17 Words Have Power

This essay was composed in October 2024 and uses MLA documentation.

Many people don’t realize that the language they use daily is influenced by culture, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and education. The language choices we make often influence how others treat us and likewise the language we choose reflects how we wish to be perceived. In Nobody Mean More to Me than You and the Future Life of Willie Jordan, June Jordan discusses the power dynamics of language within the African American community. She emphasizes Black English as both a form of resistance and something often erased in academic settings. As explored by Amy Tan in her text Mother Tongue there are similar tensions surrounding language in the American immigrant experience, particularly how speaking “broken” English shapes perceptions and social identity. In June Jordan’s Nobody Mean More to Me than You and the Future Life of Willie Jordan and Amy Tan’s Mother Tongue, both authors examine how language reflects identity and power, though they come from very different cultural contexts.

In “Nobody Mean More to Me than You and the Future Life of Willie Jordan,” June Jordan advocates for the recognition of Black English, also known as African American Vernacular English (AAVE). She argues that the definition of “standard English” varies globally and that in the United States, the standard of American English reflects a default association with Whiteness. She narrates her experience teaching a course called “In Search of the Invisible Black Woman” and how her class of predominantly Black students had difficulty appreciating and understanding literature written in Black English even though they spoke similarly. They had never seen their vernacular written, let alone in an academic setting. In response, she works to get a class called “The Art of Black English” approved. During this process, her student Willie Jordan approaches her to request an independent study, which strengthens their bond. The essay outlines four foundational rules of Black English that she taught her students.

“Black English is about a whole lot more than mothafuckin.

If it’s wrong in Standard English it’s probably right in Black English, or, at least, you’re hot.

If it don’t sound like something that come out somebody mouth then it don’t sound right. If it don’t sound right then it ain’t hardly right. Period.

Forget about the spelling. Let the syntax carry you.” (Jordan).

These four rules carry the identity and history of the African American community. She then tells the tragedy of her and her students using Black English in response to the murder of her student’s brother Reggie Jordan, emphasizing how their choice of AAVE was taking back power from his killers. Jordan emphasizes this importance of using Black English as a form of cultural resistance and identity in her third rule, stating, ‘If it don’t sound like something that come out somebody mouth then it don’t sound right. If it don’t sound right then it ain’t hardly right’ (Jordan). By explaining the oral traditions of AAVE, Jordan not only asserts cultural validity but also evokes a sense of pride and solidarity among readers familiar with the vernacular, while confronting the discomfort of those outside it. She also asserts its validity as a linguistic system rooted in culture and community. Overall, the text highlights the injustices African Americans face and how using their language brings back power to themselves and their community.

Amy Tan’s essay “Mother Tongue” reflects on her experiences growing up as the daughter of a Chinese immigrant mother who spoke “broken” or limited English. She examines the complexities of language in shaping social perceptions, personal identity and cultural belonging. She starts by recounting how as a child she acted as a translator for her mother, often pretending to be her on the phone so she’d get treated better. She remarks that her mother’s limited English had negative effects on her academics, partly because it led to less exposure to the English taught in school, but also because of the social stigma around Asian-Americans. She was steered away from creative writing and literature by her teachers because of the vernacular spoken in her home and she states that this is likely why there are fewer Asian-Americans represented in American literature. She also emphasizes that her mother’s language -though nonstandard- was rich in emotion. Tan’s acknowledgment of her mother’s intelligence and linguistic understanding confronts societal biases that equate non-standard English with unintelligence. She writes, ‘It belies how much she actually understands,’ a reminder that linguistic diversity often masks intellectual richness rather than a lack of ability. This challenges readers to reconsider their assumptions about intelligence and language. She continues, ‘She reads the Forbes report, listens to Wall Street Week, converses daily with her stockbroker … all kinds of things I can’t begin to understand.’ This contrast highlights the depth of her mother’s intelligence, countering societal biases that equate non-standard English with a lack of competence.

Throughout the progression of the essay, Amy Tan shares her experience of growing up navigating two linguistic worlds and how her mother’s English shaped her identity. Tan’s reflections further the essay’s central argument: language is more than a tool for communication—it is a reflection of identity and a source of power. Her mother’s non-standard English, rich in imagery and expression, reveals the biases in how society views those who speak differently, a theme that parallels Jordan’s advocacy for AAVE. Ultimately, Tan challenges the notion that non-standard English is a lesser form of communication, illustrating that diversity reflects experience rather than a sign of deficiency.

While Jordan advocates for the recognition of AAVE as a form of cultural and political identity, Tan explores the stigmatization of non-standard English in immigrant communities. Both authors illustrate how marginalized groups are often judged and mistreated based on the way they speak and call attention to the social biases around language. While Jordan advocates for justice and Tan challenges societal notions, both agree that language reflects identity.

According to the National Council of Teachers of English one of the standards for an English course is “Students employ a wide range of strategies as they write and use different writing process elements appropriately to communicate with different audiences for a variety of purposes.”. This begs the question of what it means to “appropriately communicate.” (NCTE). and how do we judge so. In the American education system, we are taught the way to appropriately communicate is via American English, taught as the standard English. This often causes students from non-native or non-standard English-speaking homes to feel shame, leading to linguistic and cultural assimilation due to prejudice. Understanding the power of language is crucial because it shapes not just individual identity but how entire groups are viewed and treated in society.

This examination of linguistic standards leads us to analyze the experiences of those who navigate non-standard English in academic settings, as exemplified in June Jordan’s work. She contrasts the experiences of her students who grew up speaking Black English to the expectations of standard English. She captures her student’s reactions to seeing their vernacular in a written form by stating “At this, several students dumped on the book. Just about unanimously, their criticisms targeted the language. I listened to what they wanted to say and silently marveled at the similarities between their casual speech patterns and Alice Walker’s written version of Black English.” (Jordan). Utilizing juxtaposition, she emphasizes the contrast between their linguistic identity and the mainstream academic culture. In allowing these two voices to speak side by side, Jordan points out that there are system-wide injustices in education and perception related to language, and that AAVE is a valid way of speaking with an origin in cultural expression, while at the same time demonstrating the kind of prejudice its speakers have to endure. This rhetorical technique critiques the societal norms that devalued a non-standard language and further illustrates her idea that language is a tool of power and identity.

Additionally, she shares the story of Reggie Jordan’s murder by police brutality, an act of racial violence. When tasked with deciding if they should use Black English or standard English in their statement she asserts “That one question contained several others, each of them extra- ordinarily painful to even contemplate. How best to serve the memory of Reggie Jordan? Should we use the language of the killers—Standard English—in order to make our ideas acceptable to those controlling the killers? But wouldn’t what we had to say be rejected, summarily, if we said it in our own language, the language of the victim, Reggie Jordan? But if we sought to express our- selves by abandoning our language wouldn’t that mean our suicide on top of Reggie’s murder? But if we expressed ourselves in our own language wouldn’t that be suicidal to the wish to communicate with those who, evidently, did not give a damn about us/Reggie/police violence in the Black community?” (Jordan). Equating abandoning their language to suicide, this metaphor speaks to the existential crisis faced by speakers of non-standard English, where relinquishing their linguistic identity feels akin to erasing their cultural heritage. Such emotional appeal strengthens Jordan’s argument about the power dynamics surrounding language in America.

Similarly, Amy Tan addresses these power dynamics in Mother Tongue, where she reflects on her own bias toward her mother’s ‘broken’ English. She observes how society’s perceptions of non-standard English can limit both communication and people’s views of those who speak it. This created challenges for her and her mother who spoke ‘broken’ English, which society often views as inappropriate or inferior. In Amy Tan’s Mother Tongue, she shares that for a long time she was biased towards her mother’s “broken” English. She asserts, “But they seem just as bad, as if everything is limited, including people’s perceptions of the limitedEnglish speaker. I know this for a fact, because when I was growing up, my mother’s “limited” English limited my perception of her.” (Tan). Tan’s admission of her own bias towards her mother’s English establishes ethos because it reveals her personal journey from internalizing societal prejudices to recognizing their harm. By admitting her flawed perspective, she connects with readers who may have shared similar biases, making her argument more relatable and credible.

Her secondary audience is people who grew up or are in a similar situation. She narrates her experience of the hospital losing her mother’s CAT scan and then being treated unkindly by hospital staff however, whenever Tan spoke with the hospital staff, they assured her they would find the CAT scan and apologized for her mother’s suffering. Tan’s narration of the hospital experience taps into feelings of frustration, helplessness, and injustice. Tan’s recounting of her mother’s treatment at the hospital not only illustrates individual bias but also reflects a broader societal issue: the systemic devaluation of non-standard English speakers. Her experience demonstrates how institutions often prioritize language over the person, revealing the power dynamics at play. By showing how her mother was dismissed due to her limited English, Tan evokes empathy in readers who have experienced similar mistreatment or who can imagine the unfairness of the situation. This emotional appeal strengthens her argument by highlighting the real-world consequences of linguistic discrimination.

In their respective texts, June Jordan and Amy Tan use differing rhetorical strategies to convey their messages about language and identity. Jordan uses juxtaposition and emotional appeals to illustrate the significance of AAVE, particularly through her description of its rules: ‘If it don’t sound right then it ain’t hardly right.’ This approach emphasizes the authenticity and oral tradition of AAVE, challenging societal norms that devalue it as ‘improper.’ Similarly, Tan reflects on how her mother’s ‘broken’ English, though non-standard, was ‘vivid, direct, full of observation and imagery.’ Both authors use their personal narratives to reveal the social biases that marginalize non-standard English and advocate for its recognition as a valid and powerful reflection of cultural identity Through their rhetorical and narrative choices, Jordan and Tan foster a deeper understanding of the cultural significance of language and power.

While Amy Tan used to have personal bias and June Jordan’s students found AAVE texts difficult to understand, both these experiences show that by engaging with the language and people one can come to appreciate and understand something they don’t. Everyone’s cultural, ethnic and socioeconomic experience reflects the language they use. In some cases that can mean vocabulary differences, while in others that can mean racial or ethnic vernaculars, or language barriers. The way we speak reflects our identity and gives us power, both as an individual and a society. In conclusion, both Jordan and Tan powerfully illustrate that language is a vital component of identity that transcends mere communication. By advocating for the recognition of Black English and challenging perceptions of ‘broken’ English, they urge society to reconsider its biases and embrace linguistic diversity. Acknowledging the cultural significance of different languages fosters greater empathy and understanding, ultimately enriching the fabric of our society.

Works Cited

“African American Vernacular English: What Is It, Where Does It Come from, and Why Is It Important?” Homepage – Mango Languages, 30 Aug. 2024, mangolanguages.com/resources/learn/general/language-culture/african-americanvernacular- english-what-is-it-where-does-it-come-from-and-why-is-it-important.

Jordan, June. “Nobody Mean More to Me than You and the Future Life of Willie Jordan.” Harvard Educational Review, vol. 53, no. 3, 1988, pp. 363-74.

National Council of Teachers of English. “NCTE/IRA Standards.” NCTE, 2012, ncte.org/resources/standards/ncte-ira-standards-for-the-english-language-arts/. Accessed 2 Oct. 2024.

Tan, Amy. “Mother Tongue.” Read, 6 Oct. 2006, pp. 20-23.