Let the Copula Be

Gage Swett

ENGH0990

Anna Daines Renneker

September 27^th 2013

            The underlying statement being made in “Let the Copula Be” is to bridge the gap of misunderstanding of what the difference between what is “good” and “bad” English. As written by Sonja J. Lanehart, “...it’s easy for me to say there’s no ‘good’ or ‘bad’ English because I know and use “good” English.”, which she did not always believe. She uses rhetorical appeals, especially logos, and her firm knowledge of her rhetorical situation to validate these claims.

            It is obvious to tell that Lanehart is trying to reach a scholastic audience. This is reflected in her writing by the proper use of Standard English and great structure.  To make sure that her thoughts are taken seriously she establishes herself as a scholar and an expert indirectly, while attaching her readers to her opinion using pathos. Using her childhood in an African American household and not understanding her family’s poor grammar and an improper use of the copula, to be, referring to herself as the “militant language midget”. Using the phrase “However, when I took a couple of classes in English language—‘History of the English Language’ and ‘American English’—my life was forever changed.” she ensures the audience understands the beginning of the shift in her views as someone with a higher education in the areas of context establishing ethos as well as logos. Realizing that each language is part of a history and a culture changes her view entirely. What she previously considered “bad” English is merely a language variation, each variation carrying with it the history of the language, a culture, and an identity associated with it. Where previously she had thought this “bad” English was a lack of a knowledge of the English language, she states now that she believes these variations need to be celebrated and that they should not try to be eradicated. She recounts reading a passage from the book The Color Purple that followed her earlier concepts of correct grammar, making her feel as though she had alienated the culture and community she had come from. In a later discussion with her mother, an appeal of pathos is used. “She believes I don’t know what it’s like to use only ‘bad’ English in a society that demands that everyone use ‘good’ English or else. It’s like when rich people tell you money doesn’t bring happiness.” Relating it back to a common phrase that even a scholastic audience can connect with. She begins drawing her conclusions using logos and leaves her audience using pathos. Using her knowledge of the English language she acquired while earning her doctorate in language skills, she lets the reader know in a subtle way that all forms of language are follow a specific system and have rules that they adhere to. This leaves the reader to draw the conclusion that this is the same for even forms of what we normally consider incorrect English.

            While I cannot say I whole heartedly agree with the statements made by Lanehart, I did enjoy her thoughts on the subject. The author presented great facts in and established a connection with her readers. Even though I do not agree with her, I can see her point of view, making her rhetoric successful. I believe that proper English is best expressed in the standard academic format. However, I do believe that depending on the rhetorical audience, these language variations are not “bad” English.