Originally posted by Aristotle
By the way: those of you who don't follow the link, what Pelic and Malacasta are talking about right now is Ebonics. I can only imagine why they deliberately chose not to use the common term, and instead danced around it with AAVE. I think most of us are well aware of the hyper political abuse that has always been connected to Ebonics.
I imagine Pelic used the term because that's the way it's used in his teaching. I imagine I used the term because it was the term that the Wiki page he linked to used. It looks to me like you're trying to infer that we're being dishonest.
Read the traits of Ebonics. It is basically a "get out of jail free" excuse for all kinds of horrible grammar abuses. Things like using "aint", double negatives, leaving off the "has" when "has been" is supposed to be used, leaving off verbs, etc. Its a freakin' joke. Only in the hyper-PC world we live in could junk academics like this persist.
Junk academics like who?
Seriously, just because you can't see the use of something doesn't mean there isn't a use for it. I know basically nothing about linguistics or language. I know next to nothing about African American culture. I know though, that there are all sorts of complicated arguments about black nationalism and black identity which really need to be looked at in detail with an understanding of the history of Blacks in America if one is going to have something useful to say.

People like Bill Cosby argue from one side of a very involved debate and that side has all sorts of famous and learned and respectable people, so what? Leon Trotsky disagreed with CLR James about the issue too. Who gives a fuck about a given individual making a noise, it's the noise they make that matters.