Helping ESL kids with reading... need advice

[St_Francis]

Helping high school kids who are learning English as a second language with reading and comprehension. Anyone have suggestions as to how to handle the n-word in books like Huck Finn, etc? Everyone including me takes a turn reading aloud.

Thanks!

 

[PseuTonym]

Helping high school kids who are learning English as a second language with reading and comprehension. Anyone have suggestions as to how to handle the n-word in books like Huck Finn, etc? Everyone including me takes a turn reading aloud.

Thanks!

“Negro” is the exact written form in Spanish for a word meaning simply “black.” That “n” word occurs in the name of some old institutions, such as the “United Negro College Fund”, which obviously wasn’t either intended to be offensive or interpreted as offensive in the early days of the UNCF.

My understanding is that the more offensive “n” word that contains a double “g” had the specific meaning of a black slave, to be distinguished from a black who isn’t a slave, and may have never been a slave. So Twain had his characters simply speaking the dialect of that era as it was actually spoken to convey a specific meaning rather than a meaningless racial pejorative.

However, this is merely my recollection. I am not an authority on spoken dialect of Twain’s era, and I cannot provide references for you.

You should be able to find some explanations that have already been written by people who have done the historical research on English usage. Maybe you can give them some internet traffic and help them sell some books, essays, pamphlets, etc so that they will be likely to grant permission for you to copy more than what is automatically permitted under “fair use” provisions of copyright law.

Edited to add:
viralnova.com/vintage-swastikas/

That link makes the point more general. Some symbols have baggage associated with them in our minds, but quite different connotations to people from past eras.

UNCF “About us”
Link:
uncf.org/sections/WhoWeAre/SS_AboutUs/aboutus.asp

Now, since this is Catholic Answers, the following acronyms for KKK (from Acronym Finder) might be helpful to indicate that the acronym does not necessarily stand for the notoriously anti-Catholic Klan organization:

Katechizm Kosciola Katolickiego (Polish: Catechism of the Catholic Church)
Korduma Kippuvad Küsimused (Estonian: Frequently Asked Questions)
Krusty Komedy Klassic (The Simpsons)
Kinder, Küche, Kirche (German: children, kitchen, church; WWII Nazi slogan)

 

[PseuTonym]

Regarding the UNCF, you have to look at the copyright notice at the very bottom of the page to see their name written out in full. At least, I don’t see it anywhere else on that “About us” page. Perhaps they decided to keep it mostly out of sight, rather than attempt to explain it, and in the process draw to it attention that could provoke reactions from people who are actually offended, along with reactions from people who are pretending to be offended.

 

[St_Francis]

So actually, I may end up needing a sort of generic thing, because I forgot to include other bad words.

So, can I just have the reader substitute another word for the bad word: darn or dang instead of damn, and the like? And explain that the words as written are not acceptable?

 

[Exiled_Child]

Helping high school kids who are learning English as a second language with reading and comprehension. Anyone have suggestions as to how to handle the n-word in books like Huck Finn, etc? Everyone including me takes a turn reading aloud.

Thanks!

St Francis, you’re awesome! It’s very cool that you’re doing that.

As far as getting across Twain’s non-racist use of racist language, that’s a tough one even with kids whose birth language is English.

I don’t know how else to approach it other than just trying to put it into historical context.

But I do admire what you’re doing…

 

[St_Francis]

St Francis, you’re awesome! It’s very cool that you’re doing that.

As far as getting across Twain’s non-racist use of racist language, that’s a tough one even with kids whose birth language is English.

I don’t know how else to approach it other than just trying to put it into historical context.

But I do admire what you’re doing…

No, no, it’s my job It’s a sort of supplement to their regular, more formal classwork.

Oh, I know, it can be like that knight movie where they played rap music at the tournament! I’ll just that it was all right then, but we have to change the words!

 

[Exiled_Child]

No, no, it’s my job It’s a sort of supplement to their regular, more formal classwork.

Oh, I know, it can be like that knight movie where they played rap music at the tournament! I’ll just that it was all right then, but we have to change the words!

I haven’t seen that, but I know exactly what you’re talking about.

I don’t know whether this will hold true or not, but my guess would be that the more relaxed and nonchalant you are about it, the less awkward it will be. If you project absolute confidence and knowledge in what you’re trying to teach, that would seem like the best way to go.

 

[Regina7]

So actually, I may end up needing a sort of generic thing, because I forgot to include other bad words.

So, can I just have the reader substitute another word for the bad word: darn or dang instead of damn, and the like? And explain that the words as written are not acceptable?

Actually, this is the perfect opportunity to discuss the evolution of language. Words, and their meanings, can change over time. A great example is the word “gay,” which means something very different today than it did 40 years ago. The “N” word in Twain’s time wasn’t the derogatory meaning of today. So rather than say the words are “unacceptable,” I’d modify it to say that today’s versions are unacceptable. In Twain’s time, black people would not have been offended at the “N” word, so the word was not unacceptable (though it certainly is today).

 

[St_Francis]

My main problem is that I cannot say those words.

The words won’t have the same impact on the students, but I do need them to know not to say the words.

 

[PseuTonym]

My main problem is that I cannot say those words.

The words won’t have the same impact on the students, but I do need them to know not to say the words.

Perhaps you could introduce a convention that they are to name the first letter of the word and then read every remaining letter according to the convention that any vowel is to be read as “vowel” and any consonant is to be read as “consonant.” Otherwise they will continue to generate, in their own minds, the sound of the word and usually (but not always) refrain from speaking the words aloud.

The problem goes beyond individual words. If your students learn to read “a nice distinction” in Shakespeare as meaning a subtle distinction, and if they were to ever speak and write that way themselves, then they will lose grades in school, and they will be misunderstood by others.

Most academic institutions require that students remember, after one exposure, that “The Ballad of Reading Gaol” is not to be described as containing a typographical error or spelling error. However, students are not themselves permitted to use the spelling “gaol” as an alternative to “jail” in their writing. So reading comprehension becomes very much a matter of “Do as we say, but don’t take our samples of great literature as models for yourself.”

Another proposal for protocol:
Perhaps, before beginning to read a given piece of writing, write down and have all students write down in their notes the year that the work was originally published. (However, if you are reading old private letters, diaries, etc that weren’t published until many dozens of years after they were written, then you want to give the date of writing rather than the date of first publication.)

 

[jcrichton]

Helping high school kids who are learning English as a second language with reading and comprehension. Anyone have suggestions as to how to handle the n-word in books like Huck Finn, etc? Everyone including me takes a turn reading aloud.

Thanks!

Hi!
While looking for a thread in Spanish I found your thread… from personal experience I can tell you that terminology and diction (enunciation) are quite confusing for an ESL student.

If you are able, I suggest that you make a short clarification of the context of the word/s and their historical and actual meanings–it’s tough learning a new language, specially when not fully aware of the usage while people around just giggle and let you continue in the misunderstanding/error.

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Actually, this is the perfect opportunity to discuss the evolution of language. Words, and their meanings, can change over time. A great example is the word “gay,” which means something very different today than it did 40 years ago. The “N” word in Twain’s time wasn’t the derogatory meaning of today. So rather than say the words are “unacceptable,” I’d modify it to say that today’s versions are unacceptable. In Twain’s time, black people would not have been offended at the “N” word, so the word was not unacceptable (though it certainly is today).

I actually don’t agree with you.

The N word was always meant to be derogatory to blacks, and yes it was offensive to them. Sadly it was more socially acceptable to use such language.
It’s always been an offensive term.

 

[Mary_Gail_36]

Helping high school kids who are learning English as a second language with reading and comprehension. Anyone have suggestions as to how to handle the n-word in books like Huck Finn, etc? Everyone including me takes a turn reading aloud.

Thanks!

My son is a freshman and they read “Of Mice and Men”. There are a few uses of the N word. The teacher told them to read it as “n-word”. The child reading out loud got to the word, and before saying it asked if he should. The teacher said he could use “N-word”

My son wanted to know why George would use that word, and I explained that people didn’t understand how it was hurtful. George’s character was a bit rough and a bit ignorant and that’s why he spoke that way.

The same with Huck and company, they were on the rough and ignorant side.

On the other hand, I believe that word is in “To Kill a Mockingbird” Mr. Ewell uses it, It’s obviously meant as an offense. Atticus, I believe tells Scout to not use the word. (If I remember well, it’s been a number of years)

 

[PseuTonym]

The N word was always meant to be derogatory to blacks

I’m not sure what you mean, so I will ask you some questions and wait for your reply.

1. Are you making a claim about the coining of a written word for the written English language, or are you talking about a spoken word that was heard by and spoken by a variety of people, including people who did not necessarily know what language a given word belonged to, or what language a given word was derived from?
2. Why was the UNCF website designed to minimize display of the full name of the organization? Perhaps there is more than one “N” word?

uncf.org/

1. Are you familiar with the word “bastard”? Are you aware that it is often used as a pejorative even though it originally denoted the legal relationship between the parents, and didn’t indicate any moral lapse of the person who was said to be a “bastard”?
2. Do you think that “slave” might have pejorative connotations, even though the condition of slavery might have been legally imposed prior to birth?
3. What do you call somebody who was conceived before the parents were married, and born ninety-one days after the parents were married?

 

[St_Francis]

My son is a freshman and they read “Of Mice and Men”. There are a few uses of the N word. The teacher told them to read it as “n-word”. The child reading out loud got to the word, and before saying it asked if he should. The teacher said he could use “N-word”

My son wanted to know why George would use that word, and I explained that people didn’t understand how it was hurtful. George’s character was a bit rough and a bit ignorant and that’s why he spoke that way.

The same with Huck and company, they were on the rough and ignorant side.

On the other hand, I believe that word is in “To Kill a Mockingbird” Mr. Ewell uses it, It’s obviously meant as an offense. Atticus, I believe tells Scout to not use the word. (If I remember well, it’s been a number of years)

Thank you so much for this answer; it may be the best solution.

And thanks to everyone else for your suggestions and comments; I explained at great length about the history and badness of the word.

 

[jcrichton]

I’m not sure what you mean, so I will ask you some questions and wait for your reply.

1. Are you making a claim about the coining of a written word for the written English language, or are you talking about a spoken word that was heard by and spoken by a variety of people, including people who did not necessarily know what language a given word belonged to, or what language a given word was derived from?
2. Why was the UNCF website designed to minimize display of the full name of the organization? Perhaps there is more than one “N” word?

uncf.org/

1. Are you familiar with the word “bastard”? Are you aware that it is often used as a pejorative even though it originally denoted the legal relationship between the parents, and didn’t indicate any moral lapse of the person who was said to be a “bastard”?
2. Do you think that “slave” might have pejorative connotations, even though the condition of slavery might have been legally imposed prior to birth?
3. What do you call somebody who was conceived before the parents were married, and born ninety-one days after the parents were married?

Hi!

…wow… quite charged!

…not sure what your intent is but the fact remains that “negro” is the Portuguese and Spanish word for the color black. When it was used it did not mean anything but a description of what the people being bought/taken into slavery meant to the Portuguese and Spanish slave traders–a person of dark skin.

The origin of this term could not mean anything more than a derogatory term; as applied it also determined how the slaves were viewed: “negro” was designated to mean someone on the edge of society to be bought and traded and treated as the “owner” saw fit.

As time progressed and this slavery period ended the word remained in use; eventually it became almost meaningless as the freed slaves accepted the term Negro as a definition to their skin/ethnicity.

In some places, as in the Dominican Republic, slavery and racism existed (still does on the down) but the word itself was deflated of its hatred and demeaning terminology as people would use the term, regardless of skin color, as an endearment (specially in its diminutive form) in all sorts of relationships (from pure acquaintance to intimate).

Still, even in places as the Dominican Republic it maintains its racial/derogatory meaning which usually is used in close quarters/circles or as an inflammatory demeaning term when used in heated exchanges.

#1 – Being ignorant of the origin of a word does not excuse the ill use of it. (I recall that when visiting a noticeably black neighborhood a young child accosted me with the term “spic” as I entered her building; since she was so young, I never doubted that she had very little understanding of the origin of the term; sadly, she had learned, from those around her, the hatred that derogatory terms carry.)

#2 – Can’t say that I have visited many web sites but I don’t recall NASA or any other organization using anything more than abbreviations–specially in a repetitive discourse.

#3 – Have not looked it up–still, its quite the same as in Spanish (bastardo) a person (usually used to demean males) born out of wedlock; more specifically a child abandoned by his father… consequent meanings would extend to a womanizer, lowlife user who refuses to live up to his responsibilities.

#4 – a person born into slavery, just as a person forced into slavery, do not think themselves as subhuman. Those who commit others to slavery are the ones that believe that they themselves are better and tend to subject those unfortunate who find themselves in such state as a lesser race/cast. So it is not the word/term but the meaning given it by those who lord power over others.

#5 – What? ¿Qué?

Maran atha!

Angel

 

[St_Francis]

Legally, any baby born to a woman who is legally married is the husband’s baby and not illegitimate.

 

[PseuTonym]

Hi!

…wow… quite charged!

I think that you are disclosing your honest impression of my previous message. It seems that you repeated in your own words some of the points that I already made. Unless I misunderstand, it seems that you agree with me on many points.

Where do we disagree with each other? To claim to know the state of mind of thousands or millions of people who simply uttered some sound or wrote some sequence of symbols before you were born … what is that? It is judging people about whom you know essentially nothing.

You stand above and declare the real and true meaning or noises and ink marks, and claim that people are guilty of bad intent based on … something. Your knowledge of meanings and connotations that are today linked with those symbols isn’t something that they had access to. Please see the vintage swastika link in my first contribution to this thread. Also, please keep in mind that parents, teachers, and governments impose standards of language. Children have little power to change them.

Hi!
Can’t say that I have visited many web sites but I don’t recall NASA or any other organization using anything more than abbreviations–specially in a repetitive discourse.

I don’t mind doing a bit of fact checking for you, especially because you went to the effort of writing a long reply to me, and I see little there that I can comment on.

Here is the webpage that I looked at, and it’s all in one window …
nasa.gov/about/index.html

First, near the top:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

NASA’s Vision: We reach for new heights and reveal the unknown for the benefit of humankind.

Second:

Maj. Gen. Charles Frank Bolden, Jr., (USMC-Ret.) was nominated by President Barack Obama and confirmed by the U.S. Senate as the 12th Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Third:

Dr. Dava Newman was nominated in January 2015 by President Barack Obama and confirmed by the U.S. Senate in April 2015 to serve as the Deputy Administrator of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

Fourth:

National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Page Last Updated: Feb. 3, 2016
Page Editor: Jim Wilson

Given that our alphabet has only 26 letters. Is it a good idea to devote one of the twenty-six to a couple of similar-sounding and similarly spelled words that now have racist and pejorative connotations and denotations?

Maybe one day “national” will be the N word. There are many laws in many nations, but international law is more of a hope for the future than a concrete reality. When nations and tribes interact, we often see disrespect for law, and that includes not only disrespect for the official letter of human-made laws, but also disrespect for the spirit of moral law.

International law is built on national law. Without nations, would there be any law that we can rely upon? The philosophy of law isn’t a particularly popular subject area, so unfortunately the reality seems to be that national consciousness is a double-edged sword.

You might want the people of Japan to disperse around the world and accept immigrants from around the world. You may want to discover the essence of the Japanese philosophy of law, and make that the one and only basis for Japanese nationalism. However, don’t the Japanese people have a right to national self-determination?

 

[jcrichton]

I think that you are disclosing your honest impression of my previous message. It seems that you repeated in your own words some of the points that I already made. Unless I misunderstand, it seems that you agree with me on many points.

…yeah, I thought it was quite a barrage of issues thrown out in a single blow. :bigyikes:

Where do we disagree with each other? To claim to know the state of mind of thousands or millions of people who simply uttered some sound or wrote some sequence of symbols before you were born …

I am not arguing about the origin of symbols and words but the actual usage of it. I’m Catholic, which means that I hold a certain Faith distinct from other Christians and non-Christian alike. My icon of perfection is the Crucifix: Christ died for my sins–still, I am not offended by those who wear an empty cross. So you see, there’s no judgment.

You stand above and declare the real and true meaning or noises and ink marks, and claim that people are guilty of bad intent based on … something. Your knowledge of meanings and connotations that are today linked with those symbols isn’t something that they had access to. Please see the vintage swastika link… Also, please keep in mind that parents, teachers, and governments impose standards of language. Children have little power to change them.

… you are grouping values; the swastika had been around for eons before Hitler’s Nazism; but Hitler’s holocaust perverted its perceived meaning. As your link suggests it is still commonly in used in the Orient… why should it matter? Whether it is done out of practice (tradition) or ignorance it holds almost no value. Yet, when it is done out of malice (hate mongering) it is perverse, loathsome, and hostile.

…and yes, while children (who are born without the defect of racism and hatred) are mostly ignorant of the wrong use of a term/symbol, they are quick to learn (sponges, if you will) about the world around them and they will base their character (morals) upon that which they are taught by those around them. So we either do as the old song say (…“teach them well and help them lead the way…”) or we twist their minds to bring the symbols and terms to their darkest values (racism, hatred, apathy).

I don’t mind doing a bit of fact checking for you, especially because you went to the effort of writing a long reply to me, and I see little there that I can comment on.

Here is the webpage that I looked at, and it’s all in one window …
nasa.gov/about/index.html

…yeah, that was a poor choice…
In the US culture we know NASA as that entity that sent out the rockets and space shuttles, etc. The point that I meant to make was that most people, estimation from the emphasis we place on abbreviating even the two syllables names (movies/shows/culture), would not know what the letters actually spelled out but would instantly identify the meaning (much like UNICEF and UN).

Given that our alphabet has only 26 letters. Is it a good idea to devote one of the twenty-six to a couple of similar-sounding and similarly spelled words that now have racist and pejorative connotations and denotations?

Maybe one day “national” will be the N word. There are many laws in many nations, but international law is more of a hope for the future than a concrete reality. When nations and tribes interact, we often see disrespect for law, and that includes not only disrespect for the official letter of human-made laws, but also disrespect for the spirit of moral law.

…I think that’s a little extreme… no one is asking for a word/letter to be removed from the alphabet; nor am I suggesting that all nations/tribes of the world hold the same values… what I am saying is that those values that are wrong (immoral) are not elastic (changing according to the scruples of the might/sword). Perpetrating a wrong, either by a government or an individual, does not cease to be wrong by crossing a border. As human beings we know and understand this (though there are creatures who are made/become sociopaths in order to justify their horrific acts).

…and yes, “nationalism” has become the N word more than once in our recent history–just check out Spain, Latin America, North America, the various Afrikan States, and Islam.

International law is built on national law. Without nations, would there be any law that we can rely upon? The philosophy of law isn’t a particularly popular subject area, so unfortunately the reality seems to be that national consciousness is a double-edged sword.

You might want the people of Japan to disperse around the world and accept immigrants from around the world. You may want to discover the essence of the Japanese philosophy of law, and make that the one and only basis for Japanese nationalism. However, don’t the Japanese people have a right to national self-determination?

I concur with the first part… however, international law is not meant to infringe upon the self-governance of individual nations.

However, there are values that cross all boundaries; slavery, child-labor, homicide, genocide; the problem in upholding international law is not the fear of losing the power of self-governance but that both parties have their own agendas and both seek to hold the higher ground; greed, mostly, stands in the way of carrying out justice (both in the national and international arenas).

…and while Japan has complete control on who enters (legally) into its nation, once they allow into the nation a person of non-Japanese descent they should afford that person the same respects and rights granted its citizens–of course, this is saying very little of nations where barbarism is still the rule of the day.

Maran atha!

Angel