Victoria Siegmund

ENGL 327W
Professor Mungo
10/27/16
Is Black Slang a Negative or Positive Representation of Black Language?
I grew up in the United States where there is usually only one form of English spoken.
This is the Standard American English in which I was taught from kindergarten until now, my
final year of university. It wasnt even until my second or third year of college that I started to
understand the depth of African American Vernacular English (AAVE). It is impossible in this
country to not have any interaction with AAVE. Since Ive acquired a better understanding of the
history and dynamics of AAVE, there are certain things which I once thought be true, that are no
longer valid. I remember when I was high school, and my mother, whose mother tongue is not
English, was telling me that one of her coworkers said her shoes were bad. My mom wasnt
sure what her coworker meant when she said those shoes are bad, but I understood the term. I,
ignorantly but innocently, explained to my mom that it was slang meaning her shoes were nice.
From this experiences and what Ive learned about AAVE, it is hard to determine whether Black
Slang is negative or positive part of Black Language. The fact of the matter is that Black Slang
on its own is a neutral entity. Slang, in general, is merely a function of language that reflects the
culture of a specific group during a specific time. Black Slang is simply a part of Black
Language which means that the slang itself is neither negative or positive; however, the whole
notion of positive or negative is very much dependent on who you ask.
If you ask anyone who is uneducated or unaware of Black Vernacular what they think
about it, you will more than likely encounter someone who says its slang. I would argue that

confusing AAVE with slang would be a mild misinterpretation, because many would argue that
AAVE is ignorant, uneducated, illogical, and many other negative interpretations. They would
argue this because mainstream society refuses to acknowledge that African American culture and
language is different from mainstream, white culture. This misinterpretation and sometimes
downright erasure of AAVE is a result of a society that perpetrates white supremacy, even
decades after the Civil Rights Movement. The common argument that AAVE is not a real
language, is improper, ignorant, or uneducated is one example of the perpetration of white
supremacy. After all, it is silly to classify a language deeply rooted in the Atlantic Slave Trade as
merely slang. It is even sillier to argue that one language is superior to another, because it sounds
more educated. What sounds educated or uneducated is human perception; because, as many
have argued in the past, language is merely a slippery slope of meaning.
The idea of language as a slippery slope of meaning seems absurd considering language
is our only means of navigating our world, but many have come up with theories about the
unreliability of language. Theories around language are often complex and divisive, but I want to
discuss one theory, Deconstruction. This a theory proposed by the French linguist and
philosopher, Jacques Derrida. Deconstruction says that language is not the reliable tool we
believe it to be, but rather a fluid, ambiguous domain of complex experience in which ideologies
program us without being aware of the (Tyson 235). The notion of deconstruction relies on the
structuralist ideas of sign, signified, and signifier. The sign is the actual word, the signifier is the
written or pronounced letters as a unit, and the signified is the concept or image of the word
(Tyson 237). Deconstructing language requires a person to find the ambiguities of language. For
example, to a deconstructionist, the signified is somewhat mythological. What I mean when I say
that the signified is mythological is that concepts are merely chains of signifiers. Chains of

signifiers are signifiers that we associate with other signifiers, and so on and so forth, so that we
never truly reach a signified/concept. Deconstruction claims that language refers neither to
things in the world nor to our concepts of things but only to the play of signifiers of which
language itself consists (Tyson 238). The theory of deconstruction can often leave a person
disillusioned about language, but ultimately language still defines our reality. With all this said,
how does the positivity or negativity of Black Slang and Black Language relate to the theory of
Deconstruction?
I brought up the theory of Deconstruction to highlight the absurdity of societys
downgrading of Black Language simply because it isnt Standard English. While Deconstruction
is merely a theory on language, there is also little that suggests that Standard English is the most
logical and correct form of English. What form English we deem logical and correct is belief not
fact. We cannot separate ourselves from our language because it colors our understanding of the
world, but that doesnt make one form of a language superior to another. The simple fact is that
language is a tool that is shaped by experience and ideology. Black English functions no
differently than Standard English, as they are both methods of communication that are formed by
ideology and experience. To demote Black English to something as fleeting as slang is to erase
an entire history and tradition. Black English is deeply rooted in history of oppression, and Black
English was formed as survival tool for slaves to speak freely in front of their masters. Black
English is often characterized by oppositional meanings to English words which a form of coded
language used by slaves to discuss their business openly. With this coded language, an entire
clandestine, culture developed. Black English is a culmination of centuries of oppression, and the
culture that arose from this oppression. This is the ideology and history that shaped Black
English, so it is asinine to deem Black English as slang. It is asinine to deem Black English as

illogical and uneducated, because this language is a language of survival. It was created to
exclude slave masters and unify slaves. Sure, many African Americans werent literate in
Standard English, but they used the language they had to survive. Given the deep history Black
English, it is far too established to be slang.
Slang has a very negative connotation in our society, but it is neutral. Black slang is both
a negative and positive representation of Black Language. Slang captures a moment of language
and culture, and Black Slang is positive because it reflects Black culture. Slang captures what
was important in culture at the time. If you look at Black slang in the 1920s and compare it to
slang of today, the culture of the time is reflected. This helps build an overarching narrative or
history. Black Slang can be negative, not necessarily with the slang or language itself but with
the way that language is perceived. The belief that Black Language is slang can be incredibly
damaging. Economic success is dependent on standard literacy, and literacy in Standard English
often comes with rejection of Black Language. In order for African Americans to be successful in
society, they must become literate in Standard English and risk losing their language and culture.
Black slang, which is almost always perceived negatively, can make Black Language look bad
by further fueling the belief that Black Language is illogical or uneducated. Despite this
downside, Black Slang is still not a negative representation of Black Language, but the
conflation of Black Language and Black Slang is negative. Black Slang as a representation of
Black Language is both good and bad. There are many positive functions of Black Slang like
preservation of culture, and there are bad things about Black Slang like poor perception by the
dominant culture. Ultimately, Black Slang is only one part of Black Language.

Works Cited
Tyson, Louis. Critical Theory Today: A User-Friendly Guide. 3rd ed. New York: Routledge,
2015. Print.