Language and colonialism

The history of Europe, together with historiographical documents produced here, has been shaped by colonial interests. These colonial interests are the result of the ideology of imperialism, which assumes the right to settle, exploit the resources and attempt to rule the native inhabitants, mostly to fit Europe’s interests -and then to try and brush the consequences under the carpet by shunning the immigrants-.

It was after the World War II that Britain lost interest in settlement, although the indigenous populations kept on being ruled by a European minority of small colonial elites, once the natives were dispossessed. India and Pakistan gained their independence from western rule in 1947, while the African colonies did in the 1960s. The process of recovering sovereignty and freedom from foreign rule is known as decolonisation, and was prompted to a large extent -in the case of the former British colonies- by the loss of power suffered by Britain after the disastrous WWII. After that, they pursued control without settlement.

The loose cultural and political denomination Commonwealth, which supposedly grouped together a number of countries with a common history of colonialism, and shared -imposed- history and language, is very well described by Shirley Chew: “a paradox sits at the heart of the Commonwealth -described as a free association of equal and mutually cooperating nations, it is drawn together by a shared history of colonial exploitation and dependence.”

Furthermore, colonisation is perpetuated in the mind of people and in the tissue of society by the idea of the “lower rank” of the colonised, systematically implanted by the coloniser. Once they persuade a generation to internalise their imposed values, these assumptions get easily passed on to the next generation. Thus, language proves to be the most effective of weapons for the never-ending process of colonisation, as “it carries culture, values by which we perceive our place in the world” (Ngugi Wa Thiong’o). It does not passively reflect reality, but it builds its own. We can better see it in Brian Friel’s play “Translations”; in an Irish village there is a school were all the characters in the play share a common space and exchange their views. However, they are not allowed to speak Irish in this school. Some are even convinced that the old language is a barrier to progress, while others just want to learn English in order to flee to the USA. Two English men arrive with a mission; one is an arrogant and distant cartographer, the other, a worker of the toponymic department and an ortographer who seems friendly and is interested in learning the native language. Their mission is to Anglicise the place-names -and also to cunningly “redistribute” the land. The topographical names hide traditional stories which would be utterly lost after the original names are replaced and standardised.

Colonized brains: ignorance and the victor’s version of history

A positive aspect of the social networks is the fact that we take a glimpse into other cultures and places throughout the world and talk to people with a different background. It is indeed very enriching, and it provokes some awkward situations as well! For instance, a young fellow from India asked me about the history of his country before the East India Company poked its nose in there. It made me feel embarrassed to acknowledge my ignorance, as I explained to him how in the western countries – as stated by Walter Benjamin: “History is told by the victors”- we are only taught history when/only as much as it involves western people, and western versions of it only. I feel we have a huge gap in our knowledge, no wonder we may behave as hillbillies when we encounter cultures and behaviours different to ours.

I resorted to Ravi Kumar (www.hindicenter.com), who sent me some bibliography on colonial and post-colonial contexts in translation. I tried to fill the gaps by researching a bit and trying to reflect in order to answer my friend’s question: why were the colonial incursions in America and India so different?

We could say that time was an important factor, as more than one century separates both invasions. The way they happen was also particular to each of them; the Spaniards assumed to role of “gods” and took over, plundering, raping and erasing entire cultures with their microbes and swords alike. The British disguised it as commercial intentions only, while they publicised it as a “christianising enterprise” in their homeland. Their intentions were not as bare faced as that of the Spaniards’ because Indian society was very much developed, organized and sophisticated already, so they could not get away so easily.

They landed at Surat in 1612 with the permission of prince Khurram, who allowed them to trade there. A hundred years after that, in 1712, empires within India crumble, there are uprisings and invasions from Persia and Afghanistan. The East India Company take advantage of the invasions effected by other countries and the vacuum of power by the death of Aurangzeb (1707) to impose their own idea of an empire, displaying their own private army and plan to take direct control over the land in order to increase their profits. In the battle of Plassey (1757) they fight against the forces of the Nawab Surajudduallah of Bengal, backed by France -out of their own self-interest, I guess-. The Indian side fails, due to Surajudduallah’s General Mir Jafar’s treachery, who was made the new ruler of Bengal by the British as a reward for betraying his own fellow citizens -that sounds familiar throughout history, doesn’t it?-.

The Indians started to build alliances in order to better fight the British. In 1764, Mughal emperor Shah Allam II allied with Mir Qasim -Mir Jaffar’s son, who had turned against the British rule- and Shujaudduallah -ruler of Awadh- to expel the Brits. It results in another failure, in the battle of Buxar (1764); they were allowed to rule their areas but forced to acknowledge the East India Company as administrator.

The company started becoming a political force and its ambitions to gain control of India started to be obvious. For the next year they exerted their power through a combination of diplomacy and sheer force. By 1840 India was under its rule. The company exploited Indian resources, started introducing Christianity -which they were advised not to do during the first stages of their sojourn-, and developed an increasingly aloof, arrogant and racist attitude. They also introduced their language, a fact which is one of the basic and most common weapons used by colonialism. Indian craftsmen became ruined, as the Europeans living in India introduced cheaper products from British factories -a phenomenon which is also familiar nowadays, but the other way round, impulsed as well by the Europeans’ outsourcing-. The British established a kind of “apartheid” which resulted in the higher rank posts being reserved for their own kind. They also introduced the Doctrine of Lapse, allowing themselves to annex any land whose ruler died or which did not have a male heir -of course they practised gender apartheid as well-. India became an important site to exploit for Britain, thus Queen Victoria became the official ruler.

Pidgins and Creoles

Pidgins started their major development in the 16th and 17th centuries, as a consequence of European imperialism.

Pidginization is the process of simplification and hybridization of two or more languages that have come into contact. Should there be only two, there would exist a relation of dominance of one over the other, based mainly on power.

Usually, pidgin serves a limited and specific purpose such as trade. The mechanism of its creation is a progressive hybridization of words from a language ordered according to the syntax of the oher. Grammar gets simplified so as to facilitate communication and acquisition of pidgin by its users, who keep using their native language.

Although not every pidgin becomes a creole, some pidgins are used for centuries and eventually evolve through means of a process known as creolization: the language which was previously used for purposeful communication is acquired now as a mother tongue by the new generation and have to meet the demand for all kinds of communicative needs and purposes, expanding and becoming more complex in its grammatical structure and its phonology. It may even become an official language as it happened in Papua New Guinea. Some pidgins, after undergoing the process of creolization have gained a status of language in their own right. Kishwahili, Hawaiian Creole English, or Haitian Creole -with five million speakers- are some of them.

What kind of a bilingual speaker are you?

In the net and the translation market places, we can find lots of people who claim to be native, bilingual or multilingual. But what exactly does this imply? Are they using the terms properly? When can an individual be considered as bilingual? And, which kind of bilingual?

A bilingual individual has some knowledge of two or more languages but, does this person need to be equally proficient in both languages in writing and speaking skills? Let’s see some theories about the phenomenon.

According to Weinreich (1953) there are three subtypes of bilingualism:

*Coordinate Bilingualism: languages are learned in different conditions and separate contexts (home, school) and meanings from both languages are stored separately in the mind.

*Compound Bilingualism: both languages are learned in the same context and meanings from both languages are intertwined in the mind (child learning both languages at home).

*Sub-coordinate Bilingualism: implies learning (at home) one of the languages first and the other later, one of them being dominant.

Macnamara (1967) classified bilingual individuals in two subtypes:

*Balanced bilinguals: who have equivalent competence in both (bilingual family and society where both languages have an equal status). It entails a high competence, although the speaker’s command may depending on the domains. The speaker would rarely be equally fluent about all topics in all contexts.

*Dominant bilinguals: their competence in one of the languages surpasses competence in the other, at least in some domains (a child learning one language from each parent, one of the languages being also used at school).

Lambert (1955) establishes that balance or dominance depends on the age of acquisition:

*Childhood Bilingualism: during the child’s cognitive development.

*Adolescent Bilingualism &*Adult Bilingualism: cognitive representation of the world is already completed.“Re-labeling”.

Childhood Bilingualism can be:

* Simultaneous Infant Bilingualism (L2 learned early in infancy, after some development of the acquisition of L1)

*Consecutive linguistic ability: basic linguistic ability in L1 and L2 acquired one right after the other.

Also, according to cultural identification (Hamers and Blanc, 1989), a speaker can be:

*Bi-cultural: identifies him/herself with both cultures. High proficiency does not imply bi-culturalism.

*Mono-cultural: the individual feels culturally identified with just one group.

*Acculturated: migration, implying that the target country will favour L2, can persuade someone to deny the culture related to his/her mother tongue and foster that of the target country. The speaker wish to blend into the new society and culture.

What kind of bilingual are you?

Escritura creativa I: el narrador.

El narrador es quien tiene la palabra en el relato. Sobre él se apoyan monólogos y diálogos. Expone los hechos, describe personajes y escenas -paisajes, ambientes, objetos-, opina, no opina pero observa, habla de sí, o se mantiene al margen de la historia. Hay que elegir el narrador que mejor se ajusta a cada historia según el matiz que se quiera aportar: distancia para darle verosimilitud, cercanía para que se produzca empatía… Es el Yo de la historia, que no es necesariamente la misma persona que el autor. Es una persona literaria. Gracias al narrador, podemos cambiar y viajar desde nuestra posición como lectores a la época y lugar en que ocurre la novela, o del mismo modo, hacer viajar a un hipotético lector cuando contamos una historia.

La elección de un narrador responde a una intención por parte del escritor, para suscribir un determinado punto de vista, un enfoque determinado. No sólo importa lo que el narrador nos revela, sino el tono en que lo hace y el punto hasta el que nos permite entrever los hechos. Existen dos enfoques principales: el narrador extradiegético o heterodiegético, que está fuera de los acontecimientos, en los cuales no participa. Suele tener acceso privilegiado a la mente de uno de los personajes, siendo incapaz de acceder a la mente de los demás; se caracteriza por el uso del discurso indirecto libre: el narrador adopta la voz del personaje pero respeta su propio momento en la narración. En esta modalidad, hallamos la mínima expresión en el narrador de “Las nieves del Kilimanjaro” de Hemingway: una mera voz que registra brevemente y con distacia los acontecimientos; por otro lado, el narrador intradiegético u homodiegético participa dentro de los acontecimientos, como personaje y como narrador externo a la historia, ya sea como protagonista, secundario o testigo. Puede identificarse con un personaje, o con varios. Si es a la vez testigo y narrador, narrando en primera persona transmite cercanía y realidad al lector.

Tradicionalmente, la figura del autor-narrador era más frecuente, a menudo por medio de la figura del transcriptor: una persona encuentra ciertas cartas o diarios narrando los hechos en primera persona; aporta distancia y objetividad a la narración. Este tipo de narrador es omnisciente, teniendo a su disposición toda la información; lo controla y lo sabe todo, tiene acceso a las conciencias de todos los personajes…, en resumidas cuentas, actúa como una especie de demiurgo manipulador o voz en “off”,y por tanto tiene control sobre la respuesta que pretende provocar en el lector. Juzga y supone sin participar del mundo que describe. Suele saber más que los personajes. Sin embargo, puede proporcionar demasiada información, y provocar que los personajes se perciban como menos centrales en la historia (Saramago). Se suele elegir por la sensación de distanciamiento y objetividad y tiene la ventaja de poder cambiar el foco de atención con libertad sin que esto se perciba como una ruptura en la narración.

El narrador organiza el texto según su nivel de omnisciencia, pudiendo preparar el terreno para algo que aún no ha ocurrido, o presentándonos los hechos según van ocurriendo, ya sea de forma lineal, o mediante analepsis (flashbacks) o prolepsis (flashforwards) en la línea argumental. Proporciona determinada información y oculta otra de forma selectiva y siguiendo una intencionalidad. Puede silenciar temporalmente una información para provocar suspense. Hemingway lo llamaba “the iceberg principle”: sólo se debe mostrar una pequeña parte, intuyendo el lector la información subyacente. De esta forma el suspense es siempre mayor. No hay que dar demasiada información.

El narrador puede proporcionar más información al lector que al personaje, y organizar el suspense en torno al momento en que el personaje descubrirá dicha información o, al contrario, de forma que la información es transmitida al lector a través de los personajes.

Tiempo y espacio en la literatura

Hay características comunes que podemos reconocer en obras literarias aunque estas daten de distintas épocas, sean producidas por distintas escuelas y corrientes, o procedan de autores de distintas culturas, extracción social, género, etc. Estas características se recogen bajo el término “lo antropológico-literario”, que alude a los elementos subyacentes y el imaginario común en la literatura como producto humano. G.Durand los desarrolla y clasifica, estableciendo una “Estructura de lo Imaginario” que consta de tres aspectos principales:

1-Diurno o postural: incluye los mitos dinámicos y de ascensión y caída

2-Nocturno o digestivo: caos, la noche (anula el espacio), la eternidad infinita, la aniquilación, la muerte

3-Copulativo o amoroso: eros, fecundación, abolición del tiempo a través del gozo.

Indiscutiblemente, tiempo y espacio tienen preponderancia en todas ellas. M.Bajtin desarrolló el término “Cronotopo” al considerar que tiempo y espacio se hallan intrincadamente unidos: la correlación esencial que se da entre las relaciones espaciales y temporales en la obra literaria en general y la narrativa en particular. El ser humano es consciente de que está sujeto a ambos aspectos, que su existencia es finita; por tanto su narración está sujeta a estas coordenadas de forma insoslayable. Puede afirmarse que el verdadero protagonista de toda novela es el tiempo y que todo se reduce a coordenadas espacio-temporales. El tiempo queda reflejado como transcurso siempre irreversible, aunque se enfatice su carácter lineal o se le de un matiz circular -mito del eterno retorno-. De igual forma, puede enfocarse desde dos perspectivas principales, viajando en dos direcciones opuestas: retrospectiva y proyectiva o progresiva. Podemos reconocer la retrospectiva en aquellas novelas en que la infancia cobra protagonismo como época de inocencia que nos redime, regeneradora de las culpas de etapas posteriores, la patria del hombre, el origen. En la mayor parte de los casos, la infancia es vista con melancolía nostálgica, mitificada. La visión proyectiva o progresiva trata fundamentalmente la temática de la muerte y las escatologías (o visiones del más allá), en ocasiones mediante la exaltación del instante presente, como ocurre en los poemas con la temática del carpe diem, Eros venciendo a Tanatos, ponderación de la belleza efímera, invitación al goce epicúreo de los sentidos en contraposición a un futuro de decadencia.

De forma secundaria y supeditada a lo espacio-temporal, existen ciertas imágenes subyacentes que son recurrentes en la producción literaria a lo largo de los tiempos, a las que se les ha venido dando la misma significación a lo largo del tiempo, cuya simbología fue ampliamente estudiada por C.G.Jung. Algunas establecen un binomio como convexidad -lo masculino, lo agresivo, lo externo, lo dinámico- y concavidad -lo tradicionalmente asignado como femenino: la protección maternal a través de objetos como la bóveda celeste, la bóveda de un templo, la almendra mística, el cáliz; todos símbolos de la matriz-, la luz y la oscuridad, etc. Pero siempre subordinadas a los dos mayores condicionantes de la vida humana: tiempo y espacio. En palabras de M.A. Vázquez Medel (“Del escenario espacial al emplazamiento”): “Entrar en la reflexión del espacio como un simple “decorado” (aunque sea -y ya es mucho- un “decorado mítico”) es una torpeza. El espacio es un constituyente de la ex-sistencia para los seres materiales. Ex-sistimos en el espacio. El ex- marca el punto cero, la in-ex-sistencia. Toda sistencia (toda consistencia, asistencia, resistencia, persistencia, insistencia, desistimiento) se da en el espacio. O el espacio es, básicamente , un en. Y nosotros -que no paramos de discurrir- somos, fundamentalmente discursos en tránsito (¿de dónde venimos? ¿a dónde vamos?).”

The Lake Poets

The Lake Poets became known as such when Francis Jeffrey used the term in one of his articles on literary criticism. Derogatorily intended, this expression alluded their sectary nature. They were regarded as radical and antisocial, and blamed for using ordinary language and themes in their poetry. The term prospered and it has been systematically used to this day. The three components of this group are considered Romantic poets, due to their interest in the unusual and the supernatural. Each of them had their own focus, though: Wordsworth the familiar, Coleridge the philosophical, and Southey traveller and adventurer. The three poets shared a love for liberty and radical political convictions in their youth, sympathising with the French Revolution, although they turned more conservative as they grew older. The French Revolution meant the promise of a glorious renovation of society. It inspired Southey and Coleridge – who met in 1794 in Oxford – to plan a Utopian community in America called Pantisocracy – equal rule by all -, based on libertarian principles. Wordsworth and Coleridge met in 1795, and wrote Lyrical Ballads (1798) together, influencing each other greatly throughout their lives. The Wordsworth household was formed by William and his sister Dorothy, also a poet, relegated by literary history to a satellite position together with other authors. Her writings were not intended for publication, although she had a gift for precise observation and description that may have surpassed that of William Wordsworth and Coleridge.

Wordsworth had chosen to describe the “humble and rustic life”, as in them “the essential passions of the heart find a better soil in which they can attain their maturity”. His works were not considered as radical because they embodied revolutionary thoughts, but because he sought to express values which stood apart from gentility and what he regarded as false sophistication. He even professed the ambition of beginning a literary reform. His main themes are the pastoral against the ugly background of industrialization, his love of nature and “emotion recollected in tranquility”.

Coleridge was brilliant in his studies but as he grew older, he found little stimulation in them and fell in idleness, dissoluteness and debt. In accord to the medical prescription of the time, Coleridge had been taking laudanum from an early age in order to ease the physical pains and ailments that he suffered. As a result, he became an addict. He expresses his despair in Dejection: An Ode (1802), his farewell to health, happiness and poetic creativity. Despite his attempts at restoring his health, he continued with his habit, and withdrawal symptoms interfered in all his relationships. He survived for some time by giving lectures, writing for newspapers, etc. While addiction was a main driving force in his life, he usually adapted – or simply transcribed – passages from other writers in order to meet deadlines, and he was charged with plagiarism. Writings that required sustained planning were left unfinished or were made up of brilliant sections padded out with filler. In 1816 under Dr. Gillman’s supervision, he manages to control, although not to suppress his addiction. His remaining years he spent with Dr. and Mrs. Gillman.

Robert Southey was expelled from Westminster School for criticising the practise of flogging in the school magazine. The incident was an instance of his revolutionary ideals which found expression in his first long poem Joan of Arc (1796). By then, he had already written The fall of Robespierre (1794) in partnership with Coleridge, with whom he also shared experiences such as taking part in experiments with nitrous oxide (laughing gas) in 1799. He also wrote travel books, composed by letters from his short residence in Port and Spain. The Doctor, published in 1837 contains the famour tale The Three Bears. Although he was praised by W. Scott and Lord Byron, and was appointed Poet Laureate in 1813, his poems does not seem to have passed the test of time, as he is now regarded by the critics as the most flat and less talented of the three.

CAT tools and translation

purrpose3There is a lot to say for CAT (computer-assisted translation) tools: they enable you to check for concordance, improving your efficience and decreasing the time and effort invested in translating; the more stuff you have previously stored in your Translation Memory, the more dramatic this effect will be. It allows you to maintain the original format, type and size of the font, etc., that is, you will also edit the text perfectly. But…, are CAT tools really that necessary? Well, I think the answer is no.

I happen to own one of the expensive ones, which I bought years ago. I had to invest a whole month of my salary in it: I bought my license to operate it, which was the most expensive part of the purchase, and then I bought the instructions manual and the disks, so that I ran no risks after spending that kind of money on something. Years after that, when translating has become my main source of income -scarce as it is, though- I find out that it has become absolutely obsolete and it can’t even be updated. Alarmed as I was, I had some words with the company, who said that all I can do is buying the new version for a special 50 % price, which is three times the price they used to charge for updating it. Well, selling one of my kidneys in the organ trade black market is out of the question, so what do I do now?

I’ve been participating in some translation forums lately and I was very happy to see that there are people who don’t use CAT tools and they are perfectly normal, functional, socially adapted and happy and they get work! Enough to make a living out of it! Also, it must be said that these CAT tools are advertised and sold in/by certain marketplaces for translators who get benefits from them, that is, they force us to buy their very expensive tool if we want to take part in their select club. This makes translators dependent in a long term, due to the aforementioned updatings, upgradings and latest of the latest versions of the tools. Besides, we are turned into text editors for the same price, not to mention this fuzzy terms application, which doesn’t take into financial consideration words and expresions reapeated throughout the text for the final price, impoverishing us as a result. So, in a nutshell, should we buy this money-shrinking device?

The Confederation Poets I

The Confederation Poets is the first distinctly Canadian school of poetry. It includes the four writers in Malcolm Ross’s anthology “Poets of the Confederation” (1960): Sir Charles G.D. Roberts, his cousin Bliss Carman, Archibald Lampman and Duncan Campbell Scott. Close contemporaries, all of them were born in the early 1860s and had prominence between 1867 and the Great War.

They share some common traits and background:

They had a Victorian education and were trained in the Greek and Roman classics, they blend cosmopolitism with Canadian nationalism, they draw from the Canadian landscape, the worship of nature is a main theme in their writing, they adopt Pan – the Arcadian fertility god of wild nature and patron of pastoral poets – as the centre of their personal mythology, they are linked to British Romantic-Victorian literary tradition and with American trascendentalists (Emerson, Thoreau).

Charles G.D. Roberts is the founder of this school of poetry. Roberts enjoyed a boyhood in close contact with the wilderness until his father accepted a post in Fredericton, away from the Tantramar region of New Brunswick. Once in Fredericton Collegiate School, he met his cousin Bliss Carman. Back in New Brunswick, he began writing poetry. He published over 21 volumes of poetry, among them “Orion & other poems” (1880), under the influence of Keats, Wordsworth, Tennyson and Arnold, “Diverse Tones” (1886), which includes his famous poem “Tantramar Revisited”. He is credited for inventing the modern animal story. In his famous work “Earth Enigmas” (1896) animals are victims of the laws of nature. It is based on direct observation and free of didacticism.

Bliss Carman faced serious difficulties throughout his life, all of them related to his incapacity for making decisions. He only left his parents’ house after their death. He worked for two years for a religious weekly in New York and then in journalistic positions and giving lectures. From 1892 on, he lived as a visitor with many friends and relatives, his income being never sufficient to support himself. From 1908 on, he lived with Dr. and Mrs. King. He produced over 50 books of light verse, nostalgic tone, pastoral theme and Edenic setting (more obscure in his later volumes). He had always been interested in quasi-religious philosophies, especially with Mrs. King’s pantheism. Throughout his life he suffered from bouts of depression interspersed with manic joy, process which is reflected in his most effective poetry.

Archibald Lampman read Roberts’ “Orion” in 1881 and got astounded by it, sending a “fan letter” to Roberts. He wrote nature poems in which the descriptions are minutely detailed, compared to those of Roberts’ poetry. He combined his poetry writing with his post as a Post Office clerk in Ottawa, where he developed a close friendship with Duncan Campbell Scott. Both of them disliked urban life and took trips to the countryside.

Duncan Campbell Scott was very skilled with lyric forms due to his love for music. His poems are full of alliterative lines. As a clerk in the Indian Branch, he was able to explore the Canadian wilderness & to come into contact with Native Canadians, whom he idealized in his poems, full of Christian imagery.

Observer’s Paradox

Yesterday I was sitting in front of my terrapins, watching them. I have a male one and a female one, and they’ve been devoting some of their time to courtship lately. Mainly the male one, as the female specimen looks quite unresponsive to the male’s advances and his display of attentions. They belong to the family Trachemys and, when they reach their sexual maturity, they perform a nuptial dance. Well, the male one does, mostly, although she performs it sometimes, when she’s in the mood, as if she was encouraging him not to lose heart.

As I sat there watching them, my male terrapin, Mafaldo, started dancing as he always does: palms of his little hands facing upwards, and fingers flickering lightly and swiftly producing delicate caresses on the female’s face. In the meantime, the female one, Chupachusa, sat right there, just like me, but without my curiosity or any remarkable prospect at acknowledging the male’s presence: eyes closed, just in case his extremely long fingernails land accidentally in them, legs retracted partially inside her shell. Contrary to her, I thought it was a very interesting event, and I proceeded to record it with my phone: there it goes! the ultra-potent beam of light from the camera instantly thwarted the romantic atmosphere of the moment! Mafaldo lost all concentration and command of his limbs, unwillingly slapping Chupachusa in the face. What a mess! Then, they were both looked at me, accusingly, like saying: “What the hell are you staring at, you voyeur?”

Ashamed, I retreated and turned the camera off, apologetically…

And it all reminded me of Labov’s concept of the Observer’s Paradox when he was studying the use of AAVE (African American Vernacular English) to position himself against the “legend” which said AAVE was a symptom of verbal deprivation (white centric bigots…). He did this by means of using narrative analysis, that is, studying the interviewee’s verbal behaviour during their narratives of their own personal experience, given that people tend to use vernacular in that case. Apart from reaching the conclusion that AAVE is equally rich and effective as “normative” American English, he came across different responses from the interviewees, which led him to acnowledge the fact that the observed person may change their discourse to a more formal one if the observer seems distant, aloof, belongs to a different social extraction, has a different gender, race, age or speaks a different kind of vernacular. Thus, he had to investigate in order to minimize his impact as an observer.

So, next time I’ll were a shell-like helmet.