Month: September 2021

The theory of language used in the question states that people who speak different languages cannot share a common reality. Anzaldua disagrees with this theory. In her story/literacy narrative, she talks about how the language/variant of Spanish that she knows is influenced by English colonization. An example : “The pocho is an anglicized Mexican or American of Mexican origin who speaks Spanish with an accent characteristic of North Americans and who distorts and reconstructs the language according to the influence of English.”

To me, Anzaldua wrote her literacy narrative with a lot of personal connections. The way she told her story felt like a tale out of a history book, lined with facts and opinions. She also included her own personal scenarios while facing discrimination for the language she speaks. An example: “Pocho, cultural traitor, you’re speaking the oppressor’s language by speaking English, you’re ruining the Spanish language,” I have been accused by various Latinos and Latinas.”

At the beginning of Manson’s essay, she talks about how her silence is described by others as sadness. She then explains how she is not actually sad, and being sad is expressed differently, but she just has a hard time getting her thoughts out. By the end of the essay, she learns that her silence is actually a good thing, as it helped her cope with things she learned while exploring history. For example: “Silence helped me cope with the truly unspeakable. It allowed me connect to myself and to those around me.”

In Sedaris’ essay, the most prominent Literacy Narrative I found was the explanation of an event through personal experiences. The essay also goes in line with the literacy narratives used to connect others through discourses. Sedaris explains in the essay how he felt scared and threatened by his French teacher in France, which is a discourse he shared with other students. However, he did not really seem to care about connecting it to a larger meaning or message, like Manson’s for example.

Anzaldua clearly disagrees with this statement after describing how there is another language she speaks called Pachuco. She describes it as a “language of rebellion, both against Standard Spanish and Standard English” (Page 72). This language consists of different slang terms and phrases from both English and Spanish, combining the two worlds together. As a result, this language eliminates the “firm line” described as a border between English and Spanish. Other examples like Pachuco is the common hybrid language Spanglish where a person would mix the two languages. 

A style of writing I have noticed by Anzaldua was her constant use of Spanish phrases every now and then to support her idea of using both languages as a bridge to a greater understanding of language. She uses Chicano Spanish terms to explain how it is different from a standard Spanish that is taught in most schools. “We leave out initial syllables, saying tar for estar, toy for estoy, hora for ahora” (Page 72). By doing this, she is able to give the reader a better understanding of how not every person of Spanish origin speaks the same type of Spanish. 

One of the conventions for a literacy narrative Liao describes is how they begin with a moment the writer experiences whether it is a cultural tradition or a particular discourse community that the narrator joined. In this case, Sedaris recounts how his first day of French class was and the diverse community he is surrounded by. However, Sedaris didn’t provide any takeaways for the reader that is clear. It almost seems like he intentionally did this for the reader to draw their own conclusion.

I believe that Manson can still relate to this quote towards the end of the essay however, only to a certain extent. While she did start to improve her vocabulary by working on herself as she states on page 86, she later added that when she lost her grandmother she became silent again. She states, “I feel something, but I don’t know what it is,” thus implying that even though she improved on her communication skills, she still couldn’t address her emotions which were a completely different problem. 

1.  In the essay How to Tame a Wild Tongue by Gloria Anzaldúa, she disagrees that their are firm lines between different languages and people that speak different languages.  “Chicano Spanish is not incorrect, it is a living language”. This line demonstrates that, while various people speak different languages, the goal of language is to communicate and connect with one another. She also demonstrates that even if she speaks different languages, there may be a shared reality, because she speaks different languages and communicates in different languages.

2. Anzaldua is a persuasive writer in my opinion because she takes a stand for what she really believes in. She chose to base her literary narrative on the difficulties she has faced throughout her life in a different language. Her writing is virtually contradictory, if not outright defiant. Her entire essay is about her inability to express herself in the way she desired, despite the fact that it is written bilingually. As the reader learns about her inability to change languages, Anzaldua demonstrated in her work that she was able to rise above all of the criticism and drift towards success, inspiring inspiration.

3. Liao’s literacy narrative conventions are most visible in Sedaris’ essay, as they both learn a new language from not knowing to know, from confusion to fluency. However, Sedaris believes that the convention that Liao mentioned is that “Literacy narratives both show and tell.” and must illustrate ideas about things as a result of one’s own experiences. However, in Sedaris’ essay, It appears like she’s complaining about her French teacher’s harshness in the classroom, but she didn’t elaborate on how she improved her French comprehension. Instead, she simply asserts that she understands the teacher’s final remarks. 

4. By the end of her piece, I don’t believe Manson feels the same way she did at the beginning. The situation wasn’t totally solved, but she tried her best and was satisfied with the outcome. “Even if my thoughts were incomplete, I stated what I had to say.” There was more to it. You may count on me for the rest of your days! My words were not enough, but I did the best I could” (Manson, 88). Without being self-conscious, she accepts that she has a problem with vocabulary as well as the ability to express her thoughts.

3. Liao’s conventions for literacy narrative are most apparent in Sedaris’s essay as they both learn a new language from not knowing to knowing, both are confusion to fluency. But the convention that seems less important to Sedari is, Liao mentioned that “Literacy narratives both show and tell.” and need to illustrate ideas about things as a result of one’s own experiences. But in Sedaris’s essay, I can only see that she’s talking about how her French teacher is harsh for the class, and did not illustrate a lot of how she became better at understanding French. Instead, she just claims she can understand what the teacher says at the end.

4. I don’t believe she felt the same way at the end of the essay. Mansion describes silence as a tool for speak when it is unspeakable, but she doesn’t always do it because she needs to talk to friends and family. At the very end of the essay, she fell silent again, but no longer using terms like “I don’t know”, she sat down and cried, saying things were unclear, but the point was she changed the tone from “I don’t know” to “I said what I could”.

1. 1. 1. For Anzaldua, not being able to mix her speaking of different languages is absurd. “Until I am free to write bilingually and to switch codes without having always to translate, while I still have to speak English or Spanish when I would rather speak Spanglish, and as long as I have to accommodate the English speakers rather than having them accommodate me, my tongue will be illegitimate,” (Anzaldua, 74). She is saying here that if she can accommodate English speakers without a returned accommodation, she should also be able to write bilingually without translation or criticism. If she has to switch languages while speaking to people, why can’t she do it in her own world and work as well?  Anzaldua doesn’t want her speaking of different languages to represent “different universes,” she wants to be able to speak freely. She believes that your culture is in your true self and soul, not your location, which causes speakers of different languages to share a common reality. “Deep in our hearts we believe that being Mexican has nothing to do with which country one lives in. Being Mexican is a state of soul—not one of mind, not one of citizenship. Neither eagle nor serpent, but both. And like the ocean, neither animal respects borders,” (Anzaldua, 76)
      2. I think Anzaldua is a very persuasive writer since she really stands up for what she truly believes in. She chose to write her literary narrative based on the hardships she went through her whole life about speaking her own language. Her writing is almost contradictory, rebellious if you would. Her entire piece is about how she wasn’t able to express herself in the way she wanted to, yet her narrative is written bilingually. As the reader reads about how she couldn’t switch between languages, Anzaldua did exactly that in her piece and proved that she was able to emerge from all the criticism and drift into success, which persuades inspiration.
      3. (a)“Successful literacy narratives use specific examples to illustrate ideas about literacy that we’ve acquired as a result of our own experiences, and explain explicitly why these ideas are important,” (Liao, 59). Sedaris definitely illustrated his narrative. He clearly described his classroom experience and the beginning of his learning French. I was able to picture his teacher and her voice. He nicely explained what it’s like to live in a foreign country and not fluently speak the native language. I experienced this when I went to Israel for my gap year. Although I’ve been learning Hebrew my whole life, I never really fully caught on and am far from fluent. I very much related to Sedaris’s illustration about that. (b)“Literacy narratives are stories in which something changes. If nothing changes, then it’s not a narrative. How did a particular moment change or help you achieve some greater awareness about culture, identity, or the world as you know it?” (Liao, 59). Liao’s convention about change doesn’t seem to be so present in Sedaris’s essay. Although at the end he is able to understand what his teacher is saying, he said himself, “Understanding doesn’t mean that you can suddenly speak the language. Far from it. It’s a small step, nothing more,” (Sedaris, 5). There is small change in that he sees himself starting to improve and some improvement for the future, but there were not such drastic changes in his progress of learning French and the process of his literacy as a whole.
      4. I don’t think Manson feels the same way as she did in the beginning by the end of her essay. Although she couldn’t completely fix the problem she was facing, she tried and was comfortable with the outcome. “I said my thoughts, even though they were incomplete. I felt more than that. I always will. But I said what I could, and that was enough,” (Manson, 88). Instead of her feeling self conscious about her vocabulary and ability to say what she’s thinking, she acknowledges her problem and settles nicely with her progress.

Vocabulary:

1. Recourse- (n) a source of help in a difficult situation
2. hailed – (v) call out to (someone) to attract attention
3. Detest- (v) dislike intensely.
4. Forged- (v) move forward gradually or steadily.
5. leafing – (v) turn over (the pages of a book or the papers in a pile), reading them quickly or casually.