Douglass’s Narrative consistently discusses how language (knowledge and education) is at constant odds with slavery. The active prevention of educating slaves and teaching them language is something that is both emphasized in Douglass’s Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass and M. NourbeSe Philips “Discourse on the Logic of Language.” Philips repeatedly mentioned the complex relationship between having a mother tongue a father tongue and no tongue at all. I understood this argument to mean that slaves had no mother or father tongue; they had no language of their own, and were forced to take on the language of their master. In addition, she emphasized how as punishment for speaking out, slaves would sometimes literally loose their tongue, so their lack of a native language can actually be the physical loss of their ability to speak. All of this is consistent with Douglass’s arguments, as he repeatedly discusses his yearning for learning, education, and language throughout his life, and how under slavery it was forbidden. Philips mentions that preventing communication and a uniform language between the slaves, helped block rebellion, because it would be impossible to formally rebel if there is no clear communication channel. Philips also brings up the complex relationship between mother and child under slavery; something that Douglass regards as non-existent under the reprehensible idea of tearing apart mother from child. In addition, Philips’s word bending throughout her performance is similar to Douglass’s performance of his language and speech at his first abolitionist convention in Nantucket. Douglass’s language is his history, his story, and his fight for freedom. By performing that, he is in many ways teaching the world the language of slavery.