Visible Language

Through processes that originated in the eighteenth century — but were greatly accelerated by Brahmin academics at the end of the nineteenth — a separation has developed between literacy instruction in the schools and the literacy ends of the competent citizen. Formal reading instruction today is primarily oriented toward understanding and appreciation of fine literature. Non-fiction materials are treated as unpleasant and boorish intruders into the otherwise serene, romantic kingdom of plot, character, and author’s viewpoint. A single impotent stratagem centering on rapid skimming with rereading is usually suggested for all non-fiction, be it math story problem, cooking recipe, or biological exposition. The result of this disparity, as revealed by the more valid components of various national literacy surveys, is the ever apparent chasm between competency needs and literacy instruction, a chasm that can be crossed only through a reorientation of literacy training toward the true needs of society.

While it may be true that the electronic age has devalued literacy, what seems more serious is the way in which certain groups have been so devalued that they are inhibited in their acquisition of literacy skills. Many poor and minority students are prevented from developing their cognitive and manipulative skills beyond a minimal level. Perhaps what needs changing is not the level of skills in literacy or functional competence butthe level of hope and expectation among bypassed people in our society. Action research might be designed to focus on competencies presently existing and valued and, at the same time, on the changes that occur when groups develop new hope for themselves and a more dynamic vision of the options available to them.

This paper advances and experimentally evaluates the argument that in ordinary oral language the intentions of the speaker (what is meant) has primacy over the actual expressions used (what is said). In reading and writing this relationship is reversed. The cognitive consequences of attention to linguistic form (what is said), a form of metalinguistic competence, and the possible origins of this competence are discussed.

This paper examines the problems involved in arranging the letters of the English alphabet into nonstandard spellings for the purpose of producing eye dialect spellings. It argues that the writer of eye dialect is under certain restrictions imposed by the fact that the reader must be able to associate the eye dialect spellings with the standard spelling. These restrictions, and how various writers dealt with them, are illustrated by the use of various eye dialect spellings from literary works.

Finley Peter Dunne’s Mr. Dooley was once one of America’s most popular humorous characters. Dunne’s elaborate eye dialect tends to put off contemporary readers, but the Dooley essays lose much of their power and literary “flavor” when they are transcribed into standard English spelling. This study relates Dunne’s respelling system to the pronunciation of Anglo-Irish and shows that Dunne’s eye dialect is intended to represent many phonological features of English as it is spoken in Ireland, while avoiding other features whose inclusion would threaten readability. The authenticity of Mr. Dooley’s dialect adds to the credibility of the character by giving the reader the illusion that he is listening to a real human voice belonging to a real member of a specific, historic Irish-American community.