Summary Of Native Tongue By Gloria Anzaldua

We all have some form of language limitations, no matter where we come from and what our background is. “Mother tongue” by Amy Tan and “How to Tame a Wild Tongue” by Gloria Anzaldua both share similar themes in their stories that demonstrate how they both deal with how different forms of the same language are portrayed in society. In both stories they speak about what society declares the right way of speech and having to face prejudgment, the two authors share their personal experiences of how they’ve dealt with it. Both authors go in detail about their ethnic backgrounds and blend their language for us to better understand throughout their story.

Written by Gloria Anzaldua, “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, is an opinion easy , a retrospection of her past and a story about identity and recognition of a wild tongue. The following is a rhetorical analysis and personal response of this easy . My analysis will be divided into 4 separate parts including intended audience, main claim, purpose and situation.

Although when she wrote this it did not connect to many reader but now that immigration is at its highest peak is is bound to be connected to many immigrants as well as Mexican-Americans. Anzaldua was frowned upon due to her lack of english, and they wanted to obliterate her native language which was spanish. Now, many believe that english is the language all should know, but in reality it's not. A person's native language is a language that should stay with them forever. This native language is what makes them who they are, it helps develop their

Language is a part one’s identity and culture, which allows one to communicate with those of the same group, although when spoken to someone of another group, it can cause a language barrier or miscommunication in many different ways. In Gloria Anzaldua’s article, “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, which was taken from her book Borderlands/La Frontera: The New Mestiza, she is trying to inform her readers that her language is what defines her. She began to mention how she was being criticized by both English and Spanish Speakers, although they both make up who she is as a person. Then, she gave convincing personal experiences about how it was to be a Chicana and their different types of languages. Moreover, despite the fact that her language was considered illegitimate, Anzaldua made it clear that she cannot get rid of it until the day she dies, or as she states (on page 26) “Wild tongues can’t be, they can only be cut out.” At the same time her attitude towards the English speakers is distasteful.

My parents are both immigrants from Haiti. I was born in America. Growing up, my parents spoke Creole, the national language of Haiti, and English at home. As I got older my resistence to speak their native tongue began to grow. I don’t know why I began to reject the language as my own. Maybe it was because kids with immigrant parents, especially Haitian kids, used to get a lot of flak from the other kids at school. Maybe it was because i couldn’t fully relate to the kids who came from Haiti and spoke to me in the language about things in the country I knew nothing about. Maybe it was because of the inevitable switch, back and forth from Creole to English, due to my lack of the proper vocabulary to speak fluently. Maybe, it was even because

However, in order for one to truly understand the arguments made by the authors they must also understand the context behind these arguments; therefore, knowing how the individual authors’ definition of bilingualism lets the reader truly absorb what points they’re trying to make and why.In Espada’s essay, he defines bilingualism as a way for a person to remain in contact with their different cultural identities. There are many areas in the essay where the reader could interpret this definition from. However, the most significant piece of evidence appears at the beginning of the essay where Espada mentions his friend Jack Agueros’ analogy to describe his bilingualism “English and Spanish are like two dogs I love. English is an obedient dog.

The way a person speaks is a direct link to a person’s culture and the environment which he or she was raised in. A person’s language, skin color as well as economic status influences the way he or she is perceived by others. Lisa Delpit and eleven other educators provide different viewpoints on how language from students of different cultures, ethnicity, and even economic status can be misinterpreted due to slang and dialect or nonstandard English by the teachers as well as his or her own peers.

Throughout generations cultural traditions have been passed down, alongside these traditions came language. The language of ancestors, which soon began to be molded by the tongue of newer generations, was inherited. Though language is an everlasting changing part of the world, it is a representation of one’s identity, not only in a cultural way but from an environmental standpoint as well. One’s identity is revealed through language from an environmental point of view because the world that one is surrounded with can cause them to have their own definitions of words, an accent, etc. With newer generations, comes newer forms of languages. Although these new generation 's’ way of speaking has come from elsewhere, there is a kind of shame that comes from this. Shame, because their ancestors spoke

Gloria Anzaldúa’s “La Prieta” tell her struggles with identity by talking about prejudices she dealt with while growing up. These prejudices, such as colorism, sexism, and heteronormativity, were not only held by people outside her social groups but within them as well. Anzaldúa goes on to explain the way identity is formed by intersecting factors and not only one aspect of someone’s life therefore denying one factor of identity can cause isolation and self-hatred.

For instance, she states, “…we don’t identify with the Anglo-American cultural values and we don’t totally identify with the Mexican cultural values. We are a synergy of two cultures with various degrees of Mexicanness or Angloness” (85). This quote exemplifies what many Mexican-American think and that is, that we aren’t a part of just one culture, but rather a mixture of both. Furthermore, there are obstacles that a Mexican-American may face, such as discrimination from one or both cultures. This is seen when Anzaldúa says, “Pocho, cultural traitor, you’re speaking the oppressor’s language by speaking English, you’re ruining the Spanish language…” (77). So, what happens when a person is constantly discriminated against for the language they speak? They create their own, which is where the explanation for Chicano Spanish comes into play. According to Anzaldúa, Chicano Spanish is “…for a people who cannot identify with either standard (formal, Castilian) Spanish nor standard English…A language which they can connect their identity to, one capable of communicating the realities and values true to themselves” (77). This is something that Mexican-Americans want nothing more than to be who they really are without having to choose a

In the article, ”My English” by Julia Alvarez, the author wrote about her experience as she learn to speak English. Spanish was her mother tongue and struggled to speak English in the early phases. She thought that English was a form of Spanish, as there are different dialects in Spanish. Her parents spoke English when they didn’t want her and her siblings to know what was going on. He was curious about what they were talking about and tries to interpret the meaning form the facial expressions her mother made. She started learning English at Carol Morgan school and it was strange for her to see the American people and their appearances which differ from her. She got mixed up with Spanish and English as she starts to learn English.

The passage How to Tame a Wild Tongue is a very defensive and straightforward argumentative essay which defends her language and the people who speak it against the discrimination that the author herself has experienced first hand (Ethos). From this text we can infer that the author is most likely from hispanic descent as she is speaking spanish a lot of the time throughout the text. This text mainly speaks about the discrimination many Mexican-Americans suffer because they are spanish speaking. This is a problem that may be passed unnoticed because many of us may believe that this is no longer a problem in our society but sadly keeps happening today. Through her use of pathos, by telling her story, the author is persuading people not to discriminate based on the language others speak. Her purpose is to inform the reader about this issue and hopefully help prevent it from continuing to happen. Anzaldua adopts a declamatory tone in order to help her

“The Myth of the Latin Woman: I Just Met a Girl Named María” by Judith Ortiz Cofer and “Mother Tongue” by Amy Tan depict the endeavors people take on in an attempt to integrate into society. Cofer demonstrates how stereotypes of Latina women have led others to misjudge her and explains the difficulty she had disassociating herself from those stereotypes. Tan demonstrates that the “broken” English her mother speaks has led others to think less of her and disregard her. One’s appearance instantaneously causes others to judge them. For some it is easier to blend in and be accepted by their community, but what is it that keeps some people from assimilating, and what effect does their otherness have on them?

Our identity is a place upon many attributes of a human being. Whether the person is someone who goes on promoting themselves to the world or not, and it shows how people communicate to others around them. Language is one of the main components that unveils the person’s identity in their everyday life, and they are many different ways to approach a person’s language. Relating to the article of Yiyun Li, “To Speak is to Blunder,” she knows two languages that has its positive and negative outcomes in her life. I to relate to her understanding of language, but a different view of what language means to me. This how a language connects towards those who can relate to other people and may or may not have a deeper relationship

Lera Boroditsky, a professor at Stanford, introduces readers to the question of whether a person’s language can shape their thought processes and views of the world around them through her research conducted at Stanford and MIT. Boroditsky explores further into the questioning about a language’s influence in her article “Lost in Translation”. Boroditsky proves to an audience of broad audience of scholars and people interested in cultural psychology that a person’s language not only influences the way a person thinks but can change a person’s perception of the world and media around them. Lera Boroditsky, through her use of rhetorical questions, comparisons, and addressing the counterargument achieves her purpose of proving that language does