Caribbean Creole in Class
Rebecca Karli and Brynna Larsen
Structure of English
Prof. Baron
I.
Statement of Purpose
As teachers of English Language Learners (ELL) at Roosevelt High School in
Washington, DC, our classes are typically composed of native Spanish, Amharic, French, and
Chinese speakers. Alongside these English Language Learners, however, are native English
speakers who grew up in Caribbean countries such as Trinidad, St. Kitts, Jamaica, and Guyana.
Most of these students speak a form of Creole English as their first language. This English
emerged historically when African slaves and indentured servants from Asia and Europe were
brought together under the control of European plantation owners (Nero, 1997). Curious about
the differences between Caribbean Creole English (CCE) and Standard American English (SAE),
and concerned about how we could better meet the needs of our Caribbean students, we
developed a study centered on four questions: 1) What are the differences between Caribbean
Creole English and Standard American English? 2) To what extent do CCE speakers attending
U.S. high schools recognize those differences? 3) How are the needs of CCE speaking students
different from the needs of non-native English Language Learners? 4) What can teachers of
CCE speakers do to better support them?
Regarding question one, based on our observations of students at school, we predicted
that we would find variance in vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammatical structure. While
curious about lexical and phonological differences, we were most concerned with differences in
syntax, particularly as they relate to prescriptive grammar. Manipulating sentence structures
effectively is central to success in academic writing. Failing to uphold the grammatical
Larsen & Karli | 2
structures of Standard American English would present the most academic problems for CCE
speaking students in U.S. schools, particularly when it comes to writing. Based on the research
of R.B. Le Page (1985) and Kean Gibson (1992), we anticipated that students would confirm
differences between SAE and CCE as they relate to markers for tense, subject-verb agreement,
plurals, and the present progressive and habitual aspects.
Next, we wanted to know to what extent students who speak both CCE and SAE were
able to recognize the phonological, lexical and syntactic differences between the two English
dialects. For example, would students be aware of the phonological differences between the
letters <th> in thing (/θ / in SAE and /t/ in CCE), the letters <th> in that (/ð / in SAE and /d/ in
CCE) or the vowel <a> in can’t (/æ/ in SAE and /a/ in CCE)? Would the students be able to
provide examples of lexical differences, such as the different meanings of the words hand and
foot? While these terms refer to appendages of the arm or leg in SAE, they refer to the entire
arm and to the entire leg in CCE. Finally, would students be aware of syntactic differences, such
as the need for inflections with plurals, tense, and subject-verb agreement in SAE but not in
CCE?
Alicia Beckford’s (1999) research on Jamaican Patois speakers suggested that native
CCE speakers were most likely to indicate that the difference between CCE and SAE is one of
accent and vocabulary only. Only a minority of speakers indicated that the differences were also
structural. This, along with the work of Shondel J. Nero (2000), which highlights students’
difficulty identifying the structural differences between the CCE and SAE, led us to believe that
the students we interviewed would be unlikely to recognize the structural differences between
CCE and SAE, and that they would be more likely to focus on differences in pronunciation and
vocabulary.
Larsen & Karli | 3
A third focus of our research was to determine how the needs of CCE speakers differ
from the needs of English Language Learners. Based on Shondel J. Nero’s (2000) descriptions
of CCE speakers’ written work, we anticipated that CCE students would need more explicit
instruction in the ways academic writing is distinct from speaking. Compared to ELL students,
they would also need more explicit instruction on the structural differences in the use of tense,
aspect, and plurals. Arlene Clachar (2006) suggested that CCE speakers will not understand
their placements into ELL classes and will gain few benefits of being in these classes. They may
find their placement in such classes insulting and unnecessary, thus lacking motivation to
recognize the differences between the two dialects and improve their academic writing. We
hypothesized that from an academic standpoint our students would also feel insulted about being
placed in ELL classes, but that they may welcome this placement from a social standpoint, as
they would be surrounded by other recent immigrants.
Our final question would focus on how teachers could better serve and support CCE
speakers in their classes. The works of Nero (2000), Clachar (2006), and Jeff Siegel (2008),
suggest that we look to models such as the Caribbean Academic Program based in Illinois, which
uses a well-rounded, scientific, sociohistoric, and humanistic approach to teach differences
between SAE and CCE. We hypothesize that teachers are currently doing little of this and that
they would benefit from a background in the origins of different English dialects, how they are
different, and how to effectively and explicitly teach those differences.
II. Research Design
Subjects
We based our research on 3 high school Caribbean Creole English speakers at Roosevelt
High School in Washington, DC, who are current ELL students. While there is a significant
Larsen & Karli | 4
population of CCE speakers at Roosevelt, we were not able to get a larger sample because most
of them were mainstream students that did not have a relationship with us. The subjects were 3
males between the ages of 15 and18: 2 students from Guyana, and 1 from Trinidad. Two
students arrived to the U.S. in middle school and are now 10th graders. One student arrived to
the U.S. in high school and is now an 11th grader. All students have a mix of ELL and
mainstream classes. We also emailed a teacher survey to 15 ELL and mainstream DC Public
School teachers; however, only 8 teachers had experience with CCE students and could complete
the survey.
Methodology
The methodology we used to collect our data was a CCE student interview and a teacher
survey emailed to teachers throughout the District of Columbia who have worked with CCE
students. The first data collection phase focused on the attitudes and perceptions of CCE
speakers and their ability to distinguish differences between SAE and CCE. In the first section,
each student was asked about the context where CCE and SAE are used, his attitude and
perceptions of CCE and SAE, and his opinion of ELL classes, support, and accommodations at
his school. Some examples of our sample questions include: “How would you describe your first
language?”, “Do you think students who are from the Caribbean and speak English should be put
in ELL classes? Why/Why not?”, and “Are there ways that Roosevelt teachers could better
support you?”
The second component of the student interview consisted of example problems in three
key areas where differences between CCE and SAE were found in the research: pronunciation,
vocabulary and grammar/sentence structure. In each area, the student was first asked to produce
his own examples of differences and then identify differences in examples that were given to
Larsen & Karli | 5
him. Some example problems include: “Pronounce “think” as you would in CCE”, “Are there
words that are different in CCE and SAE?”, and “Is the sentence “He rich” okay in CCE? In
SAE? If not okay, correct the sentence.”
The second data collection phase focused on the attitudes and perceptions of ELL and
mainstream teachers who have worked with CCE speakers in the classroom. We emailed a 5
question survey to teachers to determine their attitudes about CCE speakers being placed in ELL
classes, their ability to identify differences in CCE English, and to see what strategies they used
specifically for CCE students, as opposed to those used for ELL students. A few example survey
questions include: “Do you think that Caribbean students should be in ELL to receive training in
English? Why/Why not?” and “In which areas do you notice differences in these students'
English? (pronunciation, vocab, sentence structure, grammar). Please provide examples.”
III. Data
Phonological Differences
Student 1:
Guyana
Word
SAE
1. my
/mai/
/mə/
1. Hanging
2. she
/ʃi/
/ʃɛ/
out
3. the
/ðə/
/də/
b. “Bring it
4. where
/wɛr/
/wæ/
come”
5. fore-
/fɔrhɛd/
/fairhId/
7. take
Guyana
SAE
CCE
6. man
/mæn/
Limin
CCE
1. “Can you
a. “Carry
bring (it)?”
come”
/man/
/tek/
/tɛk/
SAE
CCE
1. three
/θri/
/tri/
2. the
/ ðə/
/də/
Word
CCE
Syntactic Differences
SAE
head
Student 2:
Lexical Differences
SAE
I
CCE
Me
SAE
1.“I’m
going”
CCE
“A biliz”
Larsen & Karli | 6
Student 3:
Trinidad:
Word
SAE
CCE
SAE
1. what
/wʌt/
/wʌ/
Wa?
2. no
/no/
/na/
3. stupid
1. What’d
you
say?
/stupId/
/strupid/
4. damn
/dæm/
/dɔm/
Limin
5. daughter
/dɔtər/
/dɔtɔ/
2. Hangin
’ out
SAE
CCE
1. Come
here.
CCE
1.Come na
.
Students were asked to identify any specific examples of phonological, lexical, or syntactic
differences they were aware of between CCE and SAE. They were given the following list of
words to read and their pronunciation is listed below. Deviations from SAE pronunciation are
listed in bold.
Students’ Pronunciation of Selected Words
Word
SAE
Student
Pronunciation
Pronunciation
thing
/θIŋ/
Student 1: /təŋ/
Student 2: /təŋ/
Student 3: /təŋ/
that
/ðat/
can’t
/kænt/
home
/hom/
don’t
/dont/
make
/mek/
Student 1: /dat/
Student 2: /dat/
Student 3: /dat/
Student 1:/kænt/
Student 2:/kænt/
Student 3: /kyænt/
Student 1: /hom/
Student 2: /hom/
Student 3: /om/
Student 1: /dont/
Student 2: /dont/
Student 3: /don/
Student 1: /mek/
Student 2: /mek/
Student 3: /mək/
Larsen & Karli | 7
body
/badi/
you
/yu/
father
/faðər/
Student 1: /badi/
Student 2: /badi/
Student 3: /bædi/
Student 1: /yu/
Student 2: /yu/
Student 3: /yʌ/
Student 1: /fadər/
Student 2: /fada/
Student 3: /fada/
Students were presented with sentences that use structures that are acceptable in certain forms of
CCE, but are unacceptable in prescriptive SAE. Students were not told that each sentence
presented one or more problems in SAE. Instead, they were asked to identify if it was acceptable
in SAE and, if not, what they would change. Below, we have noted when students were able to
correctly identify the problems with the sentences.
Student Recognition of SAE Errors
Sentence
(Issue in SAE)
1. He rich.
Confirmed
Acceptance in CCE
(subject-verb agreement)
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 3
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 3
3. Yesterday, I wash the
clothes.
-Student 2
-Student 3
(copular verb)
2. She tell me everything.
(past tense)
4. Blake carried guns and
threaten other people.
nd
(2 verb past tense)
5. Students does go on like
that.
(subject verb/ use of does as
habitual)
6. He does go to church every
week.
(use of does as habitual)
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 3
Correctly Identified
the Issue/s in SAE
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 3
-Student 1
Could not Identify
the Issue/s in SAE
-Student 2
-Student 3
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 3
-Student 3
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 1
-Student 2
Larsen & Karli | 8
7. At present, me a du (do)
farming.
(present progressive: be +ing)
8. Mary a sing now.
(present progressive: be +ing)
9. At half-past five me (mi) de a
work.
(past tense or present
progressive: be +ing)
10. My father work two job.
(subject verb and plural
inflection)
-Student 2
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 3
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 1
-Student 3
-Student 2
-Student 1
-Student 2
-Student 3
-Student 3
-Student 1
-Student 2
IV. Analysis
1) What are the differences between Caribbean Creole English and Standard American
English?
The Caribbean Creole English lexicon is largely based on British English, while it draws
on West African languages for much of its phonology, morphology and syntax (Nero, 2000).
Some Caribbean Creole English, notably Jamaican Creole, also includes words from what is
today Ghana, as well as from French, Hindi, Chinese, and American Indian (Le Page, 1985).
The types of Caribbean Creole English vary from country to country and also within those
countries as related to social class and rural and urban dichotomies (Nero, 2000). Caribbean
Creole English speakers speak CCE along a continuum. The acrolect is the form nearest to
“Standard English.” The basilect is the opposite, the most “creolized” form. The mesolect exists
along the continuum between the basilect and acrolect (Gibson, 1986).
While most interested in differences of syntax based on research by Kean Gibson and
Robert Le Page, we anticipated that we would also find lexical and phonological variation. CCE
and SAE are rooted in British English, and though both dialects show lexical variation from
British English, this historical relationship means that while there are lexical differences between
Larsen & Karli | 9
SAE and CCE , they are less significant than lexical differences that exist between completely
distinct languages. . (Clachar, 2006 Our students confirmed several of the differences For
example, each confirmed that hand can indicate the part of the body from the shoulders to the
fingers in CCE, that foot can indicate the part of the body from the thigh to the toes, that a next is
used instead of another (Nero, 2000), and that they would typically use me as a subject pronoun
instead of I in CCE (Le Page, 1985). Two students, one from Trinidad and one from Guyana,
described the CCE term “limin” as “hanging out.” One student suggested that this word is used
to show a relationship between humans and limes. He said it captures the way limes just “hang
out” on lime trees. The students provided few other lexical differences, which supports our
understanding of a great lexical overlap between CCE and SAE.
Our next focus was on phonological variation and here we anticipated that the CCE
speakers would demonstrate deviation from SAE pronunciation of words we provided them.
First, we anticipated that the students would pronounce initial consonants differently. For
example, thing, which is pronounced /θəŋ/ in SAE, would be /təŋ/ in CCE and that, which is
pronounced /ðat/ in SAE, would be/dat/. Similarily, we predicted that can’t, /kænt/ in SAE,
would be /kyænt/ and home, /hom/ in SAE, would be /om/. We also anticipated differences in
whether or not they would pronounce the final consonant in don’t /dont/ in SAE but /don/ in
CCE. Finally, we expected the students to pronounce vowels differently. For example, we
thought that students would pronounce you, /yʌ/, in contrast to /yu/ in SAE, make /mək/, instead
of /mek/, body /bædy/, instead of /bady/,and father /fada/, not /faðər/ (Nero, 2000).
The student from Trinidad showed pronunciation patterns consistent with those described
above. However, to our surprise, when we asked our Guyanese students to say each of these
words as they would if they were in their native country, they showed little variation from the
Larsen & Karli | 10
SAE pronunciation. Initial consonant pronunciation of <th> was consistent with Nero’s
description of CCE pronunciation. Both students said /tiŋ/ for thing as opposed to the SAE
version /θiŋ/ and they said /dæt/ for that, in contrast to /ðæt/. One of the Guyanese students
pronounced father /fada/ as opposed to the SAE form /faðər/. However, for 6 areas in which we
expected to find phonological differences, the Guyanese students’ pronunciation was consistent
with SAE pronunciation. We believe that the students’ pronunciation is an effect of their time in
the U.S. (2.5 years and 3 years) and of their adoption of many SAE pronunciation patterns.
Students may also have demonstrated more pronounced CCE pronunciation had we captured
natural speech, rather than having them read us words in isolation.
The final and most crucial area of examination was the difference in syntax. Here, we
expected that our research with CCE speaking students would confirm that in CCE there are no
inflections for tense, subject-verb agreement, and plurals. We also expected they would confirm
the lack of copular verbs when predicates are adjectives and the unstressed use of the verb does
to indicate habitual action (Nero, 2000). We anticipated that our Guyanese students would
confirm their use of a + verb and/or a + verb + ing to indicate the present progressive aspect
(Gibson, 1992).
The students from Guyana confirmed the usage of nearly each of the structures described
above in their native dialect. The only discrepancy was over the past tense sentences,
“Yesterday, I wash the clothes,” and “At present me a do farming.” One of the Guyanese
students said he would say, “Yesterday I was washing the clothes.” He provided no response as
to how he would say the second sentence, only indicating that it would not be acceptable in CCE.
Meanwhile, the student from Trinidad had problems with, “At present me a do farming,” and
“Mary a sing now.” He said these were unacceptable in Trinidad, which comes as no surprise
because the structures are Guyanese specific (Gibson, 1992). By engaging in this sentence
Larsen & Karli | 11
analysis, our students confirmed that SAE and CCE have many of the syntactic differences
described above, which is of great consequence to them in a U.S. academic setting.
2) To what extent do CCE speakers attending U.S. high schools recognize those
differences?
We had anticipated that in spite of the many syntactic differences between SAE and
CCE, our students would only be aware of the phonological and lexical differences. In her study
of Jamaican Creole speakers, Alicia Beckford asked men and women in a semi-rural community
to describe how Jamaican Creole (Patois) differed from SAE. Despite the phonological, lexical,
and syntactic variations between Patois and SAE, only 15% of men and 20% of women said the
dialects varied in accent, vocabulary, and structure. The rest said that the dialects varied only in
accent, or only in accent and vocabulary. A majority, then, were unable to recognize the very
distinct syntactic differences (Beckford Wassink, 1999). Our findings differed from Beckford’s.
When we asked the students to tell us how CCE and SAE were most different (in the
pronunciation, lexicon, or syntax), one student indicated that the only major differences were in
pronunciation and a small number of words, another that the biggest differences were syntactic,
and the third student indicated that there were differences in all 3 areas. Although 2 of the
students were aware that there were structural differences in the language, they were only able to
provide us with a few examples. Those examples included: “I biliz” instead of “I’m going,”
“Come na” instead of “Come here,” and “Carry come” or “Bring it come” instead of “Can you
bring (it)?
When we gave students sentences that were acceptable in some parts of the Caribbean,
but unacceptable in SAE, the students were often unable to recognize that the sentences were
problematic in SAE. The student with the most awareness of syntactic differences was the
Larsen & Karli | 12
student from Trinidad, who correctly described the SAE issues in 5 of the 10 sentences. One
student from Guyana correctly identified the problems in 2 of the 10 sentences and the other
identified them in just 1 out of the 10 sentences. All three students identified the need for “is” in
the sentence, “He rich,” which shows that they are aware of the need for copular verbs with
predicates adjectives in SAE. This may have been obvious to the students because, of all the
differences, it is one of the least complex.
Our findings corroborate Beckford’s findings that while aware of phonological and
lexical differences between CCE and SAE, CCE speakers are less cognizant of syntactic
differences (1999). Even if they understand that there are structural differences, they may not be
able to articulate these differences. Students’ failure to make syntactic distinctions between CCE
and SAE makes sense if we consider that, “the similarities often mask the real differences
between the two [dialects].” Furthermore, CCE speakers may not be able to distinguish the SAE
syntactic structures because they often speak English along a continuum and don’t recognize the
need for producing a single, consistent syntactic structure in SAE (Nero, 2000).
3. How are Caribbean Creole-English speaking students different from non-native English
speaking students?
CCE speaking students have different academic issues and face different challenges from
their non-native English speaking peers. One challenge is that their dialect is not legitimized or
recognized in most American schools. Creole English dialects are considered “not the right
kind” because they are not the Anglophone dialects spoken in the “inner circle”, which includes
U.S., Canada, and the U.K (Nero, 2000). English spoken in this “inner circle” is considered
superior and is preferred to the Creole-English spoken in the Caribbean and India, not because it
is linguistically superior, but because Creole-English has a history of being spoken by slaves
Larsen & Karli | 13
(Nero, 2000). According to Sharon-ann McNicol, psychologist and author of Working with West
Indian Families (Guilford Press), many CCE speakers “don’t like to speak in class because their
teachers correct every sentence that comes out of their mouths. Asian and Latino children don't
get that because it's understood that they're speaking a different language” (Sontag, 1992).
This negative perception of CCE was also reflected in our findings. Two out of 3 of our
subjects described their dialect with some words that had negative connotations. For example,
one described his language as “broken” and “not proper”, while another described American
English as “normal.” Another subject expressed his frustration with being a Caribbean CreoleEnglish speaker. “They think it’s cute,” he said, “but it’s irritating. I can’t get the job I want,
they don’t understand you at the store. I can’t explain myself. And you don’t use it if you get
pulled over by the police.”
CCE speaking students have more difficulty using academic register and condensing
information into direct, concise sentences with embedded clauses or nominalization of verbs in
their writing. They are more likely to transfer speech register to their writing than their nonnative English speaking peers (Clacher, 2006). One reason is because the origin and history of
Creole English is oral and not written. Their formal writing style is less developed and is more
similar to informal speech. CCE speakers write long narratives, connecting additional
information with “and” (paratactic) and “because” (hypotactic) clauses as if they are speaking to
someone they know who shares their background knowledge and context. Their writing often
lacks supportive details and examples to support their claims. They also use informal
expressions or slang with the assumption that the reader understands what they mean (Clacher,
2006).
CCE speaking students have difficulty recognizing and learning these differences in
formal writing because of the lexical similarities between SAE and CCE. While they are often
Larsen & Karli | 14
aware of their dialectic differences in pronunciation and some vocabulary, they often do not
recognize subtle differences in grammar and sentence structures. For example, in our study, few
of the students noticed the grammatical errors in the examples, such as lack of verb tense,
inflection, or subject-verb agreement, according to Standard American English. This may be
because they are constantly code-switching between both registers, which combines the two
dialects to form an interlanguage. This interlanguage blurs and confuses the differences between
SAE and CCE, which results in overgeneralizations and inconsistencies with SAE rules (Nero,
2000). This issue is similar to that of speakers of African-American Vernacular English, who are
accustomed to switching back and forth between registers and fail to recognize or be motivated
to learn the subtle and unique structures of academic registers (Nero, 2000).
Like many non-native English speaking students in Washington, DC, CCE speaking
students come to the U.S. with diverse backgrounds of formal education. Their struggles in
academic writing depend on their educational backgrounds and their native dialect’s derivation
from SAE. Some Caribbean students may have lower literacy in their native dialects. For
example, research shows that the majority of Guyanese students have low functional literacy
(Jennings 2000). In a study conducted at an urban university in New York City, a student from
Guyana recalled that she only had to write one draft of her essays and the teachers just looked for
the answer without requiring supportive evidence or examples (Nero, 2000). Similarly, one of
our interview subjects from Guyana said that that he “did not take education seriously in
Guyana” and that education was harder because “teachers didn’t help you” When asked if
writing expectations were different in his native country he said that he “didn’t really have to
write back then.”
Larsen & Karli | 15
4. What can teachers of CCE speakers do to better support them?
According to a study conducted by Shondel Nero at St. John’s University, in the last two
decades there have been an increasing number of Caribbean immigrants in American classrooms,
especially in New York City (Nero, 2000). The largest populations come from Jamaica and
Guyana, and statistics shows that teachers are likely to see an increasing number of these
students in their classrooms (Nero, 2000). Unfortunately, there is still no consensus among
educators about whether CCE speakers should be considered native English speakers and if it is
appropriate to place them in ELL programs (Adger, 1997).
According to our study, half of the DCPS teachers surveyed feel that ELL classes are not
beneficial for CCE speaking students and may even limit their potential. If they are placed in
ELL, it should not be for more than one semester and the purpose should be for social and
cultural acclimation to a new country and not to teach them English. Our research supports the
view that while they may benefit from some ELL strategies, these strategies should be used in a
mainstream classroom where students will not feel isolated or defensive. They are often more
resistant to learning SAE in traditional ELL classes where they feel insulted and like they do not
belong (Adger, 1997).
Research shows that teachers do not know what to do with CCE speakers and fail to
notice the differences between the grammatical structures of the languages (Nero, 2000). For
example, while they often correct grammatical errors on students’ papers, they do not recognize
them as errors stemming from language differences between CCE and SAE (Nero, 2000).
Instead, teachers correct the errors assuming that the student is already familiar with the standard
structures and expect the students to understand why they are wrong.
In our teacher survey, 6 out of 8 teachers recognized differences in pronunciation, such
as word stress and accent. Two out of 8 also recognized differences in vocabulary, with one
Larsen & Karli | 16
ELL teacher adding that this was due to a British-based lexicon. Two out of 8 teachers found
differences in grammar, such as eliminating verb tense and inflection for the third person
singular. However, none of the teachers mentioned a need for specialized instruction in formal
writing, and one teacher claimed that his CCE students often had more advanced academic
writing skills than students from other countries.
Teachers should also be trained in the grammatical structures of CCE as well as cultural
sensitivity and the history of the language. For example, teachers should be familiar with
common grammatical structures of CCE such as lack of inflections in verb tense, subject-verb
agreement, copular verbs between nouns and adjectives, and plurals as well as unique structure
of a + verb for present progressive and the habitual marker does. As shown in Nero’s study,
many opportunities to highlight specific differences between SAE and CCE were missed because
teachers failed to identify a syntactic or grammatical error as a dialectic difference (Nero, 2000).
If teachers were trained in these differences, they could have personal conferences and mini
lessons with students about why and how the structures are different. Even if there is no formal
training available, teachers can conduct workshops in which they work together to analyze their
students’ work.
Nero’s study identified three types of effective programs that specialize in teaching SAE
to CCE students: instrumental programs, where the native dialect is used to teach initial literacy,
accommodation programs in which the dialect is not used by the teacher in instruction, but
acceptable if used by students, and awareness programs, in which students get a holistic,
sociolinguistic picture of their native dialect (Nero, 2000). All of these programs have had
positive results and parental support, but the most successful programs have been the cultural
awareness and accommodation programs, which have produced higher test scores in reading and
writing in standard English, overall improved academic achievement due to greater cognitive
Larsen & Karli | 17
development, increased motivation and self-esteem, and ability to notice the differences between
the dialects (Siegel, 2008).
One example of a successful awareness program is the Caribbean Academic Program
(CAP) at Evanston Township High School in Illinois, historically one of the best high schools in
the nation (Songtag, 1992). This program confronts the deep rooted negative attitudes attached
to CCE by teaching students the rich history of the dialect and how it came to be a distinct
language from SAE (Nero, 2000). Students also explore differences between the dialects of
different islands within the Caribbean and perform plays in Creole (Nero, 2000). A study
conducted on this program showed that while all students entered the program below the
American norm on standardized tests, after a year, only 15 percent remained below average and
30 percent went on to honors courses (Sontag, 1992).
Curriculum and classroom activities should reflect the diversity of the student population
and legitimize and highlight their experiences and backgrounds. This is especially important for
CCE speakers whose native language is often ignored or degraded in American society. Some
empowering exercises for them would be write personal stories or poems in their home language
and SAE or to read and interpret stories written by authors from their native countries. They can
conduct research projects on their own language in which they are the class experts, compare and
contrast their language structures with SAE, and present their findings to the class. They can
role play, write scenarios, and discuss which contexts are appropriate for both their native dialect
and SAE and how to easily shift between the two (Nero, 2000).
All of these activities are not only empowering and liberating, but also help them self
reflect and build their metalinguistic skills. Similarly, we noticed that our subjects were very
enthusiastic about participating in our study on their native language, something that they
Larsen & Karli | 18
probably never experienced before. We could see how proud they were to speak about their
language and some of them offered to provide more resources to help us research further.
Student attitudes about ELL classes
CCE students have different attitudes about whether they need ELL services and how
receiving these services make them feel. Some students feel insulted to be placed in low or
intermediate ELL courses when they already speak English (Nero, 2000). Our subjects had
different opinions about if CCE speakers should take ELL (or ESL) classes. One subject felt that
“it depends on your ability. From my understanding, ESL is for if you hardly know English or
have low academics back home. Before I came, I was about to graduate.”
The student who admitted to having little education in Guyana agreed that ELL was good
for him. He felt that he learned faster because “in ESL classes, they break it down for you, but
not in mainstream.” The other subject from Trinidad thought it was important for him to be in
ELL classes, but for social reasons. He said “if it wasn’t for ESL, I would’ve left school, gone to
a place where more kids are from the Caribbean.” He added that if Caribbean students are
placed in mainstream classes, they should be classes where “the teachers understand where we
are coming from.” When asked how Roosevelt teachers could accommodate for their needs, our
subjects suggested that they: “understand that we make mistakes”, “be more patient,” “don’t talk
too fast”, “write things down”, and “ask questions to make sure we get it”.
V. Conclusions and Suggestions for Future Research
If given the opportunity to continue our research and analyze it on a deeper level, we
could interview a larger and more varied sample of CCE speakers of different genders,
ethnicities, and geographic regions, and tape or video record our interviews to capture their
Larsen & Karli | 19
natural speech. We could also collect writing samples to capture their “natural writing” and
ability to identify syntactic differences without being led by our questions. Writing samples
would also enable us to analyze students’ specific difficulties with expository and formal writing
to better meet their needs in the classroom.
Our student interviews bore out a majority of the predictions we had related to
phonological, lexical, and syntactic differences between CCE and SAE. Students confirmed
most of the lexical differences and while the Guyanese students did not display all the
phonological differences that were anticipated, we believe this is a result of the fact that they
have all been in the U.S. for at least 2.5 years. Finally, the students confirmed that a great
number of syntactic differences exist between CCE and SAE. These differences relate to
markers for tense, subject-verb agreement, plurals, and the present progressive and habitual
aspects.
Overall, our study shows that syntactic differences are of most concern to teachers. Not
only do they have the greatest implications for students’ academic success, but students are also
the least aware of them. In all classrooms, teachers should explicitly teach CCE speakers how
and when to navigate between CCE and SAE. Teachers need to provide different contexts or
scenarios where students decide when and how to express themselves using the different
grammatical structures. They need to directly compare and contrast sentence structures,
especially subject-verb agreement, verb tenses, and inflections. They also need to explicitly teach
formal and expository writing styles, such as nominalization and embedded clauses (Clacher,
2006).
Our findings show that Caribbean Creole-English speaking students have different social
and academic issues from non-native English speaking students and should be taught in different
ways. Traditional ELL classes are not beneficial for CCE students because they do not meet
Larsen & Karli | 20
their specific needs, which are identifying the subtle grammatical differences between dialects
and using academic discourse in writing. The placement of CCE students in ELL classes should
be temporary and based on reading and writing scores. The purpose of placement in an ELL
program should be for the acclimation and socialization to a new culture. Since CCE speakers
and teachers are often unaware of the grammatical differences between CCE and SAE, all
teachers should be trained in history and structure of the dialect, as well as effective teaching
strategies (Nero, 2000).
Cultural awareness programs are often the most successful programs for CCE speakers
because they learn to feel proud of their native dialect, its origin, and purpose (Siegel, 2008).
Other successful activities encourage students to take ownership in their educations by choosing
genres, texts, and topics that are written by Caribbean authors and highlight their cultural
backgrounds. Students can be class experts in their dialects and compare and contrast them with
other students (Nero, 2000). This increases their motivation to learn and ability to separate the
languages, find connections and differences between them, and the contexts in which each
language is appropriate (Siegel, 2008).
Above all, students should be taught that their native dialect is not inferior, but instead a
tool that can be used in different social contexts and settings (Songtag, 1992). They should
consider themselves bilingual or bidialectal, with a skill or talent that they can successfully
employ to communicate in different situations, much like an ELL student whose native language
is not English. Their native dialect should be seen as a bridge to their social, academic, and
professional development, not an obstacle.
Larsen & Karli | 21
References
Adger, Carolyn Temple. “Issues and Implications of English Dialects for Teaching English as a
Second Language. TESOL Professional Papers #3. 1997.
Beckford Wassink, Alicia. “Historic Low Prestige and Seeds of Change: Attitudes toward
Jamaican Creole.” Language in Society. Vol. 28, No. 1 (Mar., 1999): 57-92.
Clachar, Arlene. “Re-examining ELL Programs in Public Schools : A Focus on Creole-English
Children’s Clause-Structuring Strategies in Written Academic Discourse.” Forum on Public
Policy: A Journal of the Oxford Round Table. (Fall 2006): 1-38.
Gibson, Kean. “The Ordering of Auxiliary Notions in Guyanese Creole.” Linguistic Society of
America. 62.3 (Sep., 1986): 571-586.
Gibson, Kean. “Tense and Aspect in Guyanese Creole.” International Journal of American
Linguistics. Vol 58, No. 1 (Jan., 1992): 49-95.
Jennings, Zellyn. “Functional Literacy of Young Guyanese.” International Review of
Education. Vol. 46, No ½ (May, 2000): 93-116.
Le Page, R.B., and Andree Tabouret-Keller. Acts of Identity. Cambridge, Great Britain;
Cambridge University Press, 1985. Print.
Nero, Shondel J. “English is My Native Language.. or So I Believe.” TESOL Quarterly. Vol.
31, No. 3 (Autmun, 1997): 585-593.
Nero, Shondel J. “The Changing Faces of English: A Caribbean Perspective.” TESOL
Quarterly. Vol. 34, No. 3 (Autumn, 2000): 483-510.
Siegel, Jeff. “Pidgin in the Classroom.” Educational Perspectives: Journal of the College of
Education/University of Hawaii at Manoa. Vol. 41. Numbers 1 and 2. (2008).
Sontag, Deborah. “Caribbean Pupils’ English Seems Barrier, Not Bridge.” New York Times.
1992.
Larsen & Karli | 22
VI.
Appendix
Student Interview Question Bank
Student Name: ________________________________
Date of Birth: _________________________________
Gender: _____________________________________
Grade in School: ______________________________
Place of Birth: ________________________________
Ethnicity: ____________________________________
First Language: _______________________________
Time in the U.S.: _____________________________
Interview Date: ________________________________
1. Do people speak English differently depending on where they are from? Can you give
any examples?
2. Do you hear different varieties of English throughout the day? Where? Spoken by
whom?
3. How often do you hear CCE spoken?
4. Where do you speak your first language? Standard American English?
Larsen & Karli | 23
5. Can you say things in your first language that you can’t say in SAE? If yes, can you give
me some examples?
6. Can you say things in SAE that you can’t say in your first language? If yes, can you give
me some examples?
7. How would you describe your first language?
8. How would you describe SAE?
9. Where is it better to speak CCE? Standard American English? Why?
10. When you first came to the U.S., was it difficult to understand spoken English here? If so,
why do you think that is?
Larsen & Karli | 24
11. When you first came to the U.S., was it difficult to be understood when speaking to English
speakers born in America? If so, why do you think that is?
12. Which is most difficult for you in school: reading, writing, speaking, or listening?
13. How are expectations for writing different here, if at all?
14. Do you think students who are from the Caribbean and speak English should be put in ESL
classes? Why? Why not?
15. Are there ways that Roosevelt teachers could better support you?
16. Do you think CCE and SAE are most different in pronunciation, vocabulary, or sentence
structure?
Larsen & Karli | 25
17. Now I’d like to examine some specific ways that your first language and SAE may or may
not be different. First, I will ask you to provide me examples, if you can think of any. Then, I
will give you examples and ask you to tell me if there are any differences.
Pronunciation
1. Are there any pronunciation differences you notice?
Word
1.
CCE
Difference
Larsen & Karli | 26
2. Please pronounce each word as you would when speaking CCE.
Word
CCE
Difference
Thing
That
Can’t
Home
Something
Don’t
Father
You
Make
Body
Vocabulary
1. Are there words in SAE that are different in CCE and SAE?
SAE
CCE
Larsen & Karli | 27
2. Can you tell me what these words means are CCE? SAE?
SAE
CCE
Billboard
Pig
Arm
Leg
Another
A’Next
Sentence Structure
1. Are there sentences that you say in SAE that you say differently in CCE?
Standard English Sentence
CCE Sentence
Larsen & Karli | 28
2. Sentence Analysis: Read each sentence below. Then please note if you can you say these sentences in your first
language and also in Standard American English. If you can’t say them, write how you would say them.
Example Sentence
Okay in Your First Language?
Okay in Standard American
English?
11. He rich.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______No, you have to say:
______No, you have to say:
______Yes, it’s fine.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______No, you have to say:
______No, you have to say:
______Yes, it’s fine.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______No, you have to say:
______No, you have to say:
12. She tell me everything.
13. Yesterday, I wash the
clothes
28
Larsen & Karli | 29
Example Sentence
Okay in Your First Language?
Okay in Standard American
English?
14. Blake carried guns and
______Yes, it’s fine.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______No, you have to say:
______No, you have to say:
______Yes, it’s fine.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______No, you have to say:
______No, you have to say:
______Yes, it’s fine.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______No, you have to say:
______No, you have to say:
threaten other people.
15. Students does go on like
that.
16. He does go to church every
week.
29
Larsen & Karli | 30
Example Sentence
17. At present, me a du (do)
farming.
Okay in Your First Language?
Okay in Standard American
English?
______Yes, it’s fine.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______No, you have to say:
______No, you have to say:
______Yes, it’s fine.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______No, you have to say:
______No, you have to say:
______Yes, it’s fine.
______Yes, it’s fine.
______No, you have to say:
______No, you have to say:
18. Mary a sing now.
19. At half-past five me (mi) de
a work.
30
Larsen & Karli | 31
31