Friday, October 12, 2018
The Bland Normality of Proper English
An important aspect of any humans life, as well as an important aspect of any novel is dialogue. Talking is something we learn to do in the first few years of our life, and something we utilize until the end of it. No two groups of humans talk the same either, certain subcultures/groups have certain nuances in pronunciation or sentence structure that give that certain dialect a flare. This idea is certainly evident in Their Eyes were Watching God, as all the dialogue from Janie and her associates is written to represent how it would've sounded in person as accurately as possible. However, I feel like this practice is rarely used. In most literature about ethnicities or cultures other than typical "proper English-speaking" Americans, the dialectual flairs that make these ethnic character's speech unique gets literally lost in translation, with each sentence going through the author's head and being written out in as perfect English as the author could produce. I wonder why Hurston chose to intentionally not do that, and what the significance of it is?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Great post! I've been wondering about the dialect too. Some phrases are nearly impossible to translate into scholarly midwestern english-- like "us colored folks is branches without roots and that makes things come round in queer ways." You lose all the character when you try to make it sound "proper"-- "we colored folks are branches without roots" and...what? How do you translate that second phrase and still keep the rhythm and poetry?
ReplyDeleteNice post. I think that the point of writing it in dialect is to show that the story is meant to be told orally and to empower that dialect and represent it in an accurate way.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Betsy that in translating it, it would lose the rhythm and flow. I am looking forward to reading more lines like that throughout the book and seeing how the dialect will play out. Nice post.
ReplyDeleteGreat post! I agree with Ayah that it was meant to be told orally. The fact that the dialect plays such a key role, it acts as a constant reminder that, yes, you are reading a different type of literature. I like it because it rebels against the typical proper English and adds more character. In class, there was the question of is this protest literature? The dialect would be one aspect that says yes. However, would the book as a whole be protest literature?
ReplyDelete