ENGL 110-64

by Kevin Haley

The way we string words together has a strong effect on people, especially if we say something in a way that has a brand new meaning to them. People enjoy finding new ways to talk because it adds variety to conversations, and more recently the idea of code meshing and code switching has become more relevant. We have been forced to code switch from a young age, as soon as we become students we start to learn a dialect of our language that is typically more formal than the language we use at home. For essays, homework, and tests students use their most formal dialect of English to get their points across. There are teachers who stress formality over content and there are teachers that do the opposite, and for a student this can be confusing. Other codes may feel more comfortable and easier to use, but they could offer confusion or discomfort for the audience so we instead soak the discomfort out of respect for the ones we are talking to. Most high school or college students realize something at some point which is that a lot of the academic writing we do really has only one member of its audience and that is the teacher. Students will spend time tailoring their essay to match the guidelines of one individual, when most of the time teachers ask you to write about a topic that pertains to multiple people. In a time where certain classical formalities are going extinct, it is safe to say students should have the ability to write what they want in whichever way gets their point across best.

        Schools teach their students formal writing throughout their lives as preparation for opportunities, jobs, and communication. It is important to know how to sell yourself and ideas, and formal school taught English is the best well respected way of doing so. However, the difference between formal and informal writing is the fabrication of ideas and words. Informal writing where we don’t have to code switch is pure and unique because we are saying the first things that come to our head without question of how to make it sound better or more formal. We are always changing the contents of our formal English language by adding new words or double meanings to words that eventually become formally accepted in schools and professional settings. One director of the Academic Student Services Writing Center, Neisha-Anne Green claims, “Standard academic English is fluid as hell. It’s always evolving…So how can you tell me there is no space in academia for all of my Englishes? Why should I always have to contort myself and fix myself to your definition of good writing?”(Dimond). This is a valid claim for code meshing because she points out how English is always evolving. Why can it not formally incorporate “less formal” codes? Code meshing offers a learning experience for everyone because people will get exposed to words, phrases, and expressions that they have never heard before and in return this allows an individual to express their ideas on a more diversified basis. 

        The main reason for code switching to formal academic writing is so that people can find a universal dialect or common ground that everyone can comprehend and communicate on. This makes it much easier for teachers to grade when they set universal guidelines for their students to follow. However, this affordance for teachers can come as a constraint for students when they are asked to express themselves in a certain way. Expressions should be natural and code meshing preserves the naturality of our expressions. Allowing to choose whichever vernacular you want while talking maximizes creativity and eliminates repetition. Learning how to say things a different way cancels out repetition in English and offers freedom. Oftentimes, high schoolers and college students find themselves tailoring their writing to better fit the teacher’s beliefs or practices which are directly or indirectly integrated into the guidelines. One article supports this claim by saying, “Classroom writing practices are further influenced by teachers’ beliefs and knowledge…They(teachers) are also more likely to apply specific writing practices they view as acceptable”(Graham). Each teacher has their own definition of formal writing, and in a way they are asking you to adapt to a certain code for the time limits of that class to receive a good grade. This places students out of their comfort zone to meet the requirements. If teachers allowed for students to mesh their codes instead of picking and sticking with one then students would be more comfortable when writing. 

        The issue of code meshing boils down to clarity, teachers want you to express yourself but in a way that they and the class can understand. To make code meshing more common in classrooms, professions, and situations it has to be more socially accepted, and for that to happen people must stop rejecting new or unknown lingo and instead ask what it means. This is similar to learning a foreighn language and that it interconnects cultures and ideas. We do this in English with our multiple uses of slang for different situations and settings. Allowing for these forms of slang to mesh interconnects culture and people, in return this makes us closer to each other while having a better understanding of one another. The effort for code meshing starts with you. One quote from an article posted by the Harvard Business Review exclaims, “By bringing more of yourself to the table, you may encourage others to do the same.”(HBR). If we make the stance to mesh our codes rather than switch them, academic writing will have to conform to incorporating new language instead of rejecting it. Academic writing does change overtime as new expressions come up, but it is at a slow pace while having a confusing metric for determining what new language can be considered academic.

        Vershawn Young mentions a quote from Stanley Fish’s Should Writers Use They Own English, he states, “Yeah, he tell teachers to fake like students have language rites. He say, If students infected with the facile egalitarianism of soft multi- culturalism declare, “I have a right to my own language,” reply, “Yes, you do, and I am not here to take that language from you; I’m here to teach you another one.” (Who could object to learn- ing a second language?) And then get on with it. (Fish Part 3).”(Young 3). Young’s criticism of Fish’s outtake on teaching academic writing highlights a contradiction Fish made in his article. He further claims, “You cant start off sayin, “disabuse yo’self of the notion that students have a right to they dialect” and then say to tell students: “Y’all do have a right.” That be hypocritical.”(Young 3). These two quotes show the faulty definition of freedom when it comes to academic writing, the formalities put in place by the teacher doesn’t always match the comfortable formalities of our personal code. This makes our expressions and words feel less personal, even though they are still coming from our thoughts, they have been influenced by the guidelines of our audience making them accustomed to someone else’s liking or belief for situational comfort. All of this offers less to little room for freedom of our mind when writing.

        This video from YouTube shows President Barack Obama shaking hands with people, and he greets the two white people in the video with a classic hand shake while he slaps up Kevin Durant. A slap up is a more interactive greeting stemming from African American culture that consists of first interlocking thumbs to a palm slap then sliding down to lock the other four fingers, often then followed by a one arm hug with a certain number of back taps. This is a visual example of how President Obama code switched for a more comfortable greeting with Kevin Durant, however this switch caught the eye of many adding fuel to the discussion of code meshing. Taking the perspective of the other two individuals in the video, could they have felt more included if they had been greeted with the same handshake? They most likely did feel some sort of seclusion in the room, and this seclusion can too be found in our diction. 

        To make a more inclusive and diversified writing environment for students, teachers should highly consider accepting less formal or different code writing. This is best for the students because it allows them to express themselves the best way they know how with no reservations. It begins with asking questions about what an unknown word or phrase means instead of classifying it as gibberish. People need to possess the will to understand one another and in return they will also be able to express themselves however they see best. Code meshing can offer a range of cultural possibilities whereas code switching pressures individuals to conform to specific formalities of a situation even when it may make them less comfortable. A solution is to reconstruct the narrative around teaching academic writing from stressing formality to more so stressing diversity. This allows for true freedom of expression which leads to ultimate comfortability in situations. Respect is given to individuals who understand others. People have many ways of expressing and connecting with one another, and this is why code meshing offers so much for human connection. 

Works Cited

Dimond, O. (2021, February 10). The benefits of code meshing in academic writing. The Bates Student. Retrieved March 29, 2022, from https://thebatesstudent.com/21125/arts-leisure/the-benefits-of-code-meshing-in-academic-writing/

Graham, S. (2019, May 22). Changing how writing is taught. Sage Journals Review f Research in Education. Retrieved March 29, 2022, from https://doi.org/10.3102/0091732X18821125

McCluney, C. Robotham, K. Lee, S. Smith, R. Durkee, M. (2021, January 28). The costs of code-switching. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved March 29, 2022, from https://hbr.org/2019/11/the-costs-of-codeswitching

Young, V. A., (2010) “Should Writers Use They Own English?”, Iowa Journal of Cultural Studies 12(1), p.110-117.