Scribd
Upload
120 views3 pages

Mockery and Appropriation of Spanish in White Spaces: Perceptions of Latinos in The United States

The document discusses three academic articles that examine the mocking use of Spanish, termed "Mock Spanish", in white spaces in the United States and how it functions as a covertly racist discourse. The articles analyze different forms and strategies of Mock Spanish, such as semantic pejoration of Spanish words, and how it relies on negative stereotypes of Latinos while denying accusations of racism. The final article also explores the different motivations and language ideologies present in the use of Mock Spanish at an Anglo-owned Mexican restaurant.

Uploaded by

Melissa Nieves Rivera
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
120 views3 pages

Mockery and Appropriation of Spanish in White Spaces: Perceptions of Latinos in The United States

The document discusses three academic articles that examine the mocking use of Spanish, termed "Mock Spanish", in white spaces in the United States and how it functions as a covertly racist discourse. The articles analyze different forms and strategies of Mock Spanish, such as semantic pejoration of Spanish words, and how it relies on negative stereotypes of Latinos while denying accusations of racism. The final article also explores the different motivations and language ideologies present in the use of Mock Spanish at an Anglo-owned Mexican restaurant.

Uploaded by

Melissa Nieves Rivera
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Mock Spanish

Mockery and Appropriation of Spanish in White spaces: Perceptions of Latinos in the


United States
Adam Schwartz (2011)

- Everyday mockery and the “symbolic resource”: a case of the Chihuahua


- The means by which to mock: indexicality and the white public space
- Mock Spanish as “covert racist discourse”
- “Gringoism” as a larger framework for mockery and appropriation
- Just joking: Denying racism in defense of “harmless fun”

Terms to define:
- Indexicality
- Direct indexicality (650)
- “No problemo.” “See ya manana!”
- “unmediated relation between one or more linguistic forms and some
contextual dimension”
- “a direct index of the speakers feelings”
- Indirect indexicality (651)
- “Speakers never acknowledge indirect indexes, and may be unaware of
their indexical scope.”
- Crack open some “cervezas”
- Drunk Mexican stereotype
- “White public space”
- Gringoism
-

Discussion questions:
1) How does appropriation differ from linguistic borrowing?
2)

Mock Spanish, Covert Racism, and the (Leaky) Boundary between Public and Private
Spheres
Hane H. Hill (2001)

- Three types of mock Spanish:


- Borrowings stripped of original meanings and given pejorative connotations
- Morphology: mistake-o, numero uno
- Ludicrous and exaggerated mispronunciations of Spanish loan material

- Racist discourse in the public sphere


- Dimensions of the public-private boundary
- Space
- Topic
- Speaker
- Style
- Mock Spanish on the blurred boundary

Terms to define:
- Public and private talk
-

Discussion questions:
1) Hill argues that “appreciation of humor in Mock Spanish requires unreflective access to
negative stereotypes of Latinos” (99) and that “it is fairly easy analytically to show that
Mock Spanish is driven by a racist semiotic, and that it functions to reproduce negative
views of Spanish-speaking people.” (98) Do you agree? How does Hill make the case
for this argument?

2) According to Hill, what is it about the situation of Spanish in the U.S. that enables
speakers to use “Mock Spanish?” How is this different from appropriation of other
languages? Do you agree with the distinction Hill makes between Spanish and other
languages? (98)

Language ideology and racial inequality: Competing functions of Spanish in an Anglo-


owned Mexican restaurant
Rusty Barrett (2006)

Terms to define:

- Chiquitification: a process which “diminishes the complexity of the languages and


cultures of the more than 22 million Latinos who reside in the U.S.” and Anglo Spanish
serves as an example of what Zentella 1996 has called the process of “chiquitification

Discussion questions:
1) What different forms of “Mock Spanish” does Barrett report observing at Chulupatown?
To what extent do these forms of Mock Spanish overlap with those mentioned by Hill
and Schwartz? How do they differ?

2) What are the different motivations for using “Mock Spanish?” Is the motivation always
the same?

Mock Spanish
Four Strategies of Mock Spanish:
1) Semantic pejoration of Spanish words
2) Mock Spanish euphemism
3) Use of Spanish grammatical elements
4) Hyperanglicization

Terms to Define:
- Hill (2001)
- Direct and indirect indexicality (p. 650)
- “White public space”
- Gringoism
- Schwartz (2011)
- Public and private talk/discourse
- Spectrum of covert-ness (p. 655)
- Deracialization (p. 658)
- Barrett (2006)
- Chiquitification (p. 21)
- Color-blind racism (p. 16)

Discussion Questions

1) How does appropriation differ from linguistic borrowing? How are they similar?
2) How can we apply the concepts of erasure and fractal recursivity to Mock Spanish?
3) Hill argues that “appreciation of humor in Mock Spanish requires unreflective access to
negative stereotypes of Latinos” (99) and that “it is fairly easy analytically to show that
Mock Spanish is driven by a racist semiotic, and that it functions to reproduce negative
views of Spanish-speaking people.” (98) Do you agree? How does Hill make the case
for this argument? Can you think of any counterexamples?
4) According to Hill, what is it about the situation of Spanish in the U.S. specifically that
enables speakers to use “Mock Spanish?” How is this different from appropriation of
other languages? Do you agree with the distinction Hill makes between Spanish and
other languages? (98)
5) What different forms of “Mock Spanish” does Barrett report observing at Chalupatown?
To what extent do these forms of Mock Spanish overlap with those mentioned by Hill
and Schwartz? How do they differ?
6) What are the different motivations for using “Mock Spanish?”
7) How can we apply the concepts of commonality, connectedness, and groupness
(Brubaker & Cooper 2000) to the linguistic situation at Chalupatown?

Ask the class what do they think of this example? Example from Barrett: Managers
would regularly used caca in directives such as “Why is there caca on the floor?”

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy