Gloria Anzaldua's How To Tame A Wild Tongue

America is truly an exemplary example of a melting pot of cultures, and in “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, Gloria Anzaldua tells her personal story of the challenges she faced while adapting to a society split between two distinct cultures: American and Spanish Chicano culture. While growing up, the American half of her society dictated her academics, as she was required to leave behind her native Spanish language and replace it with American English language in an effort to achieve success and respect from her peers in school. The Chicano half of her surroundings governed her home life, forming the basis of her personal identity, as she grew up in South Texas as part of a Chicano family. This struggle to identify herself within two distinct cultures

resulted in her loss of self-esteem, as growing up in a country that shuns Chicano Spanish forced her to internalize the belief that she speaks an illegitimate language. As a contemporary of the 1960s Chicano Movement, Anzaldua personally testifies for this correlation between one’s identity and their language, and speaks out on behalf of bilinguals who grew or are growing up in oppression because of their lingual and cultural heritage. She successfully validates the credibility of her correlation between linguistics and one’s personal identity, while strategically organizing her argument and diction, which results in her effectively convincing the reader that one’s personal identity is greatly defined by their dialect and background.

Mouna 2
At the beginning of the passage, Anzaldua provides the reader with a thought-provoking anecdote to introduce the theme of her essay.

She relays to the reader a time at a dentist’s office when the dentist told her that “we’re going to have to control your tongue”, as her tongue was interfering with his ability to perform the dental work. This anecdote introduces the main subject of her argument – one’s mouth and the language that resonates from it, while also providing a comparable and connecting example to appeal to her audience, as the reader has most likely sat in a dentist’s chair at one point. Furthermore, Anzaldua’s explanation of how she instantly related the doctor’s comment to thoughts of how she must “tame a [her] wild tongue” (Anzaldua 26), meaning her accent, makes it clear to the reader that the judgment that Anzaldua has experienced towards her accent has made her always conscious of how others view her – even in instances such as dental appointments. Anzaldua then initially attracts the attention of the reader by intentionally pointing out the harshness of the judgment she encountered to evoke pathos, as the reader feels sympathy when imagining Anzaldua’s vivid descriptions of how she has been treated in the past. She uses pathos to qualify her assertion that the acculturation process is harsh by referencing the First Amendment, explaining that this Amendment is violated when an individual has his form of expression attacked with intent of censure. Anzaldua’s explanation of a time at school when she was hit on the knuckles with a ruler for being caught speaking Spanish, induces anger in the reader as they see how poorly Anzaldua was treated when she was just a young schoolgirl. In a latter example, Anzaldua shares the story of a time when the teacher accused her of talking back when she was simply just trying to explain how to correctly pronounce her name. The insertion of the teacher’s exact words to her: “If you want to be American, speak

‘American.’ If you don’t like it, go back to Mexico where you belong”, gives
Mouna 3
the reader the awareness that these words still impact her today as she can dictate the exact phrase the teacher said. At this point in the passage, Anzaldua’s story telling abilities instill a sense of doubt in the reader; the reader asks themselves how it is fair that this young girl was made to feel so alienated in her own learning environment. The treatment that the young Chicano girl experienced growing up, culminated into the belief that her accent is something that defines her, and the reader can now personally justify Anzaldua’s ideology, since she provided specific instances that made her feel this way that the reader can cite and possibly even relate to. Anzaldua’s inclusion of anecdotes appeals to her ethos, as she establishes her credibility to the audience by providing her perspective – one of a woman who has experienced this “taming” of a “wild tongue” firsthand.
Throughout her essay, Anzaldua examines the many kinds of borders that are prevalent in every community, whether they be cultural, social, or linguistic borders, to identify the reasons as to why she has experienced this segregation within her society. She brilliantly intertwines English and Spanish language in her writing, giving the reader a glimpse of what it is like to experience something that is a meshing of two distinct cultures. Through giving the reader insight into cultural borders she defends the natural development of her own Chicano culture, as “Chicano Spanish sprang out of the Chicanos’ need to identify ourselves as a distinct people” (Anzaldua 28). She defends her heritage and the legitimacy of her argument through her explanation of how Chicano culture formed from a group of people “who are not Spanish nor live in a country in which Spanish is the first language” (Anzaldua 28). This group of people’s need to identify themselves resulted in Chicano culture, and Anzaldua’s in-depth explanation of this process provides the reader with an understanding of her background, while establishing the
Mouna 4
fact that Chicano Spanish should not be subject to being called an “illegitimate language”, as it developed just as legitimately as English did.
Anzaldua’s authentication of the legitimacy of her language strategically precedes her statement of the main point of her essay, making her able to convince the reader that her argument is valid before even introducing it. She uses the examples of her mistreatment and how that has affected her as a basis for the reader to understand why she holds her current opinion that one’s dialect greatly contributes to one’s self-image, whether it be in a positive, or in her case, negative way. She then proceeds to make her main point in the middle of her essay, after she has developed her argument through anecdotal examples and background information, as a valid attempt to catch the reader off-guard and force the reader to stop and think about the argument she is making. In collaboration with the strategic organization of her essay, Anzaldua quickly shuts down a skeptical reader’s opinion that she is being biased and hateful through her usage of a respectful tone. She maintains a strict tone to articulate her argument, but she does not let her irritation and hurt reflect greatly in her writing; instead, she remains calm and collected in an effort to maintain her credibility with the reader. In addition to this, Anzaldua shows ethos by providing insight into both sides of her acculturation process in order to convince the reader that she remained open-minded and accommodating while adapting to her surroundings in America. This clarification gives the reader a reason to believe that Anzaldua is not making a hasty generalization in concluding that one’s identity is greatly influenced by one’s dialect, but has instead formed her opinion after analyzing how people’s behavior towards her has affected her self-image today.

Mouna 5
As apparent through her writing, Anzaldua has been taught that her accent is something that defines her because of the way she has been treated for speaking in her Chicano dialect. She was never accepted as a native speaker by the Spanish or English, and this has left her to believe that she cannot identify socially with either of these groups, but instead identifies best with Chicano culture. As seen in Anzaldua’s narrative, Chicano language, or any socially unaccepted identifier, can be a source of degradation leading to hurt and anger in the individual who classifies themselves under the specific identifier. As an expatriate myself, I have personally experienced this kind of shame, so Anzaldua does not have to persuade me much for me to agree with her viewpoint. However, Anzaldua ensures to make her argument inclusive to all kinds of people, whether they have grown up in America or not, by providing a viewpoint into both sides of the argument. The problems that Anzaldua had identifying with her surroundings because of her dialect have permanently affected her personal identity, and she has realized that she cannot ultimately be happy until she accepts the “illegitimacy” of her tongue (Anzaldua ___).
Gloria Anzaldua makes it clear through her own example that one’s self-esteem greatly depends on how one feels they are viewed in society; however, she is a living example of how one is capable of self-validity despite others’ negative reactions to them. One’s language is truly a part of their identity, and it is up to that person to value their language, as living by what others dictate to you does not lead to genuine self-content and happiness. As Anzaldua speaks out for those who have been looked down upon based on their heritage, she calls all readers to take action against judgment cast towards the minority in an effort to make America a more welcoming place to outsiders who greatly contribute to society.