The poems ''Dry Foot Bwoy'' and ''Nuh Likkle Twang'' by Jamaican poet Louise Bennett

show different attitudes to language may differ and different reactions. Language is both a body
of symbols and the system for their use in messages that are common to the people of the
same speech community. Attitudes to language are opinions, ideas and prejudices that
speakers have with respect to a language. Attitudes to language differ based on variation within
standard varieties of language. This essay will compare and contrast the attitudes to languages
in the aforementioned poems.
The attitudes to language in ‘’Dry Foot Bwoy’’ are that of contempt, ridicule, rejection and
prestige. The speaker in this poem initiates conversation with seemingly a born and raised
islander who spent some time away from home, but notices something strange about his accent
and the manner in which he speaks, but does not think much of it. As the conversation carries
on, the speaker notices that Miss Mary’s son had been speaking this way intentionally. The
speaker in the poem gets progressively more irritated until she lashes out and tells him to
‘kirout’. ‘’Same time me laas me temper, an Me holler, ‘Bwoy, kirout! No chat to me wid no hot
pittata Eena yuh mout!’ ’’ Hence, the speaker displays annoyance at Miss Mary’s son and his
attempts to speak in acrolect. The young man chooses to decline the numerous invitations
made by the speaker to speak in basilect - as he used to - to her, and connect on a deeper level
with the speaker. This is seen right after the speaker lashes out and prompts Miss Mary’s son to
switch dialects, where he responds ‘’How siiley! I don’t think that I really understand you,
actually.’’ and contradicts his past actions with his words by previously continuing the
conversation in which he used acrolect and the speaker used basilect. It is therefore evident
that Miss Mary’s son has a rejective attitude towards basilect in this poem, and hence, finds any
variant higher than basilect, be it mesolect or acrolect, more prestigious, which is unnecessary
for casual talk amongst relatives. Another attitude to language in the poem is that of ridicule.
Ridicule is directed at Miss Mary’s son by the speaker and the other girls watching. This is seen
when the speaker lashes out and says ‘’ An now all yuh can seh is ‘actually’?’’ in the last stanza,
and when Miss Mary’s son begins to walk through the door and the girls say ‘’ ‘Not going? What!
Oh deah!’ ‘’. This shows ridicule because the speaker mocks Miss Mary’s son for neglecting
basilect, and the girls speak in the only way that he claims to understand, while not actually
being concerned about his emotions. The use of single quotations also hints to the reader that
extra attention must be paid to those specific words or phrases.
The attitudes to language in ‘’Nuh Likkle Twang’’ are that of shame, disappointment,
worth and pride. The speaker in this poem is ashamed of her son, who has spent six months in
the United States, but has returned to his country of birth the same way he went: speaking in
basilect. She is disappointed because she notices no real difference between himself six
months ago and his current self, particularly linguistically. To show her disappointment, she
compares her son to his sister who worked with U.S citizens for a week and came back
sounding ‘so nice’. ‘’An yuh sister what work ongle one week wid merican she talk so nice now
dat we have de jooce fi understand?’’ She also explicitly says that she is ashamed of his lack of
transformation: ‘’Me glad fi see yuh come back, bwoy, but lawd, yuh let me dung me shame a
yuh so till all a me proudness drop a grung…’’ In this quote the speaker says that her pride has
been lowered because her son returned home speaking basilect. The speaker therefore takes
pride in the acrolect variation of language and, like many others, deems it the variation with the
most worth.
 The two poems ‘’Dry Foot Bwoy’’ and ‘’Nuh Likkle Twang’’ share both positive and
negative attitudes towards language. The difference between the two is in the attitude shown
towards language varieties basilect and acrolect. For example in Dry Foot Bwoy, basilect is
uplifted and its use is encouraged, while acrolect is deprecated and ridiculed. In ‘’Nuh Likkle
Twang’’ the opposite is true. Basilect is put to shame by the speaker and it is the acrolect variant
of language that is celebrated. The specific negative attitudes towards language poems also
differ. While Miss Mary's son, for example, faces ridicule for using the acrolect variant of
language where basilect would have been apter, the speaker's son in Dry Foot Bwoy does not
face ridicule, but a mother who is disappointed and ashamed that her son does not use the
language variant by which he was supposedly surrounded, for six months, whilst overseas. In
regards to positive attitudes towards language both poems are similar; Miss Mary's son takes
pride in using the acrolectic variant of language as does the mother in Nuh Likkle Twang. One
instance each of these is seen when Miss Mary's son responds to the speaker's outlash "How
siiley! I don’t think that I really understand you, actually", and when the mother praises her
daughter for speaking acrolect "An yuh sister what work ongle one week wid Merican she talk
so nice now dat we have de jooce fi understand?".
In short, both positive and negative attitudes towards language are seen in both poems.
One poem denigrates basilect, while the other encourages it. This is also true for the acrolect
variant. The specific negative attitudes towards language in each poem are different, however
the positive attitudes are largely the same. Both poems include similar attitudes to language, but
'who' has a certain attitude changes.