44 pages • 1 hour read
Amy TanA modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more. For select classroom titles, we also provide Teaching Guides with discussion and quiz questions to prompt student engagement.
“I spend a great deal of my time thinking about the power of language—the way it can evoke an emotion, a visual image, a complex idea, or a simple truth.”
The crux of Tan’s argument is that how one thinks about language and how one represents ideas is important. This introductory argument about the “power of language” is referential to the quality of Tan’s writing in “Mother Tongue” and to her larger point regarding different forms of English and writing for a specific audience. Later in the text Tan describes her mother’s ability to do all the things that she lists here: evoke emotion, describe vivid images, express complex ideas, and capture truth.
“Recently, I was made keenly aware of the different Englishes I do use.”
Tan argues that there are different “Englishes.” There are formal Englishes, Englishes for different contexts (e.g., for the family, for out in public), and Englishes specific to people who speak languages other than English. Tan articulates her own understanding and awareness of the importance of these myriad Englishes as she develops her perspective in this essay.
“You should know that my mother’s expressive command of English belies how much she actually understands.”
Although this quote speaks to a specific example of types of English, this is a critical underlying argument of Tan’s essay: that a person’s “expressive command” over English does not necessarily reflect their actual ability to understand or think in complex ways. This is an important anti-xenophobic argument. Tan resists narratives that depict immigrants or those who speak less perfect or formal English as somehow less intelligent or less creative than those who were born in the United States and easily speak formal English.
“It’s my mother tongue. Her language, as I hear it, is vivid, direct, full of observation and imagery. That was the language that helped shape the way I saw things, expressed things, made sense of the world.”
In this statement Tan uses the titular phrase “mother tongue,” explaining the nuances intended by this specific word choice. The phrase “mother tongue” reflects Tan’s relationship with her mother and the way she “made sense of the world,” but it is also about Tan’s relationship with her mother’s use of language (and English) and how this shaped Tan’s own relationship with English and with writing. Tan’s use of her mother’s tongue in her writing is a resistance to formal structures of English and an acceptance of the complicated ways that her mother’s language exists in resistance to traditional literature.
“It has always bothered me that I can think of no way to describe it other than ‘broken,’ as if it were damaged and needed to be fixed, as if it lacked a certain wholeness and soundness.”
Tan inserts this intense personal reflection on how she thinks about her mother’s language (and, underneath that, all English that is less formal). As Tan wrestles with her struggle to describe her mother’s English, relying on the moniker “broken,” she articulates a critical thread of her argument: that her mother’s English is whole and sound, just in a different way than is considered valuable by the dominant US culture.
“When I was growing up, my mother’s ‘limited’ English limited my perception of her. I was ashamed of her English.”
An underlying emotional thread of Tan’s essay is her own feelings about being raised by her mother and having to protect her mother in situations where people only acted respectfully if one could speak in formal English. As a child, Tan felt ashamed; this essay serves as a reckoning with that shame as Tan describes her transition to fully embracing her mother’s English and ways of expression. This quote represents a turn in the essay, as Tan begins describing more of the benefits of her mother’s English than drawbacks.
“I believed that her English reflected the quality of what she had to say. That is, because she expressed them imperfectly her thoughts were imperfect.”
Through her use of the first person in this quote, Tan expertly guides readers, many of whom might share the same perspective regarding how English “reflect[s] the quality of what [one has] to say.” By positioning herself as a confessional narrator, Tan develops her argument and challenges readers to understand that one’s spoken expression (especially in a second language) does not necessarily mean that one’s “thoughts [are] imperfect.”
“And when the doctor finally called her daughter, me, who spoke in perfect English—lo and behold—we had assurances the CAT scan would be found, promises that a conference call on Monday would be held, and apologies for any suffering my mother had gone through.”
In the most emotionally charged example of discrimination related to language, Tan describes how she secured better medical care for her mother by speaking formal English over the phone to the doctor. Through this example, Tan questions the racist and xenophobic limitations of the US health care system and points out how language can limit or help a person in US society. Most importantly, this anecdote shows how a person’s use of language determines how much value or humanity they are assigned: Tan’s mother only receives apologies for her “suffering” once Tan is on the phone using formal English.
“I think my mother’s English almost had an effect on limiting my possibilities in life as well.”
In an interesting syntactic choice, Tan uses the qualifier “almost” in this statement to adjust her tone. Unlike earlier passages, in which Tan wrote strident descriptions of the limitations created by “broken” English, here Tan softens her approach. This shift in perspective primes Tan’s eventual argument that her mother’s English did not hinder but actually helped her writing career.
“Well, I could never think that way. I knew what the tests were asking, but I could not block out of my mind the images already created by the first pair.”
One of Tan’s important arguments in “Mother Tongue” is that the way people speak is intricately linked to the way people think and organize their ideas internally. This anecdote shows Tan struggling with the analogy questions on standardized tests as a student; her way of understanding through language is markedly different than what the tests are asking for. Ultimately, Tan views this difference as a gift rather than a hindrance, though she acknowledges that this might not be true for all students.
“Because lately I’ve been asked, as a writer, why there are not more Asian-Americans represented in American literature.”
As a Chinese American author, Tan is aware of how she is positioned to answer questions on behalf of all Asian Americans, despite the racism implicit in this line of questioning. This is an important aspect of how Tan chooses to position herself: Rather than arguing that she can speak for the larger social implications of language, she makes almost all her points using personal examples from a first-person perspective. By developing her points through an emotional perspective based almost solely in personal experience, Tan avoids getting into semantic arguments with people who might want to take the more formal, academic approach.
“And at first I wrote using what I thought to be wittily crafted sentences, sentences that would finally prove I had mastery over the English language.”
In her struggle to balance the different forms of English that she could write with, Tan found herself at odds with how she perceived “mastery” based on her education. The conclusion of “Mother Tongue” provides an important juxtaposition between the “wittily crafted sentences” she perceived to be good writing and what she ends up writing, which is composed in her mother’s tongue. This also references the beginning of the essay, where Tan describes her discomfort with being identified as anything more than a writer.
“I began to write stories using all the Englishes I grew up with: the English I spoke to my mother… the English she used with me… my translation of her Chinese… and what I imagined to be her translation of her Chinese.”
Tan’s triumphant conclusion resolves many of the conflicts described in “Mother Tongue” as she realizes that her authentic voice as a writer uses “all the Englishes” she grew up with. In particular, these are the Englishes used by her mother and the Englishes that represent her relationship with her mother. This realization helps Tan find her sense of self in her writing and produce a book—The Joy Luck Club—that she is genuinely proud of.
“I wanted to capture what language ability tests can never reveal: her intent, her passion, her imagery, the rhythms of her speech and the nature of her thoughts.”
Tan’s admiration for her mother’s informal but powerful language subtly refers to one of Tan’s central arguments in “Mother Tongue.” It is not enough to capture the myriad ways that her mother’s language is more interesting and vivid than formal English; it is also important to continuously call out those aspects of US culture, like language ability tests, that insist on valuing only one form of English, which limits immigrants and non-native speakers.
“I knew I had succeeded where it counted when my mother finished reading my book, and gave me her verdict: ‘So easy to read.’”
In this profound final statement, Tan effectively summarizes her arguments regarding types of English and the complexity of her relationships with her craft as a writer and with her mother. Tan’s description of succeeding “where it counted” reflects her newer understanding that her mother is the reader she should be writing for. Tan finally wrote the book she wanted to write once she accurately captured the multiple Englishes she grew up with and thinks in.
By Amy Tan