Shuman does not evaluate these stud

Shuman does not evaluate these students’texts by standard school criteria of competence, but rather
as part of a single community's repertoire: From this perspective they represent choices among
channels and genres of communication, rather than examples of greater or lesser deficiency, as the
popular debate in many societies about “standards” would appear to require. The practices described
by Shuman do not represent anomalies, rather they demonstrate “a need to re-evaluate the current
models used for categorizing writing and speaking.” Communicative competence, then, is relative to
the speech community and its norms. Labov and others have demonstrated that there is much more
of interest in the language practices of the inner city than is elicited by the standard tests and popular
judgments. The work of Shuman, Camitta, Baynham and others is now revealing the rich repertoire of
written as well as oral practices to be found there.

Results (Malay) 2:

Shuman tidak menilai students'texts ini mengikut kriteria sekolah standard kecekapan, tetapi
sebagai sebahagian daripada himpunan umat yang satu ini: Dari perspektif ini mereka mewakili pilihan antara
saluran dan genre komunikasi, dan bukan contoh kekurangan besar atau lebih kecil, sebagai
popular perbahasan di kebanyakan masyarakat tentang "standard" akan muncul untuk menghendaki. Amalan yang dinyatakan
oleh Shuman tidak mewakili anomali, sebaliknya mereka menunjukkan "keperluan untuk menilai semula semasa
model yang digunakan untuk mengkategorikan menulis dan bercakap." Kecekapan komunikatif, maka, adalah relatif kepada
masyarakat ucapan dan norma itu. Labov dan lain-lain telah menunjukkan bahawa terdapat banyak lagi
kepentingan dalam amalan bahasa bandar dalaman daripada yang dibangkitkan oleh ujian standard dan popular
penghakiman. Kerja-kerja Shuman, Camitta, Baynham dan lain-lain kini mendedahkan himpunan kaya
bertulis serta amalan lisan untuk ditemui di sana.