Leverett 1

Taylor Leverett

Weaver

LNG 406

17 March 2011

“Café Reflection” Annotations

Questions on Meaning

1. In Paragraph 9 Leong says that she and her friends “know what the word chink

truly means.” Where in her essay does she explain this “true” meaning?

Leong emphasizes that “the dealing with a label can never be removed” but the “true”

meaning of the word chink has came to be a symbol of what Chinese look like—“the

shape of [their] eyes, the color of [their] skin, the texture of their hair, and [their]

delicate features (Leong 476)” that ultimately define who they are.

2. What has the word chink come to mean when Leong and her friends use it?

Where in the essay does Leong explain this?

Following the same Paragraph 9, Leong gives a meaning to what the word truly

means amongst her family and friends. The word chink is “not to be used to belittle or

degrade, but rather as a term of endearment, a loving insult between [Leong] friends

(Leong 476)”. This shows that ironically a word that was used to discriminate against

one specific race is now used to signify “the varied and complex human beings that

they know themselves to be (Naylor 470).”

3. One might argue that the THESIS of Leong’s essay is that language is not

absolute. Is her PURPOSE, then, to propose a new DEFINITION for a word, to

 Leverett 2

teach the reader something about how labels work, or to explain how adapting a

racist term can be a form of gaining power? How do you know?

Leong’s purpose is both to show how labels work and to explain how adapting a

racist term can be a form of gaining power. She shows how labels work through her

example of her first time being exposed to the word chink and how “she was not

surprised considering being only two Asian families living and running a business in

a small suburban town inhabited by Caucasian people (Leong 475)”. Also, she

emphasizes that the racist term chink was like a form of gaining power within her

own race because they didn’t let that word define who they were but rather “a certain

comfort in each other” (Leong 476).

Questions on Writing Strategy

1. What structural similarities do you notice between it and Leong’s? Why do you

think Leong’s adapts these features of Naylor’s essay?

Naylor and Leong both give personal examples to emphasize their meaning or thesis

of the essay. With Naylor, the word nigger in her family was a way “to signify the

varied and complex human beings hey knew themselves to be” similar to Leong

where the word chink was signified as a “term of endearment” to her family and

friends. Leong adapts these features of Naylor’s essay to support her claim that a

racist term was transformed to “a common thread”.

3. What is the main purpose of the extended example from Naylor’s essay in

paragraph 7?
 Leverett 3

The purpose was for Leong’s point or meaning to be supported that the racist term

that was coined “to harm, ridicule, and humiliate” ironically change to symbolize the

“common thread” that binds a race ultimately.

Questions on Language

1. In paragraph 10 Leong explains that she and her friends are “dealing with a label

that can never be removed.” What other words does she use in this paragraph to

suggest the potential helplessness of being permanently labeled?

Leong realizes that the word chink too many has come to symbolize “the shape of

[their] eyes, the color of [their] skin, the texture of [their] hair, and [their] other

delicate features” that defines them today. This is the common line that permanently

labels them.

Critical Writing

Leong states that “language is the the tool used to define us” which contradicts to her

statements within the essay that her friends and her refuse to be defined by racist

language. The contradiction does not weaken her essay in that moreover the type of

language what truly define you. For example, if you use obscure language without

censorship then you ultimately are seen to be obscure and without boundaries.

However, the words chink or nigger which were used to humiliate and degrade but

ultimately did not define who the individuals were and their entire demeanor.