I think you're playing fast and loose with adjectives like "simpler" or "inferior".
When you say Persian is likely superior to English, you're using the word in an abstract, philosophical sense, as if you're comparing two pieces of ancient art, not concerned with their practical uses. You say Persian could be "superior", but if anyone asks which language one should learn, you will have no problem suggesting English, as that's the practical choice with much more utility.
Similarly, if anyone suggests English speakers should change their linguistic habit to match the superior grammar of Persian, I'm sure you will (like me) just roll your eyes.
Yet when you compare Standard English and AAVE, I have a feeling that you will encourage people to speak Standard English because it is "superior", and you will likely tell AAVE speakers to adopt the rules of Standard English because it is more sophisticated.
Sounds to me like you're mixing two different meanings to win one argument and then the other.
>When you say Persian is likely superior to English, you're using the word in an abstract, philosophical sense, as if you're comparing two pieces of ancient art, not concerned with their practical uses. You say Persian could be "superior", but if anyone asks which language one should learn, you will have no problem suggesting English, as that's the practical choice with much more utility.
That's correct.
AAVE, on the other hand is both (for me) poorer in the philosophical sense (which I tie to overall cultural significance), and to utility. It's a very special purpose group language, that even its speakers abandon in different contexts.
So I don't see the conflict you mention. If practicality wasn't an issue, I would suggest people study Persian (or Chinese, or several others beautiful and rich ancient languages), not English. But as it is, I would suggest English (besides, in terms of cultural significance for the modern world, it holds quite well, ever since the 20th century -- before I might have suggested French).
Similarly, for English vs AAVE, I would suggest English both for their overall cultural significance over AAVE and their practicality.
When you say Persian is likely superior to English, you're using the word in an abstract, philosophical sense, as if you're comparing two pieces of ancient art, not concerned with their practical uses. You say Persian could be "superior", but if anyone asks which language one should learn, you will have no problem suggesting English, as that's the practical choice with much more utility.
Similarly, if anyone suggests English speakers should change their linguistic habit to match the superior grammar of Persian, I'm sure you will (like me) just roll your eyes.
Yet when you compare Standard English and AAVE, I have a feeling that you will encourage people to speak Standard English because it is "superior", and you will likely tell AAVE speakers to adopt the rules of Standard English because it is more sophisticated.
Sounds to me like you're mixing two different meanings to win one argument and then the other.