Ebonic vs Ebonics

[sagehen]

<JJJRLandau at AOL.COM> wrote:
>
> Why is there an "s" on "Ebonics"?  AAVE is a single dialect (as far as I
> know) of English, a rather major dialect in fact, and its regional or
> other variations are minor compared to the similarites among AAVE in say
> California and New York.  Hence it should be referred to as "Ebonic"
> rather than "Ebonics".


It seems to this amateur that Jim Landau has a point that has been missed
here. Is this term meant to apply to a systematic examination of a
particular dialect or is it the name of the dialect itself?  The -ics
ending makes sinse in the former case, but if it's the name of the dialect
I should think it would be more like, say, Icelandic, or Gaelic.  I can't
imagine saying "she speaks Ebonics " ...or " in the Ebonics dialect." [This
is to ignore, of course, the whole controversy over the suitability of the
word in either form.]
A. Murie