Language As A Monitor Social Reality

Most questions of whether and how language shapes thought start with the simple observation that languages differ from one another. And a lot! Just look at the way people talk, they might say. Certainly, speakers of different languages must attend to strikingly different aspects of the world just so they can use their language properly.

In the chapter, “The Socially Charged life of Language” in Living Language: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology, Laura Ahearn (2012) discusses language in relation to social interactions. According to Ahearn, “language is not a neutral medium for communication but rather a set of socially embedded practices.” Ahearn references Ferdinand de Saussure and his understanding of language as a system of rules as well as Chomsky and his interest in discovering Universal Grammar. De Saussure used langue and parole as an explanation of how language works. Langue refers to language, as a specific set of rules while parole is the performance aspect of language in which language functions as “speech arts.” Similarly to de Saussure, Chomsky believes that there is a “competence” or an abstract knowledge that one has about language, and a “performance”, which involves putting those rules into practice (Ahearn 2012).

Famous American anthropologist and social theorist Clyde Kluckholm , claims in one of his publication that “Every language is also a special way of looking at the world and interpreting experience concealed in the structure of language are a whole set of unconscious assumptions about the world and the life in it”(Writing logically, Thinking critically 7th edition P 35). Based on this theory, we can learn more

Cioran’s radical, etymological awareness of how language can shape our identity, society, and perception of the world – our Plato’s cave -- is explored in detail through theories of linguistic relativity. For example, how native English speakers perceive the time continuum as horizontal as a result of front/back terminology (e.g. “The past is now behind us”) whereas native Mandarin speakers perceive time as vertical as a result of up/down terminology, looking up to the future and down to the past (Boroditsky). Linguistic relativity is often seen as a grounded, or “weak”, version of the now widely disregarded Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. But while the hypothesis is not scientific fact, it’s exploration of language and societal-building correlation provide a philosophical, Malcolm Gladwell-esque observation of the world.

The fact that the tested children grouped the actions in accordance with the grammatical structure of their respective language is evidence for linguistic relativity, as “both groups of children construe(d) the relations between objects in the world on the basis of their language specific categories, and not on the basis of some universal, conceptual categories” (Dirven and Verspoor 1998:140-141). This suggests that the children from the two linguistic communities will partly see the world in a different way, being inclined to categorise the things they see in contrasting fashions.

Linguistic discourse arises from the multiple areas: from studies of primate social behavior, from the comparison of existing human languages, from research on the development of language in children, from studies of genetic and anatomical structures, from cross-cultural studies, from the observation of earning and forming lexicon, and from the studies of the communication of bees, birds, and mammals (cit). Initially, though, language, spoken or signed, was a gestural system that evolved from so-called “mirror system” in the primate brain. Mirror system is a mechanism that allows to equate self actions with actions of others; mirror system's neurons are part of dorsal visual system (citation). The dorsal pathway projects visual information

Human beings are unique creatures as we possess the ability to communicate, to learn in more than one language. It is displeasing to say that the day when a gorilla is able to teach a bonobo in the language that a chimpanzee uses, may never arrive. The case was different for Koko, the gorilla and Kanzi, the bonobo as the American Sign Language was involved (Prince-Hughes, 1987). What sets human beings apart is that we are the same species that are inhabiting various regions around the world and thus, we inherit individual languages. Our arterial language is determined by many factors such as, race, ethnicity and even religion. However, the occurrence of a person learning in a non-native language does arise. For example, a child that is raised in Britain who learns English in school might have a family that is from the Philippines and thus, speaks Tagalog. The child may be more fluent in speaking Tagalog than English and thus, may lead to learning difficulties in school as an English Language Learner, which

In the world today, there are more and more multicultural people who can speak different languages; and they need to choose different tongues to correspond to the immediate community they belong. Language makes people remember their own cultures and contribute to their own identity. In “Mother Tongue,” a short story written by Amy Tan; she strongly narrates the stories about her different experiences and life comprehensions based on varying types of English she speaks throughout life. Wandering on two different languages; Amy discovers the importance and power of language: “the way it can evoke an emotion, a visual image, a complex idea, or a simple truth” (Tan 38). As human beings, language is the tool that contains the mighty powers; it forcefully affects people’s lives, personality, and lifestyles. Moreover, language is the “bridge” of communication between people. However, for Amy, the views on mother’s language are changing from the sense of shame into pride; as she is feeling the effects that two different types of English are giving to her as well as their respective symbols in her mind.

In the article “Lost in Translation”, the author, Lera Boroditsky, maintains as her thesis that the languages we speak not only reflect or express our thoughts, but also shape the very thoughts we wish to express. Boroditsky begins the main section of her essay with the history of the issue of whether or not languages shape the way speakers think. Charlemagne was the first to think that languages do in fact shape the mindset of speaker, but Noam Chomsky rebutted this idea with his thought that languages do not differ much from each other, thus in turn proposing that linguistic differences do not cause a difference in thinking. Now with scientists

No matter where you are in the world, you are taught about language. Whether it’s in your home learning your language or in school trying to learn a foreign language. Although while learning language the notion is never really thought about or brought up that the language and way we speak can influence the way we think and interact. Phycologist and neuroscientist alike have spent years, with multiple different tests to see if there is a connection between the various languages that are spoken and the way people not only think but also how they go about their daily lives. She writes to not only her colleagues and neuroscientists but also to anyone in the general public that is genuinely interested in the connection between

Some scholars believe that language has a direct effect on how we perceive the world and some scholars don’t.

Language is the universal connection that brings all humans together. We share this common ground to communicate. The three major points that I would like to focus on are: How does language influence our culture? Does it define us, or does it refine us? And lastly, the impact that language has on our societies.

Linguistics has impacted cognitive psychology as the quest to understand language acquisition and the structure of language itself is undertaken. Linguistics is a complex and multifaceted; it includes language structural patterns and language development (Barsalou, 2005). The process of language development is complicated and dense, as the study of language is examined; the role of cognition is inherently examined and analyzed. Sternberg (2006) also explores language as an innate process and presents the idea that humans are born ready for language as a biological and cognitive process.

“A language is a system of conventional signals used for communication by a whole community”- A. C. Gimson. Language is an essential tool for communication as well as for self-expression. Language can be considered as a habit which is not genetically transmitted. It is acquired from the environment and therefore it is always subject to change. Language and linguistics go hand in hand. Language is a network of varieties and linguistics is the discipline that deals with the scientific study of language and its variations like dialect, registers, pidgin, Creole, etc.

For all humans, language is the most common means of communication with others and it enables us to share our experiences and stories and to tell about our needs and feelings. For example, Yamamoto states that sociolinguistics see, it is ‘primarily through the use of language that people communicate with each other’ (1979: 146). We all speak one or more languages and as the main way of communication it is an important and vital part of our lives. There is many languages in the world and they differ from one another in many ways. But does the language we speak reflect to the way we see and experience the world around us? This paper will explore the question through the Sapir Whorf hypothesis and arguments for and against it.