Language Ideology By Kathryn Woolard And Bambi Schiefflin

Scholar, Gloria Anzaldúa, in her narrative essay, “How To Tame A Wild Tongue’, speaks her many experiences on being pressured on what language to use. She then expresses how the discrimination made her to realize the ugly truth--that people reject languages that aren’t their own. She adopts logos, ethos and pathos in order to appeal toward her audience who is anyone who is not bilingual. One of the perspectives she takes on in her piece clearly expresses the relationship between language and identity and how it creates a conflict between her and the world.

Those who believe a shared language shows a country’s identity do so because of the cultural assimilation this provides. Because language is a large part of culture, to learn one language is to culturally unite all of those people in a country with the same shared language. Henry Ford, the creator of Ford automobiles, believed in such an ideal; he was even famous for his English school which taught newly-migrated immigrants to learn the “language of America” while also providing them with jobs and wages. However, shared language does not always mean unity. For example, even in the US where English makes up the majority of spoken language, there are always ideological disparities today between people—like the disparities between Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives, and religious groups and non-religious groups. Likewise, multiple languages does not lend itself to disunity. Even the US Bill of Rights’s guaranteed protection of the “freedom of speech” is not limited to the English language, supporting the idea of a united yet pluralistic society. Throughout the years, though, there have been laws made in America that have either supported or gone against the use of only

Ken Wiwa presents several ideas pertaining to language and culture within his essay, Get Beyond Babel. Wiwa explains that every language has a chance of dying out over time. For any language to survive through years of societal changes, it must be adapted so it can be used to embrace other cultures, new technology and new perspectives. Wiwa presents the concept that language is the same as culture. I do not agree with this concept because I believe that culture is carried by the people, not by the language.

c.h. Knoblauch in the essay titled ;literacy and the politics of education conveys literacy or rather the idea of it is highly subjective to differing aguements and its percieved importance varies from person to person. Litteracy is enforced by those who you use it and altho its not all languages have used it, it is agrgued that humanity cannot progress without it. Today literacy is commonly associated with social reality and forms thereof.

In recent weeks all of us have been introduced to the essay “What is Literacy” written by Linguist James Paul Gee in 1987. Within this document we learn Gee is going to employ his learned skills to provide a ‘useful’ definition for the word literacy. Prior to providing us this insight, however, Gee must educate the reader on various definitions, idea and numerous theories in an effort to provide support for his conclusions and ultimately woo the reader into believing the postulations he makes. It is my belief that while Gee is eventually able to turn the reader to his way of thinking, he is not able to as eloquently as he would like. In fact, upon closer examination, I

We are all members of a social group and members of `society´ as a whole. People interact in many ways and communication is just about the most common and among the most important. Whatever is meaningful to a group, from their everyday life to their traditions constitutes their very own culture and is generally respected by all group members. Language is only one of such items. For ethnic minority groups that may have a language of their own, their language is a cornerstone in their culture.

On October 22, 2014, Raffaella Zanuttini’s essay, “Our Language Prejudices Don’t Make No Sense,” was published in Pacific Standard magazine. This work was written to draw attention to the false assumptions made about different varieties of the English language. Zanuttini starts her essay by considering, “There are some things you just don’t say in a polite society” (173). With this statement, she is referring to the ridicule made on different varieties of language. Zanuttini offers a few examples of judgements people often make, negative concord demonstrating one of them. Negative concord is a part of the Russian language and many others, but in today’s English, those who speak with negative concord occupy a low position on the socioeconomic scale. Zanuttini then introduces an argument in which people believe the language they speak is inferior. The English language has many recipes and according to Zanuttini, these different variations can be associated with age, ethnic or social identity, and geographical location. Although, there is a prestige language that should be used for business matters. As a final remark, she describes how different varieties of the same language should be viewed. Zanuttini indicates different dialects are like bread. No bread is better than any other, but for certain purposes, different breads should be used. Just like bread, no variation of language should be judged.

By welcoming the diverse languages and religions of the world, America is considered a melting pot of both cultural and ethnic identities. In the essay about bilingualism “How to Tame a Wild Tongue” by Gloria Anzaldúa she writes, “So, if you want to really hurt me, talk badly about my language. Ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity - I am my language. Until I can take pride in my language, I cannot take pride in myself” (172). Anzaldúa believes that her ethnicity and language are what make her who she is. Therefore, by insulting her language, she is insulted as well. Her identity is “twin skin” with how she speaks. Linguistic identity is the ability for a person to speak freely in any language and ultimately their identity is shown through shared language. The things that define a person are their actions, their behavior, the way they walk, and the way they talk. A person’s culture has a heavy influence on their identity throughout their lives. To disrespect an important part of their culture, their language, is to disrespect the person on an extremely interpersonal level. The person would be, therefore, discouraged from speaking their native language. Anzaldúa shows that her language constitutes who she is; it binds her to the existence of her identity therefore a person’s language defines his/her identity.

Language is the inevitable medium which people use as a means of communication. However, how that person uses the language that they have varies. Some view language as a persuasive political instrument and others view it as a means of expression and empowerment. In the essay “If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is?” by James Baldwin, he was able to illustrate the history of the discrimination of language and how Black English is not accepted as its own language. Baldwin also shows that due to the lack of acknowledgement of Black English, it lacks the power it needs to empower the people who speak it. In the essay “Politics and the English Language” by George Orwell, he was able to break down language and explain how language shapes reality. Orwell states that the he is not considering the literary use of language, but language is an instrument of expression and the promotion of cognitive deliberation and persuasion. Furthermore, both these authors agree that language is a political instrument, however, Baldwin uses this instrument to unite people and Orwell uses the instrument to persuade people.

Who am I? What is it that defines that personality? Anzaldua argues in her essay that the language is what defines one’s identity. Language is indeed an important component of culture, and culture is known to be a crucial definer of identity. People use language to connect to their identities and communicating their realities and values to themselves and to the world around them… In other words, language is important because people use it to express their thoughts and beliefs. “People evolve a language in order to describe and thus control their circumstances” (Baldwin 109). Consequently, language does not necessarily define identity as much as identity defines language. People decide on

Language attitudes, which include people’s perception about the language variety in their own community and language varieties in other communities, has been one of the crucial topics in sociolinguistics since 1960s.

The Language Wars have been waged in the realm of English Literature, Language and Linguistics for years. Both sides of the argument are staunch believers in their position, but are more than willing to concede points to the other sides’ favour. In Bryan A. Garner’s essay, “Making Peace in the Language Wars”, he describes himself as a ‘descriptive prescriber’ (Garner, Making Peace in the Language Wars 2008, 270), and offers a truce that fulfils both sides of the argument as the crux of his essay. While the separate sides of the argument are relatively easy to define, it seems that no one sticks to them religiously, and the argument is between individuals fighting over individual points. The two sides are that of the descriptivist and that

Language is the inevitable medium that people use as a means of communication. However, how that person uses the language that they have varies from person to person. Some view language as a persuasive political instrument and others view it as a means of expression and empowerment. In the essay “If Black English Isn’t a Language, Then Tell Me, What Is?” by James Baldwin, he was able to illustrate the history of the discrimination of language and how black English is not accepted as its own language. Baldwin also shows that due to the lack of acknowledgement of black English, it lacks the power it needs to empower the people who speak it. In the essay “Politics and the English Language” by George Orwell, he was able to break down language and explain how language shapes reality. Orwell expresses that he is not considering the literary use of language, but language is an instrument of expression and the promotion of cognitive deliberation and persuasion. Furthermore, both these authors agree that language is a political instrument, however, Baldwin uses this instrument to unite people and Orwell uses the instrument to persuade people.

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.

Talking about “dialects”, a term often mentioned along is “standard language”. When being brought into comparison with “dialect”, “standard language” usually serves as a legitimate variant with the highest level of excellence (Bex & Watts, 1999). Though positive in nature, standardization - the procedure of standardizing a language – often raises heated controversy because of its consequences on not only linguistics field but also the society. In the second part of the essay, I will focus on the disadvantages of language standardization.