Humanity has continuously engaged in understanding the universe and all its composition. Language has played a great role in such pursuit of understanding. Part of that universal composition is the existence of the medium of communication among humans – language. Language has always been viewed as a tool in communicating, but how we understand it now as an innate human ability is anchored on the discoveries of scholars and linguists like Noam Chomsky. Chomsky is the proponent of the Universal Grammar (UG) theory that banks on the universal properties of language and its innateness among humans. It argues on the innate capacity of humans in language acquisition using Language Acquisition Devices (LAD) that are faculties of the human brain. The continuous pursuit to understand language in the context of its universality and species-specific existence is a step towards understanding humanity in a new light.
Language as a Species-specific Biological Feature
Seeing language in the perspective of biological capacity of the human being brought researches in the applied linguistics field such as in neurolinguistics and psycholinguistics. The Universal Grammar theory establishes the premise that language could be a biological endowment such as how birds fly with wings or how cold-blooded animals lay eggs. Since there are no species that are using the same language in communication, and other creatures have their own means, which we do not understand as humans, the plausibility of such claim led to researches on linguistic capacity as a brain activity more than an observable behavior. The Universal Grammar theory became a groundbreaking shift from the behavioral perspective as regards the human language. This shift in the study of the human language aims to cater to the biological context of the human language, supporting the probability of a universal system that the brain recognizes in order to facilitate language acquisition regardless of the availability of external stimulus. This is just one of the major implications of the Universal Grammar theory in the development of other linguistic studies. The following are the other implications that could be derived from the theory:
In Language Acquisition and Studying Languages in General
If Universal Grammar asserts that language acquisition is aided by the mind, responding to stimuli, therefore, all humans are capable of acquiring a language. Since the Universal Grammar theory argues that there are Language Acquisition Devices (LAD) that facilitate language acquisition for all human beings within normal conditions and are raised in normal circumstances, therefore, the linguistic system that these devices respond to has to be the similar in organization in order for any person to adopt any language as one’s native tongue. This particular system has been the basis of further linguistic studies, establishing the foundations of phonetics, phonology, morphology, semantics, and pragmatics as the micro linguistic branches responsible for language acquisition and learning.
We are no longer confined within the availability of circumstantial stimuli to effectively acquire language. We can already manipulate language learning and provide interventions for the irregularities of language acquisition phases. Language studies has extended beyond the micro linguistics and made research possible across fields of expertise. Further researches made innovations possible, and language is no longer just a medium of communication, but also a vast field of knowledge – a science, and the application of the science of language merges the field in all other sciences and their technology.
In Language Learning and Multilingualism
If the Universal Grammar theory argues that there are similar patterns on how languages are created and recreated, thus, there can be a universal means of structuring languages and learning the system of each. We can study how every language variant, whether regional languages or dialects, differ from one another and how they exist as offspring of parent languages. This could make faster teaching of multilingualism possible as language learning could be simultaneous, structured, and organized.
The strategy of teaching languages in the classroom can be altered by the concept of the Universal Grammar theory. If curriculum developers will investigate its theoretical arguments, all languages must be taught the same linguistic principles. These principles should be explicitly discussed among learners, so they can identify one language in relation to others, instead of seeing it as a single knowledge and skill, completely separated from the knowledge and skills required in learning other languages. This will help language learners establish their own techniques in learning a second language, and better, multiple languages.
In Bridging Linguistic Variations
Since languages also vary regionally, just like in the Philippines, the Universal Grammar theory can also be the basis for bridging linguistic variations within nations and help its people develop understanding of their regional languages. This can be applicable for dialects, so that one language can be united into one linguistic system. This can help ease the perceived division within a regional language because updates of dialects can already be passed on through formal language education. This will enrich the language, preserve the existing system, and avoid linguistic divisions among language users. Thus, if the Tagalog, a regional language common in the Southern Tagalog region, has various dialects across provinces, it can be consolidated into just one language, Tagalog, and other provinces get to study words that are contributed by other provinces across the country using the same regional language. Learning different dialects within a language will ease the feeling of exclusivity or alienation, hopefully extending, merging, one linguistic community to another. This way, language can unite people instead of creating further division.
In Unifying a National Identity
The same goes with learning the Filipino language. There are regions who wouldn’t embrace a Tagalog-based national language because they find their regional languages as qualified as the other languages of the Philippines. To resolve this divide, there can be studies conducted to determine a parent language where all languages of the Philippines are rooted. This will provide the equal opportunity for all regional languages to be candidates for the national language status.
Having the current national language based on Tagalog is not really the issue. The issue is the manner of selection that does not sit fair with other regional languages. With this process of determining the national language, non-Tagalog regions will see representation. Also, studies connecting the similarities and differences of regional languages will give the impression that our languages are unique in their own aspect, but are united under one unifying linguistic system. Identifying that system and naming it as national language will surely be a fair representation of the diversity of the Philippine languages. National unity can be achieved by unifying the bearers of our identity as a people, in this case, the Philippine languages.
In Learning a Second or Foreign Language
Using the arguments of the Universal Grammar theory, teaching the second language can be supported by the knowledge of one’s mother tongue. In fact, our phonemic inventory affects how we learn our second language. This is why Americans pronounce Filipino words differently compared to how we do. The same thing happens when we pronounce words of a different language we didn’t grow up with. The reason Filipinos can be fluent with English is our exposure to the language since childhood even if it is not our native tongue.
Since humans adopt a mother tongue that follows the same linguistic system of other languages, the jump from one language to another should be bridged by this interrelationship established by the theory. At the same time, understanding this connection between the native language and the second language, there could be a curriculum development that can bridge the knowledge of both languages instead of starting from scratch when learning a foreign language in a formal education set-up. This also emphasizes the effects of the linguistic performance in using the mother tongue to the capacity of the person to learn another language. The competency is no longer limited within the structure of a specific language, rather, a universal pattern that could affect further linguistic learning, regardless of language to study. Therefore, poor native language acquisition can lead to poor second language learning.
The Universal Grammar theory made the possibility of evolution of human languages and all the sciences that can lead to a better understanding of humanity. Who knows? Language could be one of the ways humans adapt to the changing environment for self-preservation and continued existence. Future researches could give us the answer.
Showing posts with label linguistics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label linguistics. Show all posts
Tuesday, December 31, 2019
Monday, December 16, 2019
The History of Language is the History of Its People: A Reflection on Historical Linguistics and Its Role in Rebuilding Lost Language and Culture
Language has always been a bearer of culture and an identifying mark of a society. It names our customs, beliefs, and ideals. It describes our norms and those that goes against them. It helps us establish our set of values and teach them to the next generation. This is why the underrated aspect of our history is the contribution of language in every chapter it was written. It is part of our identity as a people, and understanding it fully is understanding who we are as a whole. However, not all aspects of a native language survive. Take for instance, the written form of the precolonial Filipino language, Baybayin.
Filipinos lost Babayin for a number of reasons: the people stopped using Baybayin because of the new form of writing introduced by the colonizers; since there are less people are knowledgeable in reading the text, less and less read the remaining texts; since there are few who know the texts, they were not reproduced and the materials where they were written began to disintegrate; lastly, colonizers actively disposed known written texts in the precolonial era by burning them. This is how we lost Baybayin. This is how we lost an aspect of our culture, our identity, because of colonization. However, all is not lost. There is a way to revive and rediscover Baybayin.
One kind of Linguistics that can help us develop our culture through language is Historical Linguistics. One of its main objectives is to trace the roots of languages and how they developed into their current form. They provide the necessary data to differentiate one family of language from another. They also present how dynamic language is, and how flexible and adaptable it could be as its persists to endure. Understanding the history of language helps us appreciate how it grows with our society, how it describes the things that shape our culture, and how it provides development through learning. All these are ideals of Historical Linguistics on a general scale. It can offer more, especially to Filipinos, on a local level.
Filipinos use the native language Filipino and the second language English. Despite the existence of both languages and the capacity of most Filipinos to understand both, there is still room for Historical Linguistics to rediscover the written language of Filipinos before the colonial era, the Baybayin. If Historical Linguistics can trace the roots of languages and the system that they used, it is likely that it can also work on an extinct form of writing that complements an existing language like Filipino. How is this possible?
Since Historical Linguistics traces the roots of languages, it can also work on the roots of Baybayin. Once it is identified under a specific family of language, historical linguists can determine the patterns, recurrences, and restrictions of the languages where Baybayin belongs. It can provide the system and encompassing rules that the Filipino language also uses. This can illustrate and can probably reveal more distinct features of the Filipino language in relation to how Baybayin is written.
With the numerous Baybayin variations, every variant can draw the striking similarities across regional languages, while preserving a distinct quality that made it localized for a particular language or dialect. This can help us determine the functionality of the Filipino language in its diverse environment and localized experiences of its users. This can help us identify to the language that sounds different from one region to another. Understanding the similarities and differences of Ilocano, Kapampangan, Tagalog, and other regional languages will help our society bridge the concept of regionalism, towards a unified country. Historical Linguistics can bring us the mother language of our regional languages and help us discover our being Filipino in the midst of diversity.
With Historical Linguistics, we can even trace how Filipino language was used before the influence of the colonizers. A lot of words incorporated in our native language are from Spanish that we have adopted during the colonial period. We can identify the words that our ancestors used and understand their values and customs based on how they name everything. It will be an acquaintance with the beginnings and how the Filipino minds shape into its current values. Indeed, it will open minds to better appreciate what we have had, and how we have become the unique race that we are now.
Understanding the linguistic system, rediscovering the parent language of all regional languages, and knowing the lexicon that describes our culture in the past are just some of the things we can do to revive an extinct form of writing. What happens after the discovery is the responsibility of everyone. The rediscovered form of writing must be taught, used, and normalized. Our culture is not for mere stage spectacle. We do not rediscover ourselves just so we can have another identity to remember. We need to merge the past to what we have in the present. Our culture should not be special, rather, it should be the norm. We can always start this journey through Historical Linguistics, then follow through.
All these ideals are romantic. However, reality is speaking in irony. The recent change in the Philippine curriculum in the tertiary level scrapped Filipino and Philippine Literature. We already have a vague grasp of our way of writing, now, we are gradually unlearning our native tongue. People who argue that elementary and secondary classes in Filipino are enough to learn our native language fail to see that learning the language is just a means to an end.
Elementary level provides the basics of the language. Secondary level provides exposure, usage, practice, and mastery. The tertiary level was supposed to provide the avenue for students to read, write, and communicate with mastery to understand the Filipino as a people. It was supposed to provide enrichment through reading and discourse not only with academic texts, but literature that speaks more than of the requisites of classroom instruction – the literature of life, wisdom, culture, and society that makes us who we are.
That is the end goal of every language learning program. We are supposed to learn who we are as a people after we learn our language.
It is already difficult espousing our identity with everything colonial in our society. People should understand that nationalism is beyond the pride in international fame or winning sports and beauty pageants. How we value the language we have, in writing and in practice, is part of the basics of being Filipino. The history of our language speaks of our identity. Without Filipino, who are we?
Filipinos lost Babayin for a number of reasons: the people stopped using Baybayin because of the new form of writing introduced by the colonizers; since there are less people are knowledgeable in reading the text, less and less read the remaining texts; since there are few who know the texts, they were not reproduced and the materials where they were written began to disintegrate; lastly, colonizers actively disposed known written texts in the precolonial era by burning them. This is how we lost Baybayin. This is how we lost an aspect of our culture, our identity, because of colonization. However, all is not lost. There is a way to revive and rediscover Baybayin.
One kind of Linguistics that can help us develop our culture through language is Historical Linguistics. One of its main objectives is to trace the roots of languages and how they developed into their current form. They provide the necessary data to differentiate one family of language from another. They also present how dynamic language is, and how flexible and adaptable it could be as its persists to endure. Understanding the history of language helps us appreciate how it grows with our society, how it describes the things that shape our culture, and how it provides development through learning. All these are ideals of Historical Linguistics on a general scale. It can offer more, especially to Filipinos, on a local level.
Filipinos use the native language Filipino and the second language English. Despite the existence of both languages and the capacity of most Filipinos to understand both, there is still room for Historical Linguistics to rediscover the written language of Filipinos before the colonial era, the Baybayin. If Historical Linguistics can trace the roots of languages and the system that they used, it is likely that it can also work on an extinct form of writing that complements an existing language like Filipino. How is this possible?
Since Historical Linguistics traces the roots of languages, it can also work on the roots of Baybayin. Once it is identified under a specific family of language, historical linguists can determine the patterns, recurrences, and restrictions of the languages where Baybayin belongs. It can provide the system and encompassing rules that the Filipino language also uses. This can illustrate and can probably reveal more distinct features of the Filipino language in relation to how Baybayin is written.
With the numerous Baybayin variations, every variant can draw the striking similarities across regional languages, while preserving a distinct quality that made it localized for a particular language or dialect. This can help us determine the functionality of the Filipino language in its diverse environment and localized experiences of its users. This can help us identify to the language that sounds different from one region to another. Understanding the similarities and differences of Ilocano, Kapampangan, Tagalog, and other regional languages will help our society bridge the concept of regionalism, towards a unified country. Historical Linguistics can bring us the mother language of our regional languages and help us discover our being Filipino in the midst of diversity.
With Historical Linguistics, we can even trace how Filipino language was used before the influence of the colonizers. A lot of words incorporated in our native language are from Spanish that we have adopted during the colonial period. We can identify the words that our ancestors used and understand their values and customs based on how they name everything. It will be an acquaintance with the beginnings and how the Filipino minds shape into its current values. Indeed, it will open minds to better appreciate what we have had, and how we have become the unique race that we are now.
Understanding the linguistic system, rediscovering the parent language of all regional languages, and knowing the lexicon that describes our culture in the past are just some of the things we can do to revive an extinct form of writing. What happens after the discovery is the responsibility of everyone. The rediscovered form of writing must be taught, used, and normalized. Our culture is not for mere stage spectacle. We do not rediscover ourselves just so we can have another identity to remember. We need to merge the past to what we have in the present. Our culture should not be special, rather, it should be the norm. We can always start this journey through Historical Linguistics, then follow through.
All these ideals are romantic. However, reality is speaking in irony. The recent change in the Philippine curriculum in the tertiary level scrapped Filipino and Philippine Literature. We already have a vague grasp of our way of writing, now, we are gradually unlearning our native tongue. People who argue that elementary and secondary classes in Filipino are enough to learn our native language fail to see that learning the language is just a means to an end.
Elementary level provides the basics of the language. Secondary level provides exposure, usage, practice, and mastery. The tertiary level was supposed to provide the avenue for students to read, write, and communicate with mastery to understand the Filipino as a people. It was supposed to provide enrichment through reading and discourse not only with academic texts, but literature that speaks more than of the requisites of classroom instruction – the literature of life, wisdom, culture, and society that makes us who we are.
That is the end goal of every language learning program. We are supposed to learn who we are as a people after we learn our language.
It is already difficult espousing our identity with everything colonial in our society. People should understand that nationalism is beyond the pride in international fame or winning sports and beauty pageants. How we value the language we have, in writing and in practice, is part of the basics of being Filipino. The history of our language speaks of our identity. Without Filipino, who are we?
Friday, September 20, 2019
Cultural Diversity Concretized Through Linguistic Representations: a Reflection on Hilda Freimuth’s Journal Article, Language and Culture
In my years of teaching language and literature, I have always believed that culture and language are intricately woven societal elements that help a community claim a unique identity against other societies and pass such identity from one generation to another. The journal article (Freimuth, 2006) on Language and Culture helped me justify my assumptions on the close relationship between language and culture through various arguments presented in the article. Believing in one linguistic characteristic such as the cultural aspect of every language is different from gaining the firm resolve that they indeed complement each other. Gaining a balanced and wider perspective on the relationship between language and culture enables me to reflect not only on the characteristics of language but also on its role in building societies and preserving the identity that every community nurtures.
Hilda Freimuth began her article with the definition of culture. And just like any concept paper, the concepts should be well-defined before discussions are carried out. She included the different definitions of culture, and they served as points of arguments in my first attempt at understanding language and culture. Here are some of the definitions she mentioned:
According to Whorf (1956), language determines, influences, and limits a person’s perspective of the world. Though controversy surrounded this idea about language, the connection that it establishes with culture should also be considered. Our understanding of the world could be affected by the capacity of our language to describe what we perceive. Whorf’s concept complements the idea of the limitations of language. In Chomsky’s concept of linguistic competence, the rules of the language are just descriptions of the observed recurrences within the system of lexicon and grammar. Thus, language is a limited description of what exists in the perspective of an individual and his society. If language itself is limited, a society’s perspective of the world can only extend as much as how its language can describe -- as much as the society can comprehend. This works both ways. Language develops as a society encounters new human experiences that demand new linguistic representations. A society’s growing perspective of the world extends the capacity of its language to describe what exists within a society’s understanding. Thus, language grows with the society, making it dynamic. This is also the reason language ceases to grow when it is no longer used by a group of people. There would be no human understanding to sustain, and so the language dies.
An example of how language grows with the society is the Filipino understanding of the word ‘tokhang,’ which was hailed as Salita ng Taon in Sawikaan 2018 by the Filipinas Institute of Translation, University of the Philippines Diliman, and Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino (KWF). According to the body, the winner was chosen based on the meaning of the word in the life of Filipinos, its reflection of the current state of the society, the depth of research accompanying the proposal, and its presentation to the public. The word was submitted by Mark Angeles, Filipino poet, fiction writer, and essayist. The word ‘tokhang’ came from the Cebuano word ‘toktok-hangyo’ which means knock and plead. It is a polite request that turned into a word that describes the violent drug war that killed thousands of Filipinos under the Duterte administration. Lifeless bodies along the streets were no longer called as mere corpses but ‘na-tokhang’ which presumes that these deaths are results of the drug war. The prevalence of extra-judicial killings made the Filipino language adopt ‘tokhang’ in its entirely new meaning to describe a unique and unprecedented human experience like deaths in a drug war. The seeming normalcy of the culture of killing made the language adopt a new linguistic representation. This leads us to culture as an influential element on the development and acquisition of language and vice versa.
Culture is a parcel of the societal understanding that language enriches and, at the same time, describes. Since culture is socially acquired, according to Wardhaugh (2002), one’s language can reflect the culture that a society upholds. According to Bates and Plog (1990), culture includes the “shared beliefs, values, customs, behaviors, and artifacts of the members of a society, that are used to cope with their world, with one another, and that are transmitted from generation to generation through learning.” We already know what constitutes culture, but the keywords that we need to note in this definition are (1) the function of culture to help members of the society cope with their world and with one another, and (2) the preservation of this culture across generations.
Coping with one’s world and with the other members of the society refers to the function of culture to set the standards of behavior that is acceptable to the society. According to Goodenough (1957) culture is what one needs to know or believe to exhibit acceptable behavior. These perceived and accepted standards of social behavior must be coursed through the members who will observe them. The role of language in the promulgation of this acceptable social behavior demands the capacity of the language to describe cultural specifications. This makes any language tightly-knitted with culture as its core. This intricate relationship between language and culture is supported by Sapir (1929) since a language can only describe what a society knows, believes, and accepts. This relationship between language as means to propagate culture and culture as a social behavior could have prompted the initial behaviorist theories on language before it became known as a biologically-based characteristic of the human mind. Since culture is a learned behavior and language describes this behavior, language acquisition is possible through exhibiting the same behaviors that the language describes. However, we already know that language acquisition is not as limited as behavioral language theories proposed. The human mind makes language acquisition possible in more ways other than learned behavior. Language acquisition leads us to the next role of language in the society as means to preserve culture.
Language is not solely used to extend accepted social behavior within a community but also to preserve such culture across generations. Thus, society equips the language with the lexicon necessary to describe the culture that they need to pass onto the next generation. An example of this is the rich Japanese language that has words to describe several Japanese cultures that do not have the exact translation in other nations because of their unique set of values, beliefs, and social behavior. Some of these words are ‘Origami,’ the Japanese art of paper folding; ‘Chanoyu,’ the Japanese tea ceremony; ‘Ikebana,’ the Japanese art of flower arrangement, and ‘Seppuku’ or ‘Harakiri,’ the Japanese ritual suicide by disembowelment to restore one’s and family’s honor. The Japanese language does not sit idly in describing traditions, but continuously grow to describe emerging concepts that the current Japanese society faces. Some of these are the Japanese pop culture fashion of dark and cute, ‘Yamikawaii,’ and the alarming culture of death by overwork, ‘Karoshi.’ All these words can be translated into another language but one cannot fully grasp the meaning of these words without understanding the Japanese culture embedded in each linguistic representation. The Japanese is just one of the many societies that preserves their culture, and their language is one of their means. The language acts as markers of cultural elements that one society can pass on. It transforms the abstraction of a nation’s identity into a concrete and observable behavior that people can learn. Therefore, language works together with socially accepted behaviors for the preservation of culture.
The inseparability of language and culture, which Wenying Jiang (2000) discussed in a study on native speakers, makes language acquisition not only a linguistic pursuit but also a cultural affair. The connection of the two made second language learning anchor on the cultural and linguistic aspects instead on the mere instruction of language structure. According to Hammerly (1985) second language learners can only be considered fully trained when they exhibit both knowledge and behavior of the culture of the language they are learning. That way, language learners can effectively use context and implications based on their deeper understanding of the language and the culture it represents. Thus, the relationship of language and culture is not limited to the functions of promulgation and preservation of culture. Language concretizes the existence of a behavior, an identity, a tradition, a way of life.
Reference:
Freimuth, H. (2006). Language and Culture. UGRU Journal.
Hilda Freimuth began her article with the definition of culture. And just like any concept paper, the concepts should be well-defined before discussions are carried out. She included the different definitions of culture, and they served as points of arguments in my first attempt at understanding language and culture. Here are some of the definitions she mentioned:
According to Whorf (1956), language determines, influences, and limits a person’s perspective of the world. Though controversy surrounded this idea about language, the connection that it establishes with culture should also be considered. Our understanding of the world could be affected by the capacity of our language to describe what we perceive. Whorf’s concept complements the idea of the limitations of language. In Chomsky’s concept of linguistic competence, the rules of the language are just descriptions of the observed recurrences within the system of lexicon and grammar. Thus, language is a limited description of what exists in the perspective of an individual and his society. If language itself is limited, a society’s perspective of the world can only extend as much as how its language can describe -- as much as the society can comprehend. This works both ways. Language develops as a society encounters new human experiences that demand new linguistic representations. A society’s growing perspective of the world extends the capacity of its language to describe what exists within a society’s understanding. Thus, language grows with the society, making it dynamic. This is also the reason language ceases to grow when it is no longer used by a group of people. There would be no human understanding to sustain, and so the language dies.
An example of how language grows with the society is the Filipino understanding of the word ‘tokhang,’ which was hailed as Salita ng Taon in Sawikaan 2018 by the Filipinas Institute of Translation, University of the Philippines Diliman, and Komisyon ng Wikang Filipino (KWF). According to the body, the winner was chosen based on the meaning of the word in the life of Filipinos, its reflection of the current state of the society, the depth of research accompanying the proposal, and its presentation to the public. The word was submitted by Mark Angeles, Filipino poet, fiction writer, and essayist. The word ‘tokhang’ came from the Cebuano word ‘toktok-hangyo’ which means knock and plead. It is a polite request that turned into a word that describes the violent drug war that killed thousands of Filipinos under the Duterte administration. Lifeless bodies along the streets were no longer called as mere corpses but ‘na-tokhang’ which presumes that these deaths are results of the drug war. The prevalence of extra-judicial killings made the Filipino language adopt ‘tokhang’ in its entirely new meaning to describe a unique and unprecedented human experience like deaths in a drug war. The seeming normalcy of the culture of killing made the language adopt a new linguistic representation. This leads us to culture as an influential element on the development and acquisition of language and vice versa.
Culture is a parcel of the societal understanding that language enriches and, at the same time, describes. Since culture is socially acquired, according to Wardhaugh (2002), one’s language can reflect the culture that a society upholds. According to Bates and Plog (1990), culture includes the “shared beliefs, values, customs, behaviors, and artifacts of the members of a society, that are used to cope with their world, with one another, and that are transmitted from generation to generation through learning.” We already know what constitutes culture, but the keywords that we need to note in this definition are (1) the function of culture to help members of the society cope with their world and with one another, and (2) the preservation of this culture across generations.
Coping with one’s world and with the other members of the society refers to the function of culture to set the standards of behavior that is acceptable to the society. According to Goodenough (1957) culture is what one needs to know or believe to exhibit acceptable behavior. These perceived and accepted standards of social behavior must be coursed through the members who will observe them. The role of language in the promulgation of this acceptable social behavior demands the capacity of the language to describe cultural specifications. This makes any language tightly-knitted with culture as its core. This intricate relationship between language and culture is supported by Sapir (1929) since a language can only describe what a society knows, believes, and accepts. This relationship between language as means to propagate culture and culture as a social behavior could have prompted the initial behaviorist theories on language before it became known as a biologically-based characteristic of the human mind. Since culture is a learned behavior and language describes this behavior, language acquisition is possible through exhibiting the same behaviors that the language describes. However, we already know that language acquisition is not as limited as behavioral language theories proposed. The human mind makes language acquisition possible in more ways other than learned behavior. Language acquisition leads us to the next role of language in the society as means to preserve culture.
Language is not solely used to extend accepted social behavior within a community but also to preserve such culture across generations. Thus, society equips the language with the lexicon necessary to describe the culture that they need to pass onto the next generation. An example of this is the rich Japanese language that has words to describe several Japanese cultures that do not have the exact translation in other nations because of their unique set of values, beliefs, and social behavior. Some of these words are ‘Origami,’ the Japanese art of paper folding; ‘Chanoyu,’ the Japanese tea ceremony; ‘Ikebana,’ the Japanese art of flower arrangement, and ‘Seppuku’ or ‘Harakiri,’ the Japanese ritual suicide by disembowelment to restore one’s and family’s honor. The Japanese language does not sit idly in describing traditions, but continuously grow to describe emerging concepts that the current Japanese society faces. Some of these are the Japanese pop culture fashion of dark and cute, ‘Yamikawaii,’ and the alarming culture of death by overwork, ‘Karoshi.’ All these words can be translated into another language but one cannot fully grasp the meaning of these words without understanding the Japanese culture embedded in each linguistic representation. The Japanese is just one of the many societies that preserves their culture, and their language is one of their means. The language acts as markers of cultural elements that one society can pass on. It transforms the abstraction of a nation’s identity into a concrete and observable behavior that people can learn. Therefore, language works together with socially accepted behaviors for the preservation of culture.
The inseparability of language and culture, which Wenying Jiang (2000) discussed in a study on native speakers, makes language acquisition not only a linguistic pursuit but also a cultural affair. The connection of the two made second language learning anchor on the cultural and linguistic aspects instead on the mere instruction of language structure. According to Hammerly (1985) second language learners can only be considered fully trained when they exhibit both knowledge and behavior of the culture of the language they are learning. That way, language learners can effectively use context and implications based on their deeper understanding of the language and the culture it represents. Thus, the relationship of language and culture is not limited to the functions of promulgation and preservation of culture. Language concretizes the existence of a behavior, an identity, a tradition, a way of life.
Reference:
Freimuth, H. (2006). Language and Culture. UGRU Journal.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)