http://www.cracked.com/article_20744_5-surprising-ways-your-language-affects-how-you-think.html
This article talks about a question that we discussed in the first few weeks of class. Does the language you speak affect the way you think and perceive the world? According to this article, the answer is yes.
The first point it makes is interesting and one that I have never given much thought. It claims that societies who speak languages that are gendered(having masculine or feminine definite articles) tend to be a bit more sexist. Through a study, they found in countries with a gendered language, female participation in the work force drops by about 12 percent.
Another interesting point they make is that thinking in a foreign language actually aids you in making better decisions. The reason being that when you translate your thoughts into another language, you are forcing your brain to make strict analytical decisions rather than letting emotions take over.
It also states that your views change with the language you choose to voice them in. It says you are able to put yourself in someone else's cultural shoes just by speaking their language. Maybe some of you fluent bilingual speakers will have some input on this that would help me to better understand this idea because I feel the study results they stated in the article weren't very conclusive although I do find the hypothesis intriguing.
Anyway, I think the article was well-written and it brought up some thought-provoking ideas that I would like to look into further.
Thursday, February 26, 2015
Wednesday, February 18, 2015
Blog 3- Is Texting Killing the English Language?
http://ideas.time.com/2013/04/25/is-texting-killing-the-english-language/
When I first came across this article, I assumed it would take the popular stance on this topic, which is that texting is killing the English language. I was surprised to find that the author instead chose to side with texting.
The author, John McWhorter, justifies his reasoning by saying that texting shouldn't be considered written language. It should instead be considered "speaking with your thumbs" because there is a rapid exchange similar to speaking.
McWhorter goes on to say that not only is texting not killing language, but it is expanding it. He refers to an example of the usage of LOL, saying that it is no longer used literally(laugh out loud) and instead is a new type of grammar. LOL is now used to "signal basic empathy between texters, ease tension, and create a sense of equality."
I agree with bits and pieces of what the author is saying, but I mostly disagree. I think he is right about texting expanding our language, but I think the changes are mostly negative. If texting was only adding to our language, I think there would be nothing wrong with that, but it seems to be adding things as replacements to our fundamentals. For example, because of texting, the word "gonna", which is a replacement for "going to", is basically an accepted word in our language that doesn't really conform to our rules of grammar. English is already a very difficult language for foreigners to learn because there are so many contradictions, but I think this kind of stuff makes it even harder.
McWhorter also says that there is no evidence that texting has any effect on composition skills. I would like to know what study he got that information from because I have seen numerous texting addicts with horrendous fundamental writing skills. Now I know this isn't always the case, but it is enough to not be only coincidental.
When I first came across this article, I assumed it would take the popular stance on this topic, which is that texting is killing the English language. I was surprised to find that the author instead chose to side with texting.
The author, John McWhorter, justifies his reasoning by saying that texting shouldn't be considered written language. It should instead be considered "speaking with your thumbs" because there is a rapid exchange similar to speaking.
McWhorter goes on to say that not only is texting not killing language, but it is expanding it. He refers to an example of the usage of LOL, saying that it is no longer used literally(laugh out loud) and instead is a new type of grammar. LOL is now used to "signal basic empathy between texters, ease tension, and create a sense of equality."
I agree with bits and pieces of what the author is saying, but I mostly disagree. I think he is right about texting expanding our language, but I think the changes are mostly negative. If texting was only adding to our language, I think there would be nothing wrong with that, but it seems to be adding things as replacements to our fundamentals. For example, because of texting, the word "gonna", which is a replacement for "going to", is basically an accepted word in our language that doesn't really conform to our rules of grammar. English is already a very difficult language for foreigners to learn because there are so many contradictions, but I think this kind of stuff makes it even harder.
McWhorter also says that there is no evidence that texting has any effect on composition skills. I would like to know what study he got that information from because I have seen numerous texting addicts with horrendous fundamental writing skills. Now I know this isn't always the case, but it is enough to not be only coincidental.
Monday, February 9, 2015
The Last Speakers of Sylbo(Blog 2)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C0CIRCjoICA
Occasionally, I'm sure many of us wonder what life was like without cell phones, or even home phones for that matter; before long distance communication was fast and simple. That is something that the speakers of Sylbo never had to worry about. Sylbo is a language that is thousands of years old and native to an island off of the West coast of Africa called La Gomera.
Surprisingly, all the language really is is sounds made by whistling that copy the phonetic sounds of Spanish. The cavernous topography of the island allows speakers to communicate up to 7 kilometers away from each other.
Due to the advance in communicative technology, the language is not nearly as common around the island any more. There are still people who use it because they refuse to pay for cell phones, like the guy at the end of the video.
This makes me wonder how many(if any at all) other languages have this and how common it is. I don't think I would be compelled to learn how to speak it, but I would be interested to learn more about it.
Occasionally, I'm sure many of us wonder what life was like without cell phones, or even home phones for that matter; before long distance communication was fast and simple. That is something that the speakers of Sylbo never had to worry about. Sylbo is a language that is thousands of years old and native to an island off of the West coast of Africa called La Gomera.
Surprisingly, all the language really is is sounds made by whistling that copy the phonetic sounds of Spanish. The cavernous topography of the island allows speakers to communicate up to 7 kilometers away from each other.
Due to the advance in communicative technology, the language is not nearly as common around the island any more. There are still people who use it because they refuse to pay for cell phones, like the guy at the end of the video.
This makes me wonder how many(if any at all) other languages have this and how common it is. I don't think I would be compelled to learn how to speak it, but I would be interested to learn more about it.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)