Me amased CURE A999 Lavowace avy cvtrvee OUP 4 The relationship of language and culture Language is he principal means whereby we conduct our seal lives. Whenitisured in contexte of communication, is bound up swith culture in muliple and complex wey. ‘To begin with, the words people utes refer 19 common experince, They expres Frets, Wess oF events chat are oa lcable because they refer toa toca knowledge abou the worl that aches people share, Word also cefect their autho! tiles and bebel, thei pant of view, tat are seo those of others. In both cases, Tanguage express clr eal, ‘But members of a community oF sel group do not oaly express experienc; they aso ceat experience through language They give messing to it hough the medium they choose 10 communicate with one another, for example, speaking on the telephone or reetoface writing «leer or sending an e-mail message, eadinghe newspaper or interpreting graphiur achat ‘The way im which people use the spoken, weiten, or Mista snodiums isell creates meanings that are undesstandble to the group they bsloag to, for example, sowgh a spekers tone of ise, accen, conversational ele, gestures and fasial expres Sions. Through alle vechl and non-verbal aspects, langage ‘exbodis elt reaiy. "ially, Languages 3 ystem of slg that is seen a having inal 2 catoral vale, Speakers identity themselves and oeher through fir use of language hey view theirlanguage ava svmbel of hee social ieatty The prohibition of suse is oes perceived by is speakers asa rejection oftheir socal group andteieculte, Ths Weean say that anguage symbolizes elt reat ‘We shal be dealing with thee cree aspects of language snd‘late throughout this book, Bu fs we need rif what we ‘ean by culture. We might do this by considering the following poem by Emily Dickinson eseaial Os are wrung = ‘The Amar from the Rose Benot expressed by Suns~ alone — Teisthe git of Sew “The General Rose = dessy ~ Sus this in Lady's Drawer ‘Moke Summee -Whea the Lady ie Te Ceaseless Rosemary ~ Nature, culture, language (One way of thinking about cultuce to contrast it with nature, Nature tefers 0 what ss bora and grows oxganicaly fm the Latin niscve: tobe oral eure rere o what hasbeen grown and groomed {fom the Latin colere: co culate), The word ulture evokes the wadional natarenureure debate: Are human beings mainly what nature determines chem fo be fom birch ot wat culture enables them to become trough socialization and schooling? my Dickinson's poem expeeses wel albeit in a stylzed wy, the telatonship of mature, culture, and language, A cose sn a flower bedy says the poem, a generic rose (The General Roshi phenomenon of mature. Beautiful, es, bt faceless and nameless mong others of the same species Perishable Forgsteable, Nature lone cansoe reveal nor preserve the particular beauty of 2 parsiclar cose ara chosen nome inte, Powerless co prevent the biniogcal decay and the ulsmare death of roses and lade, ature can only make samme when te season i cght. Clture by contrast, sno: bound by biologieal time, Like nate its 3 ‘ft, bur ofa different kind. Through 2 sophieated techno logical proceduse, developed especialy to exact te eseence of oss, clture forces nate to teres ‘erential potentialities ‘The word Screws suggests thatthe proceseis not without laboe By crushing the petal gzear deal ofthe cose mast lost none to get tit essence. The chology ofthe stews coastrans the | | | ewuberanceof natu in the same mae ste estoy of he ‘word, oF printed sytax and vocabulaey, selects among the many potential meanings that a ose might have, only those that best npeasitsinaermostteuth—sand eaes al others nse Cale makes the ose petals ito arate eee, purchased aig cose, forthe particular, pessonal we ofa pasicula lady. The ad may de, bur the fragrance ofthe roe’ esenc the Adtar) can make her immortal inthe same manser asthe language ofthe poem immoraizes both the rose and the lad an rings Po back to Ble inthe imagination of ts eaders- Indeed, th very poem, left for fatue eader in the poet’ drawer can “Nake Somer for readers even after the poet's death. The word and the wchaclogy ofthe word have immortalized nature “The pocm itself bears testimony that nite and eutare both need each other The poem would’ have ben writen if thete ‘vere no natural roses; but it would not be desc itt share with is readers some common assumptions sad expect ‘Sons about rose gardens, echnologial achievements, hor associations regarding Indes, roses, and perfumes, common ‘memories of summers past, a shaced longing for inwortality, 8 ‘nul fanlriey wie the printed wor, ar ith the vernacular 8nd poeticusesof the English language, Like che seers ofthe rose press these common collective expectations ean be liberating, they endow a universal rose arith @ particular meaning, by imposing astuctre soto speak, on nacre Bu they ca also be ‘constraining. Particular meanings ate adopted by the spagch ommunty and imposed ia tern on i members, who Bad then Aificul i aoc imposible, co say ve Feel anything orignal about roses Fer example, once bout of roses hat become coded 61 society’s way of expressing love becomes controversial not isky, fr lovers to express thei ow partic love without ‘storing tothe symbols that their society imposes pon ther, and jo offer each other as a sign of love, say, chrysanthemums ‘esteld—which in Germany, for example, are reserved for the dea! Both oral cultures and erate cleures have ther own ways ‘of emancipating and constsining their members: We shall tearm tothe dlferences between oral and literate cutaresin subsequent chapters ‘The screws that language and culture impose on natuce jicorrespond t various forms of stelazatin or acultation, Eniguete, expressions of politeness, soeial dor and don't shape people's behavior shevgh shld rearing, behavioral upbringing, Schooling, profesional taining. The uve of writen language Is also shaped and socialized through culture. Noe only whats proper to write ro whom in what cscurstanees, but also which {ext genres are appropriate (the application form, the business leer, the political pamphe), because they ace sunctioned by cultural convention. These Wags wich language, or norms of Intefacion and interpretation, form pare of the ivisile tual imposed by clue on language users. This i ultue’s way of bringing order and predictability into people's use of language ‘Communities of language users . Social conventions, norms of social appropriateness ace che produc of communities of language users Av in the Dickinson oem, ports and readers, foie and lovers, hort, rose press manufacturers, pecfume makers and wer create meanings through their words and actions. Cltae both bsetes people from oblivion, anoaymity, and the andommes of natty and constrain themby mposingon them astauctuse and prinepes of Selection, Ths double eet of caleae onthe individual-—both, liberating snd consrining—plays itl out on the social he historical andthe metaphorical planer. Lee ws examine each of these planes in urn. ‘People who identify themselves as members af stil group. fart, neighborhood, profesional or eine affiliation, ation) acquire common ways of wowing the orld through their iterations with oder mambers ofthe same group. That views are reinforced through instations ike che family, the schoo the ‘workplace, the chutch, che government, and thes sitey of Soctalzaion throughout their ives. Common studs, belies, tnd values are relcted inthe way members of the group ase language—for example, whatthey choose say or nots a Ihow they say it Thus, in addition to the notion of speach community compared of people who use the same linguistic code ‘vercar speak of discourse communities to cefer tothe common ways in which members of a socal group se language to mect ‘heir socal needs. Not only the grammatical, lexical, and phonological featores ofthis language or example, tenase talk, protessonal jargon, poiealeetoric| dferentate them feo others, bur alo te opis they choose tall abou, the way ‘hey peesent information, the nije with whch they inert, other ond, hee lscoure neent For instance, Amencans have cea socaled ito responding "hank you! to any compliment, 5 if they were acknowledging 2 fndy gts“ like your ‘preatee™—'Oh, thankyou!” The French who tend t pescere fucha compliments an intrusion ito hee privacy, would eather Alwpiay the compliment and miniiae leh ell? IP aleeady quite ol? Tho eaccossof both groups are hased onthe ‘iering vals given to compliments in both calares, anon the dlering degrees of emobutasement caused by pertonal cone raents This 3 view of culeore that focuses on the ways of thinking behaving, and valuing cute shared by members of thease discourse comsmsnity ‘Buc thereis another way of viewing elewre—one which akes 3 more historical perspective, For the culical ways which can be ‘denied arany onetime have evolved snd becbme solid over time, whichis why they are so ofen taken for natral behavior ‘They have sedimented isthe memories of geoup members Whe have experienced them firsthand or metely beard bouche who have passed them on ix speech and writing fram” one |eneraton to che next. For example, Ely Dickinson's alaion to ile after deat i grounded inthe hope tht future generations tof readers wil beable to understand appreciate the soil ‘alae ofrose perfume and the Funeral custom of scouring the ead with fragrant rosemary. The clear of everyday practices draws on the cultare of shaved history and traditions. People ‘eau demsalves a members of nsoccty to he exten tha they ‘ean favea placeinthat scien history althat they can identify with the way i remembers its past curME 5 attention £0 the Present, and ancipaes ite future, Cultue costs uf pressely tha historical dimension in a group's enti. This diachronic view of cultre focuses on the way in which 2 zonal group epresents itself and other through ie ateral productions aver fime=its techrological achievement, i monuments ie works bf a, i popular culture—char punetuate he developmiat ofhistorical identity. This material culsue is reproduced and preserved through institutional mechaniams that ate ato ptt of thecultore, ke museums, schools, public isracies, government coeporations, aad the media. The ffl Tower or the Mona Lise ‘ist as material artifact, but they have heen kept alive and given the prominence they bave oa the cultural macket though hat arts art coletors poets, novel, rvvel agents, tourist gues Ihave said and write aboue thom. Language tots cultare fee coe, distinc: fom the way people sink an behars, bu, rather, Je plysa major ole inthe perpeaaton of ealare parity in Is pred form. Imagined communities “These ovo layers of culture combined, the socal lsichronic) and {he store iachzonil, have often hen aed the soeneutral fontet of Language study” There is, a addition,» third esenial layer toeulare, namely the imagination, Discourse communities ate characterized not only by facts and ala, but by common “reams filled and unflille maginings, Thee imaginings ae mediated through the language, that over the ile ofthe comin nity eles, shapes, and is metaphor for its eukural celity ‘Thus the iy of Londen sinseparsblinchecultual imagination ‘ofits citizen, from Shakespeare and Dickens. The Lincoln ‘Memorial Building in Washingeon as been gives extra meaning through the words I havea decane. thar Mati Lathe King Je spoke therein 1963. Rose gardens have bem immortalied inthe French imagination by Roasard's porry. Language intimately inked not only tothe culture cha and the cate tae wa, bt ako so the culture of the imagination that gover people’ Mlecisions and actions fe more than we may thin Insiders /outsiders ‘To idencify themselves as members ofa communi, people have fo define themselves oily a insides azo other, whom they thereby define as outsiders. Calne, aa procest that both includes sad excludes, bvays ence the exercise of powet aud «ontcol Te rose pees in the Dickinson poem, ane could arzue, vields exquisite perme, but ats high price, Not only must che Stem and the peas be ulmatly discarded, but only the ich aad [powerful can afford to buy the perfume, Shnlaly valy the povwerfal decide whose values and bees wil be deemed woreh Sopring by the group, which historical events ate worth ‘ommemorating, which Faure is worth imagining, Caloees, and fspeciliy national cules, resonate withthe voices of the powerful, and ae filled with che lenees ofthe poweres. Both Words and their sllences contebate to shaping one's own and others culture. For example, Edvard Sud describes hove the French constructed for themselves a view of te culate of the (One that came itety from such wrters as Chateaubrans, Nevvl, and Faubert, nd that only served he sys 0 reinforce the sen of superiority of he European cltre. The Oren tlt tras ot given a voice Such enemas, Said agus fs haa wide-ranging effect on the way Eacopeans and Americas have viewed the Middle East, and imposed that sew on Middle Easterners themselves, who implicty aequesce to ie when they Sec themslves the way the West es them Simi scholars Gender Studies, Ethnic Stadis, Gay Studies, have shown the egomone effects of dominant cultures ant the auhority they have in representing and in speaking for the Osher. Ulimatly, ‘alin culture seriously means questoning the very bse of one's wn iellectual inquiry, and aceptng the Fact that knowledge ill colored by eke socal and historical context in whish acquit and disseminated. a ths respec, language study an mine exltral acts, [As the Considerations above sugges, the study of language has always had to deal withthe difical sue of representation and {epresestatity when talking about another culture, Who i ented to speak for whom, to represen whom trough spokes tnd writen language? Who has the authority to select what Fepreseaative of given culture: the outsider who observes ad Snulie that culture, oF the insides who lives and experiences According to what and those criteria can a cultael feature be talled representative ofthat cute? Inthe Socal, the historic, and che imagined dimension, culture is heterogeneous. Members of the same discourse comm all, Ihave fferenebiogeaphies and ifeexpesencs, they may ile insage, gender, or eticity, they may have different poical ‘pion. Moreover, ultureschange overtime ax me can te from ‘he difiuty many contemporary readers might have with che Dickinson poem. And certainly Ladies inthe nineteenth cetary liagined the world dlleremy from ceades a the end of the toventieth. Cultures are not only heterogeneous and constaely changing, bue they ave the sites of ruse for power and ‘cognition, a we halle in Chapter 7. In surnmaey, culture cin be defied as membership in slscourse commaniy thar shares a common sosal space and ‘story, and common imaginings. Even when they have lel chat ommunicy, ts members may retain, wherever they are, 2 common system of standards for perceiving, believing, evaluat: ing antag, These standards ae what eral sled ie ‘The Emily Dickinson poem has served to laminate several aspets of culture 4 Caltace is always the rele of husnan intervention in the biological procestes of nate. + Culure both liberate and constrains Ie iberates by investing therandomness of aatare sith meaning, orden ftioalny and by providing sefeguatds aging chaos t constrains by Imposing a strucise oa nator and by lirting the range of Possible meanings crete bythe individual. 4 Culture is the product of socially and historically situated lscourse communis, that are co large evtent imagined ‘communis, rested and shaped by language 4 A community's Ihnguage and ies material achievements ep resent a socal paeemony anda symbolic capial that Serve to Despetuate relationships of power and domination, they dst uit insiders from outsider Bor because cultures are fundamentally heterogeneous and changing, they are constant ste of srugae lor recognition nd legtimation “The diferent ways of ooking at clue and is relationship to language raise «fundamental queton: to ahtt extent ae the work! views and meatal sentes of members of esocal group shaped by, or dependent on, che language they use? The theory ‘hat languages do alec the thovghe peacesses oftheir wees has been called the theory af ingusi relay Linguistic relativity Philologiss ad linguists have hen interested in the diversity of suman languages and theie meanings sizes the eightecnch cen- fury, The discovery by Earopean scholars of erienal lnguages like Sanit or the abiliy to decipher che Egypoanhisoglyphsat ‘he end af the eighrecnth cenmuty, coineised with a revial of ‘ational in sch counts as France and Germany, and was sccompanied by increased interest inthe univ ctrl cha fenstis oftheir national lnguages. The romantic doton of dhe indinsacabily of language and cultae peomoved by German Scholars like Johano Hleedee (x744~1803) and Wilela vor Hiumbolde|e76a-r835),inpactin eacton tothe French political and maitary hegemony of the cane, gave grea importance so the ‘vert ofthe work's languages and clears. These scholars pt forward the idea that diferent people speak cilferenly beease the hin ifferety, ad hae they think cferenly Beenie tele language offess chem aiferent ways of expressing the world sarod them hence she nocon of guste tatty). This action ‘vas picked upagui in the United States by she ingst Frama Bas (1858-1942), and subsequently by Edwac! Sapir (1854-1939) tnd his pop Benjamin Lee Whort (1897-1941) thee studies ff American Indian languages. Whoo!’ views onthe interdepend nce of language and thought have become known under the eof Sapi-Whor pothesis. ‘The Sapie-Whorf hypothesis “The Sspir-Whoefhypothesiemakesthe claim char thesrucute of the language one habitually uses inluences the manne which fe thinks ard behaver, Wharf recounts an anecdote that hat become famous. While he was working a9 fe insurance cise assessor he noticed that the way people behaved towaed hings was often dangerouty corelard tothe way these things were called, For example, the sight of the sign ‘eM ary" on empeyssoline drums would prompe patersby to toes cigars burs taco these drams, nor zelzing hat the remaining gasoline fumes ‘would belikelyeo caate an explosion In hisease che English ‘enry’ evoked a neutral pace, fee of danger, Whorf concluded ‘hat the reason why different languages can led geople #0 ferent ations is because language filters thie peespeion and the way they categorize experience So, for example, according to Whort, whereas English speakers ‘onctiv of time a linear, objective sequenee of evens encoded tna system of past, presen, an ature nse lor example, He fan! or le wil ru), oF discrete marsber of days a encoded in «arn sumerals or example cen das) the Hopi conceive of 4s intensity and) uracon in the anabsis and reporting of experience [for example, sna = Hera” or statement of fact ‘vara = "Ve tan ov statement of Fat feom memory). Similsly They stayed ten days hecomes in lop “They waned unl the leven dy" or They let afer the tenth do ‘Whort insists tha the English language bins English speakers to a Newtonian view of objet sme, neatly bounded and slusiable, ideal for record-keeping, time-saving, clock punch ing that cuts up reality ita afters and "anil butisincapable of expressing time as a eyci, unitary whole, By contras, the Hops Tanguage dees nor regard time as measurable lenge but a8 4 ‘elation between to events in lateness, a kind of Peventng” fefered 10s an objective way (as duraiba) and in «subjective vway [a imensiy). "Noehing is suggered about te lin lop] except the perpetual "aetng later” of weites Whor, Thue i ‘would be very diffe, Whorf argues, fe an English and 2 Hop: ‘physicist eo understand each others thinking, given the major Gliferences berween thei languages. Despite the general tran Tatil feom one language to another, thee wil always be a incommensurable residue of untranslatable culture astocated ‘with the linguistic straceares of any given langage. “The Sapit-Whort hypothess has been subject to Sere contr very since twa fest lormolated by Whorf in t942. Besause i inditecly made the universal validity of acienti sscoveres contingent upon the language ia which they are exprested fxcountered the mmesiate scam of thesientic commit. Fhe Postvistic climate of the time rejected any intimation that language determined thought rather than the other say around the propesition thar we ae prisoners of our language seemed tinacceptabl. And indeed ie would be absurd to suggest that opis cannot have acess to moder scenic thought becanse thei Fangoage does’ allow hem, or ha the can gun asense fof Newtonian time only by leuning English, One can se how “cong version of Who's rlativity principle could easily lend 60 pesjice and racism. After al, ti always posible to translate Seroslanguages,adifthis were no so, Whorf could never have revealed how the Hopi think The link berweea 2 oguistic SHracture aida given cultaral word view ans, rwas argu be ‘ewes arbitrary ity years ater, with the rise ofthe socialsciences interest in the nie relativity principle has revive, The eraslablity angamene that Was lovlled against the incommensorablity of atures i not as convincing ait semed, IE speakers of diferent languages do sot undertand ne another, snot becase thet Janguages cannot be mutually twamsated into one anodker— ‘ohh they obviously can, 0 a certain extent. Ie x becasse they Alon’ shace che same way of wewing andsnterpreting evens they don't agree on the meaning and the valie of the concept tinderiyiag the words. In short, they don’ cot sp reality ot categorize experience in the same manner, Understanding ares languages does not depend on structural equivalences but on ‘common conceptual ystems, boa rom the larger context of ou experience "Thesteons version of Whoe's hypothesis cherefore, tat pits thac langage determines the way we think, nao be taken seriouly but 2 weak version, supported by the findings tha there fre cultural diferences inthe semantic associations evoked by seemingly comnion concepts, + generally acepted nowadays “Theway agiven language encodes experience semantically makes sspgers of nar experience norexcluselyaeeanble, bt ost mone saline forthe users of thar language, For eeample, Navajo chldeen spel language that encoder Aiferenly through diferent verbs the action of 'icking up 4 ‘ound obec likes blland'pickingupalong, thin, fleblesijet likes rope, When presented wi blue rope, yeliow cape and « bie stick, and asked to choose which objec goes bes with the 5bive rope, most monaingal Navsjo chien cos he ellow ‘ope, thas wsosting the obec on the bass of he ye] form, where monolngsal Enghehspeiang cities most slays chore tbetlue sti, soln fhe bes on bass of that color, akhoush, of couse, bth goupe of hiceen are Pela able to distinguish Stk clos at shapes, “Thisexperiments awed assupportingche wa veron ofthe ‘hor! bpotheis thar language nese tend fo sre ot and sisting expense iferey according tothe emante Categories provided by dir perv cer Bu also shows thatthe rscrces povided by he guise ede ne undecae able only again the ager ragntconto oF peoples ‘experience A Nea hl ating Engh mht sar creer ing expernceinNovajrte way El shaper. Tw fe fer emai merg ofthe coe hac he ued themseve ovr tine wii + given dcouse community a8 subject Co the vans and alle sts mde of them i cl Contes. We ae, thea, aot praoners of he eal ean stred wo us by our language, but an ench them oot rosea imeraions wit of ngage wes summary The hoy finger ds ot i a neice ‘rome cosh pol cmos co ae ia oe wat ay tld i eae thenork of Sepeand Wh fale oo import wpe "Throws enon haga end eer t who hed bese Backs became Colored and 12 Whites ere redistributed mong other racial groupst And, of couse, there is no necessaey Coeeltion herween a given rac characteric and thease of pen language or rarity of language Regional ident is equally sontestable, As repocted in he London Times of Febreary 2984, when a Soviet book, Popul ‘uors of the Worl claimed that the population of France ‘consisted of ‘French, Alsatian, Flemings, Bretons, Basques, Catalans, Corsican Jews, Aemenians, Gypsicr and “others” Georges Marchais, the French Commnist leader, violenty disagreed For ashe sai, “every man and woman of French nationality is Fench. Franc is aot a multinational ae: on ation, he peoduer of long history. ‘One would think that national deny i a clearcut eitesfor atfae (ether you are or you ae not asitze), ba sone thing, For example, to area Turkish paspor, another thing to wcrhe to youre Turkish national ide if you were hor, raised an educated, say, ia Germany, ae a native speaer of German, 4nd happen to have Turkish parents ‘Despite the entrenched belief in che one Language = one clare ‘equation, individuals assume several coletve identities that are likely not only tochange overtime in dalogue with others but are lable to be in conf with one another, For exaipley ¢n immigrane's sense of elf, that wa inked in his counteyof ign pechaps to his social class, his political views, or his economic Scams, becomes, inthe new country, overshelingly linked to his ‘ational citizenship o: his religion, fr ths ste dentiy thats Imposed om im by others, who sein him now, for exampl, only {Turk or Muslin. Fis ov sense of elf o cultural Meni. thanges accordingly Out of nostalgia forthe “ld courey he Inay tend to become more Tupkish cha the Trks and entertain ‘what Benedice Anderson has called ‘ong distance nationalism ‘The Turkish he speaks may become withthe passing of years Somewhar diferent fom the Turkish spoken today in the sets of Ankara; the community he weed to belong fo now mote an “imagined community then the actual pesenc-ey Tacky. Cultural stereotypes “The problem ies n equating the racial etnies national identity imposed ons individual bythe state's bureaoceatic sytem, and thar individuals self-ascription. Group ident i no a natural fact, hua cultural pereeprion couse the metaptce with which we stared this book. Oue perepion of someone's soca dei ery much euturally determined. What we perceive about a person's culture and language is wha we have been sonditoned by our own cule cose, and the steeorypeal model aleady bulearourd our own. Group iene isa question of fet &