Discuss the role of language in culture

By virtue, of a natural and biological combination, when culture is defined, the language
marinates the definition hence an intertwined connection between the culture and the
language. The validity and significance of language in cultural spheres goes beyond
imaginable dimensions as it plays a pivotal role in culture. It is like the process of historical
development based on the solid archaeological artefacts of the past. The role language plays
in culture stretches boundaries and is natural designed to shape how the portfolios of culture
are structured and conveyed from generation to generation.

Culture consists in patterned ways of thinking, feeling, and reacting, acquired and transmitted
mainly by symbols, constituting the distinctive achievements of human groups, including
their embodiments in artefacts of culture consisting traditional ideas and specially their
attached values, (Berlin and Kay, 1969. Culture is defined as how people feel about the
organization, the authority, degree of employee involvement and commitment and culture can
be viewed as a widely held, shared set of values, beliefs and ideas.

Generally speaking, language is introduced by Crystal (1971, 1992) as the systematic,

conventional use of sounds, signs or written symbols in a human society for communication
and self-expression. Similarly, Emmitt and Pollock (1997) believe that language is a system
of arbitrary signs which is accepted by a group and society of users. It is taken delivery of a
specific purpose in relation to the communal world of clients. Chase (1969) declares that the
purpose of language use is to communicate with others, to think, and to shape one’s
standpoint
and outlook on life. Indeed, language figures human thoughts. Saussure (1956, 1972, 1974,
1983) defines language as the system of differences. In this sense, he believes in the
difference of meaning of a sound-image or written shape in different languages. If words
stood for pre-existing concepts, they would all have exact equivalents in meaning from one
language to the next, but this is not true. That is to say, the concept of a sound-image or
symbol in different languages is different

A human being is a social creature. In fact, man is a receiver and sender of messages who
assembles and distributes information insists that every cultural pattern and every single act
of social behaviour involves communication in either an explicit or implicit sense. The tool
for this communication is language, (Brown, 1994). When a person learns a new language, it
is easier when they also understand the culture behind the language as words and language
spoken are deeply rooted in culture. To best understand the role of language in the
relationship of the two it is good to explain separately each of the two. By language we mean
a system of speech manually said or in written form which people use for communication,
(Chase, 2010). It helps us to identify ourselves and also share and also share with other
people of other cultures. While culture defines characteristics and patterns of a society or
group of people. This normally defines their language, arts, customs and these are what are
mainly used to give character to culture. It teaches us as humans to communicate with others
too and already this shows how the two are closely linked, (Eliot, 1961). When one speaks in
other people’s language, it actually means there is an interaction with their culture when
communicating in their language. So, learning a language helps one to understand a culture.
Since we all have our own languages, it also means we have our unique cultures that go hand
in hand and this separates everyone from other. Every culture is founded on language.

All this happens in a society, a community, where culture and language bring people to a
common belief and actions that also include conforming to set standards in that particular
society, it explains how language and culture are related through daily conversation and folk
law, the relationship gets more intense as they are shared beliefs, (Emmitt and Pollock, 1997).
Just like we have our languages, culture is also there, as both are used to pass down the torch
for future generations through oral traditions which is language. The British have their
language and culture, which is their way of doing things, the Zimbabweans, even when it was
once a British colony and had their culture before settlers came, they did not abandon their
language but learnt the settlers’ language which is English, they did not abandon their
cultures and languages because of the new language learnt. It is only because they were
aware language is part of who they are and their way of doing things which makes up their
culture, (Gilbert, Aubrey, 2008).

Admitting also that both the language and culture went through some significant changes
during this time is a fact we cannot deny as both got some bit of dilution which is happening
the world over as cultures are also changing with moving times including the languages too
as there are new ways of saying things and new words formed to suit new ways of living,
(Goodenough, 1996). The two are so interrelated to the extent that a change in the language
also effects a change in the culture through dances, dressing and expression. All these
significant changes do not erode the peoples’ cultures as there is handing down of important
information of culture and language that they can never part with even when they continue
accepting some dilutions, (Hjelmslev, 2013). Especially within families, there are ways of
doing things according to culture and a way of talking that can never be exchanged for
anything and surprisingly when they leave to go elsewhere and this includes beliefs too.

Looking at dressing and language, the new generation knows when within family they can
also talk using the modern day way of talking and mixing with English because that is how it
is these days, but when they are with other families and among the older generation, they
have learnt to tone it down so they are not labelled deviant, and as for dressing, they can wear
all they want even within the family, but the moment they go to homes of the older
generation especially in the rural arears, they have been taught to bring it down so as to suit
the environment, (Levinson, Stephen, 2016). They cannot dress the way the ancestors dressed
and they still argue that the ancestral way of dressing was more revealing than it is now
because it only covered the back and front while women would walk about with their chests
revealing and exposed compared to the way they are now dressing, (Jary and Jary, 1991).
This example from the writer’s culture was trying to bring out the fact that as times change so
does the language and culture somehow but there are still some very important parts of
culture that cannot be easily diluted but the fact that the world is changing into a global
village.

When interacting with a certain language one will be accessing their culture too by speaking
their language and it comes naturally that one would also want to understand their culture,
(Kroeber and Kluckhohn, 2012). The writer at one point was learning Deutsche, which is a
German language, that an effort was made to understand part of their culture as well and it
became clear how they take pride in how difficult their language is and can easily take
offence if a word is wrongly pronounced and an obsession into the culture made the writer
understand the German way of doing things, meaning the relationship between language and
culture is quite complex, (Berlin and Kay, 1969). Language can be spoken one or gestured
and with glances that can only be understood by people of a particular culture. A look, a
modulated voice tone, a wink in the eye and even a fake throat clearing can emphasize what
one is expressing without others knowing what is being said, these are technics of
communication in a culture like the writer’s but can be easily learnt through observation a
people’s culture and if it is children it is learnt within the family unity, other extended family
members and family friends, (Brown, 1994). All these are what is known as kinesics.
Warning a child can be said in a smiling way in front of visitors while the intensity of the
modulated voice can actually alter the normal meaning of the word but sending a message to
the child and this is usually the case in the Zimbabwean culture when correcting or
reprimanding a child in the company of visitors or strangers, (Chase, 2010).

Ferruccio Rossi-Landi, a philosopher from Italy said “a speech community is made up of all
the messages exchanged with one another using a given language which is understood by the
whole community.” He further said young children learn their language and culture from the
society they are born in and in the process develop their cognitive abilities as well, (Eliot,
1961).” This clearly explains how language can convey a culture and its belief to others
around us even when both continue to evolve as we continue to mingle with people from
other cultures whose cultures can affect our own too. Both culture and language give us a
sense of belonging to a society with likeminded people whose culture and beliefs including
ethos help in shaping us to deal effectively with others, (Emmitt and Pollock, 1997). They
give us the same characteristics as people from the same community or society even when
ideas and cultural views may vary. Language is the essence of a culture.

How we interact with the world is dictated by culture as it also expresses language, binding to
groups that give us a sense of belonging and shape our identity or define who we are even
when the two are constantly changing, (Gilbert, Aubrey, 2008). In his paper which discusses
three metaphors relating to culture and language, Wenying Jiang said that “language and
culture are inseparable as they simultaneously reflect in each other. In other words, language
and culture make a living organism, where language is flesh and culture is blood. Without
culture, language is dead; without language, culture would have no shape.” While Brown
(1994), described the two, “as intricately interwoven so that they cannot be separated without
losing the significance of any of the two.

David Elmes in his paper, mentioned that “the relationship between language and culture is
rather a complex one and that cultural values determine the way we use language, (Levinson,
Stephen, 2016). Culture of a people finds reflection in the language they use as they value
certain things and do them in a certain way and using their language reflects what the value
and do” It is interesting to note, in this connection, that the expression, “language of culture”
is commonly employed by French-speaking scholars to distinguish what are held to be
culturally more advanced from culturally less advanced languages, (Goodenough, 1996).
Although there is no accepted equivalent in English, the attitude on which the use of such
expression rests is no less common in English-speaking societies. Most linguists nowadays
take the view that there are no primitive languages. However, it is worth looking at this
question again with particular reference to what one might call the classical conception of
culture, (Hjelmslev, 2013).

It is customary to draw a distinction between cultural and biological transmission. As far as

language is concerned, it is quite possible that there is an innate language-acquisition faculty.
Whether or not this is so, there is no doubt that one's knowledge of one's native language is
culturally transmitted: it is acquired, though not necessarily learned, by virtue of one's
membership of a particular society, (Jary and Jary, 1991). Moreover, even if there is a
genetically transmitted language-faculty, this cannot result in the acquisition and knowledge
of a language unless the data upon which the language-faculty operates are supplied by the
society in which the child is growing up and arguably, in conditions which do not seriously
affect the child's cognitive and emotional development, (Kroeber and Kluckhohn, 2012).

This means that the cultural and the biological in language are interdependent. Indeed, it will
be obvious, on reflection, which one's linguistic competence, regardless of its biological
basis, comes within the scope of our definition of culture. And it may very well be that other
kinds of socially acquired knowledge-including myth, religious belief and so on-have as
much of a species-specific biological basis as language does. This point should be borne in
mind when one is considering the acquisition and structure of language in terms of the
opposition between the biological and the cultural. In fact, it is no longer possible to think in
terms of a sharp distinction between nature and nurture.
Bibliography

Berlin, B. and P. Kay (1969), Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution,
Berkeley: University of California Press.

Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (3rd ed). Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.

Chase, S. (2010), “How language shapes our thoughts”. In Language: An Introduction

Reader. (J. Burl H., and Roberts, E. Y., eds.), p. 97-108. New York: Harper and Row,
Publishers.

Eliot, T.S. (1961), Notes toward the Definition of Culture, London: Faber and Faber. Emmitt,
M. and Pollock, J. (1997). Language and Learning: An Introduction for Teaching 2 nd
Language. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.

Gilbert, Aubrey L., et al. (2008), “Support for lateralization of the Whorf effect beyond the
realm of color discrimination”, Brain and Language 105(2), pp. 91-98

Goodenough, W.H. (1996). Culture. In Levinson 8 Ember (Eds.) Encyclopedia of cultural

anthropology vol. 1. New York: Henry Holt and co.

Hjelmslev, L. (2013). Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. (tr. Francis J. Whitfield

Madison), Wisc.: University of Wisconsin Press.

Jary, D. and J. Jary. (1991). The HarperCollins Dictionary of Sociology. New York: Harper
Collins.

Kroeber, A. L. and Kluckhohn, (2012). Culture: A Critical Review of Concepts and

Definitions. Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum

Levinson, Stephen C. (2016), “Yeli Dnye and the Theory of Basic Color Terms”, Journal of
Linguistic Anthropology 10 (1), pp. 3-55.