Unconscious Assumptions About Language

I think that one of the more interesting concepts brought up in the book is that we tend to make unconscious assumptions about words. I feel that this can be best observed when the idea of naming comes up. For example, one of my aunts is a teacher. When she tried to come up with a name for her son, she spent months mulling it over to no avail. Her difficulty was that she couldn't think of a name without conjuring up the memory of a former student with the same name. Though she did eventually decide on a name, at the time I couldn't understand the difficulty she had with the process. After reading Hayakawa's thoughts on the subject, I was finally able to understand where she was coming from.



The question I have about the whole concept is whether or not it is possible to refrain from these unconscious associations. My personal feeling is that it is near to impossible to fully disassociate. No matter how illogical it is, it's immensely difficult to separate our memories and feelings from the words that we use and hear. What does everyone else think?



- Tara Burns

The Difference Between Human Emotions and Behaviors

Bryce's post, titled One's Semantic Environment, inspired me to differentiate between human emotions and behaviors. The difference between such seemingly similar entities is that language can control behavior, but not emotions.

A good example for differentiating the two is a fixed set of laws in a community. Let's say a woman was pulled over for littering. The policeman fined her for breaking the law, and she obeyed by paying the fine. This fixed law illustrates language controlling people's behavior. (The woman will probably avoid littering in the future).

This particular law, however, does not have any control over the woman's emotions. Although the woman was obligated to pay the fine, she was not coerced to repress her feelings on the matter. The woman therefore could've expressed her emotions--which would most likely be anger and/or humiliation after receiving the fine--through verbal, mental, or physical performance.

Language can act as a regulator of human behaviors, but cannot control human emotions, whether the emotions are expressed externally or not.

-Chloe Martianou

One's Semantic Environment

On page 11 Hayakawa states that language constitutes "the moral and intellectual atmosphere in which [one] lives." Simply put, the words one speaks shape their ideas, hopes, dreams, prejudices, etc. Hayakawa also brings up the point that speakers of separate languages may have separate thoughts or methods of thinking. This left me to question just how profoundly language affects one's thoughts and actions. Are differences in culture directly attributable to differences in the languages societies speak? Or are upbringing, heritage, geographical separation, and other factors a more powerful force? Surely, both have a huge role in shaping who people are. But how powerful is languages role?

When I read Hayakawa's points, the first thing I thought about was "newspeak" from George Orwell's 1984 (http://www.newspeakdictionary.com/). The very purpose of this language was the restrict the thoughts of people by reducing the amount of words available with which to express feeling. For example, if a child grows up speaking a language with no word for happiness (and no word even remotely connected to happiness), then that child is not able to feel happiness, right? Surely, he won't be able to express it.

Overall, the point of language/words influencing thought was interesting to me. My final question, though, is just how powerful can language become? Is something like "newspeak" possible? Or is human nature too powerful to be controlled by a dictionary with a limited vocabulary? Thoughts? Ideas?

-Bryce Cody

Inferences and Judgments

I found it interesting that Hayakawa stresses the positive side of inferences, and doesn't mention the negative. I think we have all read a book or seen a corny movie in which a character draws an incorrect inference creating a conflict between characters. This doesn't just happen in movies. For example, from one mean word we may infer someone is mean, when really she just had a bad day, and we lose out on a friend. That's not a great example, but things similar to that happen. While I think what Hayakawa says about inferences is their more common and important use, they also have a negative side.

Hayakawa mentions the result of judgments on individuals, but I think they also permeate society. A judgment has to start with either one person, or one small group and then gossip carries it to everyone else. People easily accept judgments the same way they accept reports. These judgments usually aren't good, and a lot of time are prejudices against another group. Because judgments stop thought, the prejudices are very hard to get rid of. Once formed, the majority will only see evidence to support the prejudice, with only a select few who can look beyond it. Judgments, especially ones we feel passionate about, spread easily from person to person, and even generation to generation. Children easily accept the prejudices of their parents and never look to correct them, accepting the prejudice as fact. Prejudice is very bad for society. It leads to oppression, violence, and general ignorance. By being aware of judgments as we hear them, and recognizing judgments for what they are and not as facts, we can stop prejudices from forming or spreading. However, getting the majority to do this is incredibly difficult. Anyway, so those were my thoughts on judgments.

~ Becca LaRosa

Symbols Designed to Impress

Whenever someone goes to a concert, he or she usually purchases a concert T-shirt as a commemoration of the event. There is an underlying reason, however, for purchasing such an item: to impress other people.

I remember my sister wore an Aerosmith concert T-shirt to the mall one day. I noticed people ogling her shirt until one woman approached her and said, "Wow, you are so lucky to have gone to an Aerosmith concert!"

Jewelry and sartorial attire are impressive symbols that have signified affluence for centuries. (It is safe to say that such elegant garments worn today do not represent one's social status anymore. They are primarily used to impress people nowadays). Souvenirs from different vacation spots--magnets, postcards, bracelets, necklaces, etc.-- are purchased not only to preserve memories, but also to reveal to others that someone has traveled abroad.

To conclude, one of the roles of symbols is to arouse admiration from others. People enjoy being flattered.

-Chloe Martianou

Dynamic Language

An interesting quote: "The writing of a dictionary, therefore, is not a task of setting up authoritative statements about the true meanings of words, but a task of recording, to the best of one's ability, what various words have meant to authors in the distant or immediate past."-pg. 34

The fact that language is constantly changing is an interesting concept which I feel gives each generation a sense of individuality. This past week I visited my 91 year old grandmother in Seattle, and as I talked to her, she mentioned the "kind negro woman" who cared for her. My first response when she said this was to become very uncomfortable, since we were sitting in a room with many people. It turned out that my grandma had been saying this to almost everyone she talked to, even directly to the African-American woman who cared for her. Noone minded because everyone understood that my grandma was not aware that it was now a socially unacceptable word to say. Like many other words, this word has changed in meaning, taking on a negative connotation and becoming an inappropriate word to say in everyday use.

After this experience, I began thinking about other words that have changed. For me, the most obvious changes were new words. As a religious viewer of "The Colbert Report", I immediately thought of the word "truthiness" (http://www.merriam-webster.com/info/06words.htm). The other words I immediately thought of (I shamefully admit) were the myriad of terms created in the last ten years by online gaming ("noob", "pwn", "plox", to name a few). Many of these terms are specific to a younger generation which often leads to misunderstanding or confusion between people of different age groups (like what happened between me and my grandmother).

Ultimately, Hayakawa is stating that writing a "master dictionary" which perfectly defines every word and suits every person is impossible. Therefore, Websters and others are left with the job of defining words in a way that suits the largest group of people and addresses the various meanings a word has adopted over the years.

-Bryce Cody

Varying Associations

One thing I noticed about the feelings we associate with words is that they don't seem to be concrete. Hayakawa brings this in chapter five, saying, "The meaning of words also changes from speaker to speaker, from hearer to hearer, and from decade to decade."
I got thinking about this and realized that in some cases, we are so sure about what we think a words means that we don't remember what it started out meaning. This is particularly apparent in words that use to be harmless in meaning but now are considered derogatory or taboo. As an example, the word that use to simply mean 'female dog' is used as an insult. However, this word is still used by dog breeders and fanciers. Many people hear or see this word being used casually in relation to dogs and get quite offended. They assume that the only way the word can be used is as a curse.
Does anybody else have any thoughts on this? It's just something I've been mulling over for awhile.
-Melissa C.