Essay on Language and Culture

Essay on Language and Culture

Essay on Language and Culture is published for informational purposes only. The free papers are not written by our writers, they are contributed by users, so we are not responsible for the content of this free sample paper. If you want to buy a quality essay paper on Essay on Language and Culture at affordable prices please use our essay writing services offered by EssayEmpire.

     Culture is defined by the National Center for Cultural Competence as an "integrated pattern of human behavior that includes thoughts, communications, languages, practices, beliefs, values, customs, courtesies, rituals, manners of interacting and roles, relationships and expected behaviors of a racial, ethnic, religious or social group; and the ability to transmit the above to succeeding generations" (Goode et al, 2000, cited in Peterson and Coltrane, 2003). Thereof, language is nearly always a means of conveying culture; it is the mirror through which culture can appear. Also, it is through culture how linguistic messages are encoded, i.e., the use of language is directed and controlled by culture. To exemplify, the way and the language one uses in saluting others are determined by one's own culture. Therefore, both language and culture are inextricably interrelated. To finally add before starting some cross-cultural compatibilities and incompatibilities, Buttjes (1990, cited in AbiSamra, 2001) shows the reasons of why language and culture are from the start inseparably connected as follows:

     1. language acquisition does not follow a universal sequence, but differs across cultures;

     2. the process of becoming a competent member of society is realized through exchanges of language in particular social situations;

     3. every society orchestrates the ways in which children participate in particular situations, and this, in turn, affects the form, the function and the content of children's utterances;

     4. caregivers' primary concern is not with grammatical input, but with the transmission of sociocultural knowledge;

     5. the native learner, in addition to language, acquires also the paralinguistic patterns and the kinesics of his or her culture.

     There are a lot of cultures inhabiting our universe. Each culture has its own customs, beliefs, values, and behaviors among others. In other words, every culture has its own componential cultural patterns. Such patterns may converge or diverge among cultures. The degree of divergence and convergence oscillates in an obviously observed way. To clarify, what is essential, vivid, fundamental, and valuable in one culture may be the same or can be neutral, valueless, relatively accepted, totally rejected, normal, or a taboo as to other cultures. So, cultures usually intermingle, i.e., they have some or maybe sometimes many cultural patterns in common. Peterson and Coltrane (2003) state that "cultures are not monolithic." Still, it is postulated that each culture has some if not many particular cultural patterns that are not shared by other cultures. Such are called culture-specific patterns and the shared patterns are called culture-general (cf. AbiSamra, 2001).

     What concerns us in this article is to compare some cultural patterns from the societies of the USA and the UK - the two representatives of the English culture when we come to discuss culture incorporation in the process of teaching English as a foreign language (cf. Genc & Bada, 2005) - with some patterns from some Middle Eastern countries that teach English as a foreign language in their schools. It could be too early to say that cultural incompatibilities can impede the process of teaching English properly. But by having a glance at the cultural distance between the liberal West and the conservative East, one can assume that such a distance may seriously affect English language teaching as being affected by culture. A lot of cultural values in the West are classified as pestilent and demolishing according to some Eastern cultures. Alcoholic drinks, bars, discos, and some kinds of sexual relationships among others are all considered as first-class taboos. . .  
 
 

Language and culture

The connection between culture and language has been noted as far back as the classical period and probably long before. The ancient Greeks, for example, distinguished between civilized peoples and bárbaros "those who babble", i.e. those who speak unintelligible languages.^[88] The fact that different groups speak different, unintelligible languages is often considered more tangible evidence for cultural differences than other less obvious cultural traits.

The German romanticists of the 19th century such as Herder, Wundt and Humbolt, often saw language not just as one cultural trait among many but rather as the direct expression of a people's national character, and as such as culture in a kind of condensed form. Herder for example suggests, "Denn jedes Volk ist Volk; es hat seine National Bildung wie seine Sprache" (Since every people is a People, it has its own national culture expressed through its own language).^[89]

Franz Boas, founder of American anthropology, like his German forerunners, maintained that the shared language of a community is the most essential carrier of their common culture. Boas was the first anthropologist who considered it unimaginable to study the culture of a foreign people without also becoming acquainted with their language. For Boas, the fact that the intellectual culture of a people was largely constructed, shared and maintained through the use of language, meant that understanding the language of a cultural group was the key to understanding its culture. At the same time, though, Boas and his students were aware that culture and language are not directly dependent on one another. That is, groups with widely different cultures may share a common language, and speakers of completely unrelated languages may share the same fundamental cultural traits.^[90][91] Numerous other scholars have suggested that the form of language determines specific cultural traits.^[92] This is similar to the notion of Linguistic determinism, which states that the form of language determines individual thought. While Boas himself rejected a causal link between language and culture, some of his intellectual heirs entertained the idea that habitual patterns of speaking and thinking in a particular language may influence the culture of the linguistic group.^[93] Such belief is related to the theory of Linguistic relativity. Boas, like most modern anthropologists, however, was more inclined to relate the interconnectedness between language and culture to the fact that, as B.L. Whorf put it, "they have grown up together".^[94]

Indeed, the origin of language, understood as the human capacity of complex symbolic communication, and the origin of complex culture is often thought to stem from the same evolutionary process in early man. Evolutionary anthropologists^{[citation needed]} suppose that language evolved as early humans began to live in large communities which required the use of complex communication to maintain social coherence. Language and culture then both emerged as a means of using symbols to construct social identity and maintain coherence within a social group too large to rely exclusively on pre-human ways of building community such as for example grooming. Since language and culture are both in essence symbolic systems, twentieth century cultural theorists have applied the methods of analyzing language developed in the science of linguistics to also analyze culture. Particularly the structural theory of Ferdinand de Saussure, which describes symbolic systems as consisting of signs (a pairing of a particular form with a particular meaning), has come to be applied widely in the study of culture. But also post-structuralist theories, that nonetheless still rely on the parallel between language and culture as systems of symbolic communication, have been applied in the field of semiotics. The parallel between language and culture can then be understood as analog to the parallel between a linguistic sign, consisting for example of the sound [kau] and the meaning "cow", and a cultural sign, consisting for example of the cultural form of "wearing a crown" and the cultural meaning of "being king". In this way it can be argued that culture is itself a kind of language. Another parallel between cultural and linguistic systems is that they are both systems of practice, that is they are a set of special ways of doing things that is constructed and perpetuated through social interactions.^[95] Children, for example, acquire language in the same way as they acquire the basic cultural norms of the society they grow up in – through interaction with older members of their cultural group.

However, languages, now understood as the particular set of speech norms of a particular community, are also a part of the larger culture of the community that speak them. Humans use language as a way of signalling identity with one cultural group and difference from others. Even among speakers of one language several different ways of using the language exist, and each is used to signal affiliation with particular subgroups within a larger culture. In linguistics such different ways of using the same language are called "varieties". For example, the English language is spoken differently in the USA, the UK and Australia, and even within English-speaking countries there are hundreds of dialects of English that each signal a belonging to a particular region and/or subculture. For example, in the UK the cockney dialect signals its speakers' belonging to the group of lower class workers of east London. Differences between varieties of the same language often consist in different pronunciations and vocabulary, but also sometimes of different grammatical systems and very often in using different styles (e.g. cockney Rhyming slang or Lawyers' jargon). Linguists and anthropologists, particularly sociolinguists, ethnolinguists and linguistic anthropologists have specialized in studying how ways of speaking vary between speech communities.

A community's ways of speaking or signing are a part of the community's culture, just as other shared practices are. Language use is a way of establishing and displaying group identity. Ways of speaking function not only to facilitate communication, but also to identify the social position of the speaker. Linguists call different ways of speaking language varieties, a term that encompasses geographically or socioculturally defined dialects as well as the jargons or styles of subcultures. Linguistic anthropologists and sociologists of language define communicative style as the ways that language is used and understood within a particular culture.^[96]

The differences between languages does not consist only in differences in pronunciation, vocabulary or grammar, but also in different "cultures of speaking". Some cultures for example have elaborate systems of "social deixis", systems of signalling social distance through linguistic means.^[97] In English, social deixis is shown mostly though distinguishing between addressing some people by first name and others by surname, but also in titles such as "Mrs.", "boy", "Doctor" or "Your Honor", but in other languages such systems may be highly complex and codified in the entire grammar and vocabulary of the language. In several languages of east Asia, for example Thai, Burmese and Javanese, different words are used according to whether a speaker is addressing someone of higher or lower rank than oneself in a ranking system with animals and children ranking the lowest and gods and members of royalty as the highest.^[97] Other languages may use different forms of address when speaking to speakers of the opposite gender or in-law relatives and many languages have special ways of speaking to infants and children. Among other groups, the culture of speaking may entail not speaking to particular people, for example many indigenous cultures of Australia have a taboo against talking to one's in-law relatives, and in some cultures speech is not addressed directly to children. Some languages also require different ways of speaking for different social classes of speakers, and often such a system is based on gender differences, as in Japanese and Koasati.^[98]