hkEssay.com | 100%完全免費 | Sample Essays Site

[poshswinger]

Language Is More Powerful Than We Think ?A Comparison of Thought and Language

Today, more than ever, language is an integral part of our existence and survival. We depend on it to think and communicate on a day to day basis from person to person. In this age of cellular phones, fax machines and the internet, we use language so much that we usually take the power of language for granted. A man named Ludwig Wittgenstein once said , "If we spoke a different language, we would perceive a different world." First of all, are our thought processes directly linked to the words and symbols we call language? Is it possible that language can alter the way we think or even control what we know? And, can language reveal our own personal identity? Language can in fact have the ability to do all those things; it can change our values, our identity and even what we can and cannot know. Thus, this would lead to the conclusion that language is a lot more powerful than we think.

To analyze this concept, we must first know the definitions of language and thought. In the most basic terms, language is a means of communication by labelling our thoughts with words or symbols. In addition, our thoughts are defined as the power to think and imagine. Transferring thoughts would not only mean communicating to others, but also thinking within one's mind or dealing with an experience. From these meanings, we can now understand why language is needed for us to think, for without language, we cannot attach anything to our sense perceptions and experiences. Our power to think and imagine cannot exist if there are no labels to transfer it. When we see a small, long, narrow and wooden writing implement, we call it a pencil. Without any labels, we would not be able to differentiate between a pencil, a car and a ball, otherwise a pencil would be the same as a car and a car would be the same as a ball. Also, we wouldn't even be able to describe it because there would be no labels to call it small, long, narrow and wooden. A person cannot know he is thinking about a pencil without calling it a pencil and knowing that it is small, long, narrow and wooden. These labels are linked directly to our thoughts. Therefore, language is essential for thought.

There are also elements of language that make it easier for us to understand the world we live in. Abstractions in language help us to classify ideas into groups so that we may generalize or specify parts within a label. For instance, a car is made up of many parts such as the engine, the wheels, the body, etc. We call it a car instead of "an engine driving the wheels with a body attached to carry passengers", to make it easier for us to transfer the thought within our mind and to others. Also, by calling it a car, we have differentiated the object from a train or a bike, both being other modes of transportation. Abstractions are part of our mental grids that help us by chopping reality into fragments so that we may organize it and put it into our grasp of understanding. Something such as temperature cannot really be measured because it is infinitely variable. It is just our environment reduced to numbers so that we may be able conceive it in our minds. Again, our world is divided into pieces so the human mind can understand it bit by bit. From seeing a car to measuring the temperature, language offers an explanation to our experiences and is a powerful tool to help us think.

Seeing how language allows us to think and interpret our world, we can now probe the question, "Can language determine the way we see the world?" From one perspective, this is not true because if everyone perceives the same world as everyone else, then the world is the same to everyone, no matter what language. The world will always remain the same no matter what language the perceiver uses. Thus, everyone must know the same things and see the same world.

Using the definition of knowledge as justified true belief, we can see that an object, like a potato, is the same to everyone if they perceive the same way. It is justified because of consensus gentium; everyone thinks and calls it a "potato". It is not justified through sense perception or logic because the object would not be a "potato" if everyone you ever knew called it something else. It is the truth because it can be successfully tested with a correspondence test; tasting it to see if it tastes like other potatoes or if it can be made into fries, chips or mashed potatoes. The belief is there because the people will probably believe it is what it is. Therefore, it must be a potato to everybody.

From another perspective, that potato is not a potato to everyone. In different languages, things are given different labels so we perceive different worlds. In the French language, that potato is a "pomme de terre", or literally translated, an "apple of the earth". The consensus gentium is no longer there because a English-speaking person will say the object is a "potato" while a French-speaking person will say it is a "pomme de terre". There is no more agreement so the justified true belief is lost in a multi-lingual world. Remember that labels are directly linked to our thoughts, so that an "apple of the earth" will have similar characteristics to an apple or a "pomme" in a French person's eyes whereas the label "potato" does not really help in indicating what it is. This example proves that language controls what a culture can and cannot know.

Differing languages can not only alter knowledge, but it can affect our values. A test on this theory was done a few years ago on Japanese/American women who became fully bilingual after meeting Americans in and after World War II. A person would interview the bilingual women in two sessions, asking questions relating to their values of family, friends and their lifestyle in both Japanese and English. Care was taken not to make the asking of the same questions in different languages obvious to any extent in order to prevent any inaccurate answers. The results of the test showed two surprisingly different sets of answers. The Japanese answers showed family and friends being more valued while the English answers tended to value more of material objects. Both these answers came out of the same people being asked the same question. This test proves that language does in a way influence our values.

Another more specific example of language altering values can be found in the comparison of the English and Chinese language. A person that knows only English may see their father's brother and call them "uncle". In Chinese though, that person would call them "shu-shu" or "sook-sook". The person might also see their mother's brother and call them "uncle". To the Chinese, that person would be called "jiu-fu" or "cou-fu". In fact, the Chinese language has different names for every specific aunt or uncle in a family, from an uncle's wife to the eldest aunt in a family. This low level of abstraction in Chinese may have a lot to do with the way the Chinese culture believes in filial piety, a major aspect of Confucianism. Chinese people usually find it important to be close as a family unit and to respect their elders, therefore they often know how they are related to all their relatives. The specific names for all the aunts and uncles in a family influence a Chinese person to better respect their relatives and recognize the importance of knowing who they are. The value of a label can influence the values of a person, again emphasizing the power that language possesses over a person's thoughts.

In contrast of seeing that thoughts, knowledge and values differ with every language, the aspect of language is as universal as human culture itself. Every person since the beginning of human existence has used some form of language to communicate to each other. Even though an object such as a potato is called le pomme de terre in French, it is the same object in both French and English. The process by which languages label these objects is the universal concept. In addition, since language is linked directly to everyone's thoughts, language can be called the most universal discipline. One can use language to influence many other disciplines such as logic, justice and value judgments, making it an extremely powerful controlling tool.

To control those disciplines, one could limit a person's knowledge of language to control what they can or cannot understand. For example, if a person only knows the words car and fast, then he will only use those two words to describe an automobile. That person cannot describe the car's looks, handling, ergonomics, braking, suspension and so on. By controlling his knowledge of language, he is limited to what he can understand. He will only be able to classify whether the car is fast or not.

In reality, intentional use of the limits of language really does occur. For instance, in any modern war, the military has to report to the press about the progress of any conflict to keep the public informed. The military however, uses words and terms that the general public does not understand such as "sorties", "BDA's" and "conditioning". The public generally does not know the real meanings to the words therefore, they do not know what really is happening. In most cases, this lack of understanding leads them to be ignorant of the situation. By using these words that are above the general public's understanding, the military can keep their secrets about what really goes on in a war. A specific example can be found in a common term in the military, where a mission or attack is "compromised". To the public, this could imply that the mission was partially successful where no side really gets what they want, but in reality, it means the mission was a total failure. Again, language limits what the people can and cannot know and the truth can be hidden.

An similar element of language that is commonly used by politicians is ambiguity; the transferring of thoughts that is open to more than one interpretation. Politicians usually tend to be ambiguous in their election promises so that when they get elected, those promises can be interpreted differently so that they don't really have to be fulfilled. The language of politicians can alter the expectations of the people, influencing them to vote for them. Therefore, politicians use the power of language to control disciplines to their advantage.

Another account for the use of ambiguity was in the fictional novel Animal Farm, by George Orwell. In the book, animals take over a farm run by humans and new laws and rules are created for the "animal farm". One of the rules, created by the pigs, was that all animals were to be treated equal. However, throughout the course of the novel, the pigs gradually gained more power, becoming more like the humans they once overthrew. Eventually, the rule was changed to say, "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others." This ambiguity allowed the pigs to rule over the farm and tell the other less intelligent animals what to do. The pigs used ambiguity to bend the laws and change the animals view of justice. This example shows how the direct control of language can directly control justice and values.

All the labels within any language have a role in the way we, as human beings, think and process our experiences. With the direct control that language possess over thoughts, a person could easily control other disciplines to their advantage. However, not only words and labels themselves have an influence on our minds but the way they are said can have an influence of how we identify people.

Language can reveal an individual's identity through knowledge by acquaintance in the sounds of their spoken language. When a person from Britain speaks, what usually comes out are the sounds of English with a British accent. When a person hears this accented English, he can easily guess that that person has spent some time in England acquiring the accent. The same can happen to a person from New York where it is easy to identify that that person probably comes from the "big apple". But with this identification of a person's background, stereotypes and prejudice judgments can originate. For instance, a black person speaking heavy eubonics can very often create the stereotype that that person is a gang member from a ghetto who doesn't have any respect for society. As well, a Chinese accent might make people think a person is a new immigrant with very little education. These stereotypes are most often incorrect and are very misleading to people who use them. It often creates a different perspective of a person, heavily affecting our judgment of who he really is.

On the other hand, people have actually used the stereotypes created by the sounds of language to their advantage. An example of this can be found on television with infomercials. When they have an expert on a product talk on an infomercial, he usually speaks with a heavy British accent. This creates the illusion that the person is well educated and knows what he is talking about. This makes viewers of these infomercials believe entirely what he is saying and they very often buy the product. Thus, even the sounds of language have a powerful impact on how we think.

So with all things considered, language is a lot more powerful than we think. Without it, we would not be able to handle any thought. Through the direct link between our thoughts and our language, we can be extremely influenced by the usage of labels and their sounds. Through such things as limiting one's vocabulary or using ambiguity, one can effectively control other disciplines. An important thing to realize is that by understanding the power of language, we can learn how to use it more effectively and we can reduce its influence on our thoughts. Human kind's quest for knowledge is only limited by our language and its ability to control what we can and cannot know. We need language to think and interpret everything we experience and to put it into perspective, everything including this essay.