ASSIGNMENT No.

1
Name: Amina Mushtaq
Program /level: BS
Roll no: BY409418
Course: Language and Culture (9059)
Semester: Spring, 2021
Level: BS English
ALLAMA IQBAL OPEN
UNIVERSITY, ISLAMABAD
(Department of English Language &
Applied Linguistics)
Question:
What is the relationship of language with culture? Do Edward Sapir, Duranti
and Fairclough explain this relationship in a similar manner?
Answer:
Abstract:
Language, the most commonplace of all human possessions, is possibly the most complex and
the most interesting. Since it is an instrument for humans' communications with each other, the
growth and development of their talents, causing creativity, innovation, and novelty, exchanging
and transferring their experiences, and on the whole, for formation of society(s). Concern with
language is not new. From the earliest recorded history, there is evidence that people investigated
language. Many of the assumptions, theories and goals of modern linguistics find their origin in
past centuries. However, this study aims to investigate whether there is any relationship between
language and culture, and if so, what the relationship between language and culture is. To
achieve the aims of this study, some of the main theories which can be related to the goal of the
paper are introduced and explained. Then, it is followed by a precise discussion. The results of
the article indicate that there is a very close relationship between language and culture. That is,
culture has a direct effect on language. Language and culture are closely correlated.

Introduction:
Human being is a social creature. In fact, man is a receiver and sender of messages who
assembles and distributes information (Greimas, 1970). Sapir (1956) insists that “every cultural
pattern and every single act of social behaviour involves communication in either an explicit or
implicit sense” (p. 104).The tool for this communication is language. This study seeks to
investigate whether there is any relationship between language and culture, and if so, what the
connection between language and culture is. In other words, if there is relationship between
language and culture, how they can have this association. To achieve the answer of the above
question, some of the main relevant points are introduced and discussed as follows.

Language:
To open discussion about language, first of all, it seems necessary to mention that as far as
language is concerned, Saussure‟s theory of the sign is one of the main theories which had an
effective and significant role in this domain. Saussure‟s theory of the sign has a thoughtful and
reflective manipulate on both linguistic and the rise of semiotic approach. In this respect,
Saussure (1974) believes that language is a system of signs. For him, a sign consists of a signifier
(the sound- image or the written shape) and a signified (a concept), in the manner that, they both
are inseparably linked with each other (ibid). In other words, the sound-image cannot be
separated from the concept, that is to say, these two never part with each other (ibid). He further
likens language and thought to a sheet of paper; He believes that thought is the front part of
paper and sound the back part. It is impossible to cut any of the two parts without cutting the
other. In the sense that, in language the sounds and thought are inseparable.
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 (ibid). 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” (Saussure, 1974, p. 116). That is to say, the concept of a sound-image
or symbol in different languages is different.

Culture:
According to Roohul-Amini (1989) "Culture has multifarious meanings. Culture meant farming"
(p. 15). It is used everywhere as rural culture, urban culture, American culture and so on. Today,
in every field, in humanities, every research requires a general view of culture. It is used in
archaeology, linguistics, history, psychology, sociology and etc. It is even said that man is an
animal with culture. That is to say, the factor which differentiates the human being's behaviour
from the behaviour of animal is culture (Mesbahe Yazdi, 2005). In general, from the sociological
perspective, culture is the total of the inherited and innate ideas, attitudes, beliefs, values, and
knowledge, comprising or forming the shared foundations of social action. Likewise, from the
anthropological and ethnological senses, culture encompasses the total range of activities and
ideas of a specific group of people with common and shared traditions, which are conveyed,
distributed, and highlighted by members of the group (Collins English Dictionary 1991, 1994,
1998, 2000, 2003). There are about two or three hundred and even more definitions for culture.
With respect to the definition of culture, Edward Sapir (1956) says that culture is a system of
behaviors and modes that depend on unconsciousness. Rocher (1972, 2004), an anthropologist,
believes that “Culture is a connection of ideas and feelings accepted by the majority of people in
a society” (p. 142). Undeniably, culture is learned and shared within social groups and is
conveyed by nongenetic ways (The American Heritage, Science Dictionary 2005). Taylor
(1974), an anthropologist, says in his Primitive Culture that culture in a complex definition
includes beliefs, arts, skills, moralities, laws, traditions and behaviors that an individual, as a
member of a society, gets from his own society. Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952), consider
civilization and culture the same and they believe the two terms have been used synonymously.
For them, they both indicate different levels of the same subject. Civilization indicates the great
development of a civilized society; culture indicates the same subject too (ibid). Each society has
its own special culture either simple or complex. If culture is taken seriously, it seems that people
require not only sufficient food but also well-cooked food. Goodenough (1996) claims that
culture is a systematic association of people that have a certain way of life. Therefore, culture is
the only distinction between human and animals. Of course, animals live in association but it is a
special kind. There are, indeed, a lot of sharing characteristics between human beings and
animals such as associative life, responsibility toward children and so on. But culture is for men,
only. T. S. Eliot (1961) considers culture as a capital and means for developing all cultures and
knowledge in order to terminate all human sharing problems, for helping economical
stabilization and political security. Spencer (1986) calls culture the milieu of super organic and
highlights the separation of culture from physical and natural factors. He believes that the super
organic factor is only for man, whereas; the other two factors are the same for man and animal.

Elements of Culture
Everyone belongs to a special group. He/She reflects his/her own special thought and culture. It
is easy to put him/her in his/her group and distinguish him/her from the others. For instance,
language of a child is different from the language of an adult or the people in the North speak
differently from the people in the South or the language of the poor is different from the
language of the rich, even their clothes are different.
Elements such as language, rituals, clothes, science, beliefs and values connect people together
(Roohul-Amini, 1989). Culture is learnt through relation with other people. Therefore, culture is
not natural, inborn and will-less; it is a social product. Some factors are considerable and
momentous in this transmission such as information and knowledge in a society, social changes,
social relations and mass media. Thus, culture transmits generation by generation, the elements
are carried from one place to another place, it is divided into some sub-cultures and it is finally
the victim of crises. Words are the most significant tools of cultural symbols. That is to say,
poems, stories, fictions, epics and myths are the main ingredients and components of a culture in
a society. Myth, Levis Strauss (1976) believes, in a language expresses universal realities in
symbols. On the whole, the elements of culture are the entirety of socially transmitted and
common behavior patterns, prototypes, samples, arts, beliefs, institutions, and all other products
of human work and thought.

Sapir and Whorf Hypothesis

Sapir and Whorf Hypothesis is a Hypothesis built up and expanded by B. L. Whorf (1897 –
1941) and derived from linguistic approach of his teacher, E. Sapir (1884 – 1939). This
hypothesis, in fact, suggests that a language determines and resolves the thought and perception
of its speakers. In the sense that, no language can subsist except it is in the context of culture and
reciprocally, the culture which does not have at its centre the structure of a standard and ordinary
language cannot survive (Sapir, 1921; Berlin and Kay, 1969). Whorf himself called this view the
„linguistic relativity principle‟ (Whorf, 1952; Lucy, 1992a, 1992b; Levinson, 2000; Gilbert, et
al. 2008). Consequently, Sapir – Whorf hypothesis is, indeed, a theory of the relationship
between language and thought expounded in its most explicit form by the American
anthropological linguists Edward Sapir (1884 – 1939) and Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897 – 1941).
This hypothesis is also known as the theory of the linguistic relativity. The main idea in this
hypothesis, as Whorf (Whorf, 1952, 1956; Levinson, 2000; Gilbert, et al. 2008) puts it, is that
every human being views the world by his own native language. In other words, just as time,
space, and mass (according to Einstein) can be defined only in terms of a system of relationships,
human knowledge similarly arises only in relation to the semantic and structural possibilities of
natural languages. In fact, Sapir and Whorf hypothesis (Sapir, 1921; Whorf, 1952, 1956; Berlin
and Kay, 1969; Lucy, 1992a, Lucy 1992b; Levinson, 2000; Gilbert, et al. 2008) comprises two
consistent and unified ingredients as follows:
 Linguistic Relativity: In accordance with linguistic relativity the languages which are
completely different in their vocabulary and structure, put across and convey different cultural
significances and meanings. This belief, indeed, maintains that the way people view the world is
determined wholly or partly by the structure of their native language.
 Linguistic Determinism: In proportion to linguistic determinism in its strong version, models
and samples of thought and observation and comprehending of reality are settle on, agreed on
and found out by one‟s native language. The first part which is linguistic relativity, indeed, has a
more important role in forming Sapir and Whorf hypothesis. The main idea in this hypothesis, as
Whorf (ibids) puts it, is that every human being views the world by his own native language.

Discussion
Language and Culture
The word culture has several related senses, they are important to be mentioned. These senses
can be briefly explained as follows: There is, first of all, the sense in which culture is more or
less synonymous with civilization and, in an older and extreme formulation of the contrast,
opposed to 'barbarism'. This is the sense that is operative, in English, in the adjective 'cultured'. It
rests ultimately upon the classical conception of what constitutes excellence in art, literature,
manners and social institutions. Revived by the Renaissance humanists, the classical conception
was emphasized by thinkers of the eighteenth-century Enlightenment and associated by them
with their view of human history as progress and self-development.
The view of history was challenged, as were many of the ideas of the Enlightenment, by Herder,
who said of the German equivalent of „culture': "nothing is more indeterminate than this word,
and nothing is more deceptive than its application to all nations and periods" (Williams, 1976,
1983, p. 79). It is interesting to note, in this connection, that the expression 'language de culture
(literally, "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. 'Kultursprache' is similarly used in German. 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. The word culture is to be interpreted, not in its classical
sense, but in what might be described loosely as its anthropological sense. In fact, this is the
sense in which Herder proposed that the term should be used; but it was not until about eighty
years later that anthropologists writing in English adopted this usage. In this second sense,
culture is employed without any implication of unilinear human progress from barbarism to
civilization and without a prior value being made as to the aesthetic or intellectual quality of a
particular society's art, literature, institutions and so on. In this sense of the term, which has
spread from anthropology to the other social sciences, every society has its own culture; and
different subgroups within a society may have their own distinctive subculture. Herder's
promotion of the word culture in this sense was bound up with this thesis of the interdependence
of language and thought, on the one hand, and, on the other, with his view that a nation's
language and culture were manifestations of its distinctive national spirit or mind. Indeed, many
other writers in the Romantic movement had similar ideas. This is one strand in the complex
historical development of the socalled Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which dominated all discussion
of language and culture, as it did of language and thought, a generation ago. Although the word
culture is now widely employed in the social sciences, and especially by anthropologists, in the
sense that has just been identified, it can be defined, technically, in several different ways.
Culture may be described as socially acquired knowledge, to be precise, as the knowledge that
someone has by virtue of his being a member of a particular society.Two points must be made
here about the use of the word knowledge. First, it is to be understood as covering both practical
and prepositional knowledge: both knowing how to do something and knowing that something is
or is not so. Second, as far as prepositional knowledge is concerned, it is the fact that something
is held to be true that counts, not its actual truth or falsity. Furthermore, in relation to most, if not
all, cultures we must allow for different kinds or levels of truth, such that for example the truth of
a religious or mythological statement is evaluated differently from that of a straightforward
factual report. Looking from this point of view, science itself is a part of culture. And in the
discussion of the relationship between language and culture no priority should be given to
scientific knowledge over common-sense knowledge or even superstition.
1. We are, in all our thinking and forever, at the understanding of the particular language which
has become the means of expression for our society, we experience and practice our expression
by means of the characteristics, peculiarities, and sometimes literary words encoded in our
language.
2. The characteristics, peculiarities, and literary words encoded in one language system are
distinctive, typical, and unique to that system and they are dissimilar as well as incomparable
with those of other systems.
3. Since the culture of a particular place or nation is different from others, sometimes the
misunderstanding and misconception occurs when one from another nation uses the language of
that nation.
4. In order to understand the specific words, literary terms, and even sometimes the simple
words in one language, we must be familiar with the culture of that nation
Thus, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis mostly indicates the influence of language on thought. It is
worth mentioning that, as a reality, memory and perception are affected by the availability of
appropriate words and expression. For example, experiments have shown that visual memories
tend to be distorted so that they are in closer correspondence with commonly used expressions;
and that people tend to notice the thing that are codable in their language: i.e. things that fall
within the scope of readily available words and expressions. Codability, in this sense, is a matter
of degree. Something which comes within the denotation of a common single word is more
highly codable than something whose description requires a specially constructed phrase.
Codability is not unavoidably constant and uniform throughout a language-community-
especially when we are dealing with a community as complex, as diffuse and as varied as the
native speakers of English.
All too often, the correlation of language and culture is made at a very general level, and with the
tacit or explicit assumption that those who speak the same language must necessarily share the
same culture. This assumption is manifestly false in respect of many languages and many
cultures. No less important is the fact that the codability is not simply a matter of the existence of
single-word lexemes. Particular languages are associated historically with particular cultures; the
languages provide the key to the associated cultures, and especially to their literature; the
languages themselves cannot be fully understood otherwise than in the context of the cultures in
which they are inextricably embedded; subsequently, language and culture are studied together.
It so happens that English and the other major languages of Europe are, in many respect, highly
unrepresentative of the languages of the world. English, in particular, has been used in the
administration of an empire of great cultural diversity.
It is spoken as a native language by members of many different ethnic groups and adherents of
many religions, living in many parts of the world. It is widely employed by anthropologists,
missioners and writers of all kinds, not only in the description of every known society, but also
in novels, plays and etc., which have their setting in countries and societies in which English is
not normally spoken. The above points indicate that English, to an even greater extent than other
European languages, has been enlarged and modified by loan-translation in almost every area of
its vocabulary. The correlation between the semantic structure of English and the cultures of its
native speakers are therefore much more complex and diverse than are the correlations between
language and culture in the vast majority of human societies.
It is also much easier for a native speaker of English or one of the major languages of Europe to
think that all human languages are inter-translatable than it would be for a speaker of most other
languages.

Conclusion
From the mentioned points and discussion, it can be concluded that there is a very close
relationship between language and culture in general, and a specific language and its culture in
particular. That is, culture has a direct effect on language. In fact, the two issues are closely
correlated and interrelated. Language is the symbolic presentation of a nation or a specific
community. In other words, language is the symbolic presentation of a culture

Question:
Gender stratification is a system where the positions occupied by men and
women are associated with different amounts of income, prestige, agriculture,
education, politics etc. Elaborate the statement and explain the scenario n
terms of the local culture of gender stratification?
Answer:
Gender
Gender represents the cultural understanding of the biological differences among males and
females. It also refers to the socio-cultural and psychological shaping, patterning and evaluation
of male and female behavior. Other than the biological differences between males and females
there is gender stratification as well which is briefly explained below.

Gender Stratification
Gender stratification is a system where the positions occupied by men and women are associated
with different amounts of income, prestige, agriculture, education, politics, etc. Gender roles are
defined in most cultures (which vary from society to society). For instance, most societies based
their gender stratification on the warrior nature of their men – who in turn used their warrior and
economic roles to oppress women like in the Javanese society. This stratification is mostly
prominent in the public and political realms where men are actively involved and women engage
in economic chores at home as in most African countries. But since societies are dynamic gender
system remains flexible and keeps on changing. So the more advanced and developed a society is
the narrower and more neutralized is its gender stratification.

Language and Gender

The relationship between language and gender has been the focus of many disciplines such as
linguistics, sociology, psychology, anthropology, philosophy, biology, etc. Each discipline has
explored a certain aspect of this topic: biology and psychology-based studies focused on
examining how language is processed in the brain and learned, sociology has looked into gender
and socialization, anthropology on how gender roles vary across cultures and linguistics has
focused on the differences in language use by men and women. One of the main issues regarding
gender is the question of ‘power’ inequality. As we will discuss further in this unit one of the
most driving forces in this area is the fact that language cannot be separated from society;
people’s habits by the way they use language create inequalities in societies. This societal
practice becomes prominent through the interplay of past and current events. Therefore, it has
been argued that metaphors and other terms that denigrate women become a norm and create
negative concepts associated with femininity when used even unconsciously. This phenomenon
also becomes evident when people use language that is embedded with social status differences
including gender hence, further aggravating and reinforcing inequalities. There is a general
perception in societies that women are more cooperative, polite and caring while men are more
aggressive and competitive.
This distinction between men and women is not limited to the behavior but extends to their
language as well - despite researches that show other factors are also involved in the way people
communicate; other elements and aspects are associated in the conversations people have with
each other. The distinction that has already 42 been established is automatic and now deeply
ingrained in many cultures and it can only be shattered or changed if further research is
conducted to destroy the stereotypical images and to create deeper understanding of how people
use language to ‘construct gender’. This brings us to the concept of gender construction and we
shall now further delve into how gender is constructed in light of the cultural background and
expressed through language

Language and Gender Construction

The relationship between language and gender is not ‘natural’ but is created through culture,
because societies have different associations with different forms of language for males and
females. A lot of research concerning male and female speech proved that certain linguistic
features are associated with either men or women only. Generally, in most societies’ women are
expected to speak more formally and more politely than men. Femaleness is associated with
respectability, gentility and high-cultured, contrary to manliness which is associated with
‘toughness’ and direct speech.
These behaviours that society expects from the male and female predetermine their choice of
words (language). Women’s speech has been described by a number of scholars as being
different from men. The difference between women and men also includes the biological factor;
women have certain distinctive biological traits than men e.g. they weigh less, mature quickly,
live longer, are less strong and have lesser number of muscles. Furthermore, the voice quality of
both men and women is different; women have thinner vocal chords while men have thicker. As
a result, women have high pitches while men have lower.
However, these differences are there because of certain other factors like the social one; women
live longer because of the roles they play in the society and different jobs they have. The voice
quality is also based on the social understanding of women’s role and how they should behave
and speak in different social settings.

Difference in Communication Process

Different investigations and studies conducted on the language use by both men and women
especially in the process of communication show that:

➢ Men’s conversations revolve mostly around business, politics, legal matters, taxes and sports
while women talk about social life, books, food and drinks, life’s troubles and lifestyles.

➢ Men speak forcefully; their voices show command and authority while female speech tends
to be more polite or submissive in some situations and is usually less forceful.

➢ Men talk focuses on competition, teasing, aggression, violence (in some cases), they take
initiatives in conversations and tend to explain things to women. Men do not hesitate to interrupt,
challenge, ignore and take control in a conversation and because of this they end up dominating
most conversations and their social interactions. 43

➢ Women talk about feelings, affiliations with home and family or others, they ask more
questions than men and apologize more; their conversations are dominated more than they
dominate.
 ➢ Women use more question tags and hyper-correct pronunciations and grammar; they doubt
more on what they say and not just what they hear. Certain clichés like ‘men never listen’ and
‘women find it easier to express their feelings’ support the above findings.

Linguistic Differences
Further investigations show that there are phonological, phonetics, morphological, syntactic and
pragmatics (linguistics) differences in the male and female speech. These speech differences
have been noted in a variety of languages. For instance,

➢ In Gross Ventre, an Ameridian language of the North East United States, women have
palatalized velar stops where men have palatalized dental stops. An example is ‘bread’ which
females pronounce it as ‘kjatsa’ whiles males pronounce it asdjatsa. Moreover, Yukaghir a North
East Asian language, women and children used /ts/ and /dz/ whereas men have /tj/ and /dj/.
Syntactically, in terms choice of words, Japanese women use ‘ne’ at the end of sentence when
they speak.

➢ English, French, Latin, Greek, Russian, Spanish and many more languages make gender
distinction through their pronominal systems. For example, ‘he’ and ‘she’ in English, ‘le’ and
‘la’ in French, ‘hun’ and ‘han’ in Norwegian language. Nevertheless, among the Akan’s gender
distinction exists between male and female personal names. For example, a male child born on
Friday in Akan will be called ‘Kofi’ whiles a female child born on the same Friday will be called
‘Afia’.

➢ With the family names, a lot of male names also have their corresponding female names in
most Ghanaian societies. For example, in Akan by attaching the suffix –waa, -maa, -bea, or –ba
to the male name we have its female counterpart. Few examples are illustrated below: Male
names Female names Ampofo Ampofowaa Kyei Kyeiwaa Antwi Antwiwaa Ado Adobea Ofei
Ofeibea Table 2 Akan male names with female counterpart

Language Gender and Power

Power is often demonstrated and established through language, it is also reinforced through
language. Power is not limited to a certain authority or setting; it varies and has many types. For
instance, in a political context power is achieved through speeches and debates. The words that
are used, the vocabulary and the extra-linguistic features such as pitch, tone, volume, etc play a
great role in establishing power and authority. Legal power has its own codification; orders and
commands are passed through language and established with it. Having said this, it should also
be made clear that power is not only established in public domains but also at homes. Each
household has a different description of power and how it is inculcated in its members. Societies
through their practices of certain roles including oral and traditional customs, institutional
powers and pre-determines gender roles and norms establish power. These practices and division
of gender roles seek to control both the sexes. As a result, institutional conflicts arise about the
authority; who will speak and to what effect, limitations to gender voices and how these voices
should be raised.
 Moreover, the control of representation takes place in social, institutions and in verbal
interaction about how to communicate, display and 45 reproduce equally. This is a source of
social power that is established through control and as a result gender variation in language
behavior becomes apparent. In most societies men tend to control and dominate women while
women struggle to emancipate.
These dominance and emancipation are observed in our daily activities, jobs, naming, proverbs,
idioms etc. which are all expressed using language. Therefore, the more power you have, the
more language you can use. In most Asian and African societies, key political and traditional
portfolios that are strictly related to communication is usually male-dominated. These include
positions of chiefs, lineage head, counsellors, diplomats, chiefs spoke person, etc. There is no
doubt that the verbal wit of women is directly or indirectly limited.

Question:
Keeping in mind the Akan names give in your textbook, make a list of names
from the Pakistani context of males with their female counterparts.
Answer:
Male name Female name
Ampofo Ampofowaa
Kyei Kyeiwaa
Antwi Antwiwaa
ado Adobea
Ofei Ofeibea

These distinctions of names can also be seen in many western countries as well. For example,
Alexander/Alexandra, Andrew/Andrea, Charlie/Charlotte, Felix/Felicity etc.
Keeping in mind the Akan names given above make a list of names from the Pakistani context of
males with their female counterparts.
Question:

It is said that culture is a kind of linguistic index that contains general

directives of human actions. Elaborate
Answer:
Language as a Human Attribute:
Language sets people apart from all other creatures. Every known human society has had a language and
though some nonhumans may be able to communicate with one another in fairly complex ways, none of
their communication systems begins to approach language in its ability to convey information. Nor is the
transmission of complex and varied information such an integral part of the everyday lives of other
creatures. Nor do other communication systems share many of the design features of human
language, such as the ability to communicate about events other than in the here and now. But it is
difficult to conceive of a human society without a language.

Language, like culture, that other most human attribute, is notable for its unity in diversity: there are
many languages and many cultures, all different but all fundamentally the same, because there is one
human nature and because a fundamental property of this human nature is the way in which it allows such
diversity in both language and culture.
How Many Languages
How many different languages are there? First we must know how to count them, how to
distinguish one language from another. Linguists usually say that language A and language B are
distinct if a speaker of A and a speaker of B cannot understand each other. This is reminiscent of
how biologists define distinctness in biological species, based on whether they may produce
fertile offspring. According to this criterion of mutual intelligibility, there are about seven
thousand distinct languages in the world today (many fewer than there were even a few decades
ago, numerous indigenous languages and cultures having been lost to globalization and pressure
from larger societies).
Language diversity is attested from earliest recorded history. The story of the tower of Babel was
an attempt to explain the diversity of human language. The ancient Greeks called
foreigners barbaroi, because the speech of all non-Greeks sounded to them like a babbling
noise barbar. Certainly, to a monolingual speaker of English, even a fairly closely related
language like Swedish or Dutch is completely incomprehensible, let alone a more distantly
related language like Hindi or Russian, or completely unrelated languages like Japanese or
Mohawk. Yet, despite the seemingly vast differences between them, all natural human languages
are alike in their basic structural design; they are all instances of a single entity, human language.
Language and Linguistics
It is impossible to separate language from literature, or politics, or most of our everyday human
interactions. In this article, though, discussion is centered on language structure rather than how it is put
to use in human society. Accordingly, language is treated almost exclusively from the point of view
of linguistics, and the article concentrates on what we have learned about language from that discipline
over the last two centuries. Linguists study individual human languages and linguistic behavior in order to
discover the fundamental properties of this general human language. Through this enterprise, they also
hope to discover some fundamental aspects of what it means to be human. The importance of language
and languages goes far beyond internal structure, extending to almost all human endeavors.
Language, being a human activity, is social in nature; hence, linguistics is usually classified as a social
science. Because languages can only be studied through human behavior, linguistics, like psychology, is
further classified as a behavioral science; and because language is essentially mental, linguistics is also
a cognitive science.
There are many ways to study language scientifically. The most traditional, with its roots going back
thousands of years to the Classical Greek and even Classical Sanskrit grammarians, is called Descriptive
Linguistics. Its goal is to provide an explicit description of a language (often called a grammar), either in
whole or in part (for example, a description of the sound system of Swahili). A linguist's grammar,
though, unlike those some may remember from school, is never prescriptive: it does not dictate how a
language should be (proper language) but instead draws on the actual linguistic behavior of speakers.
Often, a descriptive linguist, especially one working on one of the many less-studied languages, will
spend considerable time in the field, learning from the speakers of the language and sometimes writing
the language down for the first time. Theoretical Linguistics, of which there are many varieties, seeks to
provide explicit general principles that are applicable to all languages, often drawing on descriptive
grammars. Within both descriptive and theoretical linguistics, historical linguistics is devoted to the study
of how languages change over time. Sociolinguistics treats the broad question of language in society and
includes the study of dialects. Psycholinguistics uses the methods of experimental psychology with
language as the primary source of data. Child Language Acquisition is devoted to learning how children
acquire language early in life. Neurolinguistics addresses the relationship between language and
the brain. Computational Linguistics deals with the interaction of computers and language, for such
purposes as Speech Synthesis, the production of artificial speech from written text, or Speech
Recognition, the conversion of speech to text, or parsing, the automatic description of the grammatical
structure of a text.
Written Language and Spoken Language
Most people think of a language as primarily written. Indeed, when a person studies a language
in school, they usually study the written language, either literature (texts written in the language)
or composition (in which the students compose their own written texts). Spoken language is
given second place in schools and universities, except at the very elementary level of foreign
language study. What set modern linguistics apart, beginning in the nineteenth century, was the
realization that the opposite is true: language is primarily spoken and written language is an
imperfect reflection of spoken language, conveyed through a fairly new and imperfect
technology, writing.

The main evidence behind this conclusion is the fact that every human society has a fully
functioning spoken language while, until a century ago, only a very few societies had a written
language and even then, literacy was, again until recently, confined only to a small class of
people. Furthermore, the few writing systems that existed prior to the twentieth century all owed
their origins to three or four quite recent inventions, none much more than five thousand years
old, while many scholars believe that human language evolved at least 50,000 years ago. All of
these writing systems arose in early materially advanced state-like societies. These inventions
include Sumerian cuneiform and Egyptian hieroglyphic writing in the Middle East (likely related
to one another century). The alphabet, the most widely used of modern writing systems, was an
adaptation by Semitic-speaking people of aspects of the Egyptian system. It is
therefore spoken language that is common to all human societies.
Spoken language comes naturally to all normal human children: expose a normal young human
child to any language from a very early age and the child will fully master the language without
any overt instruction, while it is very difficult for most humans to acquire a new language after a
certain age (generally around puberty). It is as if young human children came preprogrammed to
acquire a spoken language (something that many though not all linguists believe). Written
language, by contrast, must be overtly taught; it is never learned effortlessly, and rarely perfectly.
Language Equality
If all societies have languages then we may begin to ask in what ways all these languages differ
from one another and in what ways they are similar. The first question, asked very early on in the
history of the modern study of language, was whether one language is more advanced or evolved
or complex than another. The answer is no: there is no obvious way to rank languages on some
evolutionary scale: all languages appear to be equal in their expressive capacities. Some
languages may have more words than others or may have words for certain notions that are not
conventionalized in other languages but no language is inherently incapable of expressing a
given proposition. This realization of the equality of natural languages was in turn important in
the realization that all humans are equal, regardless of the material, social, economic, and
political complexity of the society in which they live. We know that members of the materially
most simple societies are equal to members of the materially most advanced societies in no small
part because we can find no convincing evidence that the language of one is more advanced than
the language of the other.
What languages have in common
What all spoken languages share are certain very general structural properties. Every language
has a grammar with the following components: meaningful units akin to words (lexemes) and
other grammatical markers; a sound system (Phonetics and Phonology); a system for arranging
the meaningful units into sentences (Syntax); another for arranging the internal parts of words
(Morphology); another for interpreting the meanings of utterances (Semantics); and principles
for using language in actual discourse (Pragmatics). The boundaries between these systems are
not always clear. The study of phonetics, for example, deals with the more physical properties of
speech, its relation to both acoustics and physiology, while phonology treats sounds more as
abstractions, but there is no way to draw a sharp line between them.
The sound systems of all languages are very similar in their basic design. In each, we can isolate
a small number of distinctive speech sounds or phonemes, ranging from as low as eleven
(Hawaiian) to over sixty (some languages of the Caucasus) . Phonemes by themselves have no
meaning, but they combine into syllables and then into words, which are then assigned meanings
or values by social convention. Thus, English speakers may combine the three phonemes /n/, /k/,
and /i/ to form the three English words ink, kin, and nick, which have the meanings they have
because speakers of English agree that they do. The three words are not related to one another in
meaning, only in form. Nor are all combinations of these three phonemes permissible. The sound
patterns of English prevent the existence of /nki/, /kni/, and /ikn/, though another language might
permit one or more of these combinations; in both German and Russian, for example, words may
begin with /kn/ and English once permitted this sequence, as we can tell from the spelling of
words like knight and know, which is a relic of this old system. Even sign languages, though they
use hand configurations, locations and movements instead of consonants and vowels, have units
equivalent to phonemes.
Every language has its own distinctive system of patterns that make up the phonological system
of that language. In some, the syllable type is highly restricted. Japanese syllables, for example,
almost always end in a vowel or in /n/; a Japanese syllable may end in a consonant only if it is
identical to the beginning consonant of the following syllable (like the first [p] in Nippon). This
strict syllable structure is revealed very nicely when an English word is borrowed into Japanese,
as with many baseball terms. The English word strike, for example, which has only one syllable,
has five syllables in Japanese (/su-tu-ra-i-ku/), because each consonant must have its own
syllable, and there can only be one vowel sound in any syllable. Note that the letter "i" in English
is actually pronounced /ay/ and so contains a consonant. Similarly, the word baseball has four
syllables in Japanese. English allows fairly complex syllables, by the standards of most
languages: the word sixths ends in four consecutive consonants (since "x" is actually two: [ks]).
But Georgian easily beats that: the word prckvnis 'he peels it' begins with five consonants
and gvprckvnis 'he peels us' begins with seven!
All languages have words but the complexity of words varies just as widely as that of syllables.
Again, English lies somewhere in the middle. The word de-institution-al-iz-ation (which is here
broken down into its constituent meaningful parts (or morphemes) by means of hyphens) means
'the release of institutionalized individuals from institutional care (as in a psychiatric hospital) to
care in the community' according to Merriam-Webster Online and it is easy to intuit how this
meaning is derived from the meanings of its five parts, though it would take a good deal of space
to explicate precisely how these parts are combined. Many English words have a number of
meaningful internal parts, prefixes and suffixes. Vietnamese, by contrast, has almost no complex
words, except for compounds in which two whole words are combined to form another, similarly
to English words like doghouse or catbird. But in many languages of North America, an entire
sentence can be expressed in a single word, as in the Inuktitut (Eskimo)
word iqqanaijaaqajjaagunniiqtutit 'you won't have any work anymore' (from a Canadian
Broadcasting Corporation piece on official language policy in the northern Canadian territory of
Nunavut, where Inuktitut is the language of the vast majority of people and the official language
of local government).
All languages have sentences; both the basic building blocks (parts of speech like nouns and
verbs) and the systems for constructing sentences out of these building blocks are very similar
across languages: there is no language without nouns and verbs and pronouns, though other
categories, like adjectives and adverbs, are not universal. Basic sentence structure is quite
uniform across languages, consisting of a subject and a predicate, with the essential ingredient
of the subject being a noun phrase and that of the predicate usually a verb phrase. Within the
verb phrase, all languages have transitive verbs with an object, which again is usually a noun
phrase, exactly the same as the subject in its basic internal structure. Where languages differ is in
the order of the subject (S), object (O), and verb (V), though S precedes O in almost all
languages. The most common orders are SVO, as in English, and SOV, as in Japanese. Biblical
Hebrew and Classical Arabic were VSO languages. Languages also differ in the internal
structure of phrases: in English, the adjective precedes the noun it modifies, while most
adjectives follow the noun in Romance languages like Spanish and French. Some languages,
though, like Classical Greek and the Aboriginal languages of Australia, have free word order, so
that any order of the words of a sentence is permissible.
All languages also permit recursion, the possibility of inserting a syntactic category within the
same category. The clearest example of recursion is the insertion of one sentence within another
sentence. Consider the two sentences 'Bill left' and 'Mary said that Bill left'. The second sentence
contains the first one embedded within it. Language permits infinite recursion, at least in theory.
The sentence 'Louise knows that Mary said that Bill left' contains the second sentence; the
sentence 'John claims that Louise knows that Mary said that Bill left' contains the third one; and
so on without end. Of course, no one has ever uttered an infinite sentence, at least not yet, but
simple mathematics tells us that if an infinitely long sentence is possible in principle through the
mechanism of optional recursion, then there must be an infinite number of possible sentences (all
those that contain fewer embedded sentences than this infinitely long one). Of course, in the real
world, no one will ever utter an infinite sentence, but the importance of recursion is not just the
mathematical trick, but rather that it allows languages to have complex utterances through the
combination of simple structures.
At the first level of communication, people who feel that their language is the same, perceiving
no difference in each other's language may be said to speak the same dialect. As we might
expect, dialect differences correlate not only with geography, but also with social distinctions
like class and ethnicity. Dialects thus serve the function of allowing us to recognize members of
our own social group from characteristics of their speech. As mentioned at the beginning of this
article, dialects may be grouped into languages based on mutual intelligibility. As long as two
speakers understand one another, they speak the same language, from a purely linguistic point of
view. But when most people talk about languages, they do not mean purely linguistic constructs.
First of all, modern language identity depends on writing. A person from the heart of Glasgow,
another from the heart of Jamaica, and a third from the mountains of West Virginia, put together
in a room, will not find it easy to hold a conversation, yet all will declare that their native tongue
is one and the same, because they all share a written language, written English. The same is true
of Chinese, the speakers of which share a single written language, though they speak a dozen or
so completely distinct spoken languages from a purely linguistic point of view, usually referred
to as Chinese dialects. By contrast, a speaker of Hindi from Delhi and a speaker of Urdu from
Islamabad will vehemently insist that they speak different languages, even though they
understand each other perfectly, because the two languages are written in different alphabets,
and, perhaps more importantly, are associated with different religious and national identities.
From a purely linguistic point of view, based on intelligibility however, these two people speak
the same language.
Regular Language Change
Related to the fact that everyone speaks their own language is the fact that spoken languages
change inexorably. Despite the efforts of governments and academies over millennia and the
cries of the purists, all languages change and, because they are such highly structured systems,
they do so in very orderly fashion. The most notable type of language change, the discovery of
which was the starting point of modern linguistic science, is sound change. We can see evidence
for the regularity of sound change in English spelling. One of the most noticeable peculiarities of
this system is the proliferation of silent letters. Why do we have a silent letter <k>
in knight, know, knee, and knave and many other words? The answer is that this silent letter was
fully pronounced up until about the time of Shakespeare, but that it was lost through sound
change (along with the now silent <g> in gnarly, gnaw, and other similar words). The regularity
of this sound change is demonstrated by the fact that there are no <kn> or <gn> words in which
the first letter is pronounced. The same is true for all the silent final <e> letters. They were once
fully pronounced.
The regularity of sound change can also readily be seen by comparing the ways in which two
languages that share a common ancestor have diverged over time. English and Greek are related,
being descended from a common ancestor that we now call Indo-European, spoken some five
thousand years ago. We have no evidence of this ancestor other than the many languages
descended from it that quite quickly stretched from India to Iceland, and in the modern world
now span the globe. We can see the relationship by comparing words that begin with /p/ in Greek
and /f/ in English. Compare Greek /pater/ 'father' with English father, /penta/ with five , /pod/
'foot' with foot. Linguists say that we have here a regular sound correspondence. But if we
compare other words in the two languages, we will find other sound correspondences: Greek /k/
corresponds to English /h/: compare Greek /kuon/ 'dog' and /kardia/ 'heart' with
English hound and heart. And there are many more such sound correspondences. We can use
these both to show that two languages are related and even to reconstruct what their common
ancestor must have sounded like. But all this is because of the regularity of sound change,
something that all human languages share.
Conclusion
There is much more to be said about the unity in diversity of human languages. All languages are
manifestations of the single phenomenon, language, that most characteristic of human attributes.
Question:
Define in detail the complex phenomena of ‘Context’ in Language and
Culture Studies.
Answer:
Context in Language:
In communication and composition, context refers to the words and sentences that surround any
part of a discourse and that helps to determine its meaning. Sometimes called linguistic context.
In a broader sense, context may refer to any aspects of an occasion in which a speech-act takes
place, including the social setting and the status of both the speaker and the person who's
addressed. Sometimes called social context.
"Our choice of words is constrained by the context in which we use the language. Our personal
thoughts are shaped by those of others," says author Claire Kramsch.
Observations:

"In common use, almost every word has many shades of meaning, and therefore needs to be
interpreted by the context," says textbook writer Alfred Marshall.

"The mistake is to think of words as entities. They depend for their force, and also for their
meaning, on emotional associations and historical overtones, and derive much of their effect
from the impact of the whole passage in which they occur. Taken out of their context, they are
falsified. I have suffered a great deal from writers who have quoted this or that sentence of mine
either out of its context or in juxtaposition to some incongruous matter which quite distorted my
meaning, or destroyed it altogether," says Alfred North Whitehead, British mathematician, and
philosopher.

Text and Context

"[British linguist M.A.K. Halliday] maintains that meaning should be analyzed not only within
the linguistic system but also taking into account the social system in which it occurs. In order to
accomplish this task, both text and context must be considered. Context is a crucial ingredient in
Halliday's framework: Based on the context, people make predictions about the meanings
of utterances," says Patricia Mayes, Ph.D., an associate professor of English at the University of
Wisconsin-Milwaukee.
The Linguistic and Nonlinguistic Dimensions of Context

According to the book, "Rethinking Context: Language as an Interactive Phenomenon," "Recent

work in a number of different fields has called into question the adequacy of earlier definitions of
context in favor of a more dynamic view of the relationship between linguistic and non-linguistic
dimensions of communicative events. Instead of viewing context as a set of variables that
statically surround strips of talk, context and talk are now argued to stand in a mutually reflexive
relationship to each other, with talk, and the interpretive work it generates, shaping context as
much as context shapes talk."

"Language is not merely a set of unrelated sounds, clauses, rules, and meanings; it is a total
coherent system of these integrating with each other, and with behavior, context, universe of
discourse, and observer perspective," says American linguist and anthropologist Kenneth L.
Pike.
Vygotsky's Influence on Studies of Context in Language Use
According to writer, Larry W. Smith, "Although [Belarusian psychologist Lev] Vygotsky did not
write extensively specifically about the concept of context, all of his work implies the
importance of context both at the level of individual speech acts (whether in inner speech or
social dialogue) and at the level of historical and cultural patterns of language use. Vygotsky's
work (as well as that of others) has been an impetus in the development of the recognition of the
need to pay close attention to context in studies of language use. For example, an interactionist
approach following Vygotsky is readily compatible with recent developments in such linguistics-
and language-associated fields as sociolinguistics, discourse analysis, pragmatics, and the
ethnography of communication precisely because Vygotsky recognized the importance of both
immediate contextual constraints and the wider social, historical, and cultural conditions of
language use."

Question:
What is mother tongue? Explain with reference to Skutnabb-Kangas
definition criteria. Explain in detail with appropriate examples the
significance of mother tongue in developing identity
Answer:
Mother tongue:
Definition:
The language which a person has grown up speaking from early childhood.
The term "mother tongue" refers to a person's native language — that is, a language learned from
birth. Also called a first language, dominant language, home language, and native
tongue (although these terms are not necessarily synonymous). 

Contemporary linguists and educators commonly use the term L1 to refer to a first or native
language (the mother tongue) and the term L2 to refer to a second language or a foreign language
that's being studied,

Culture and Mother Tongue

"It is the language community of the mother tongue, the language spoken in a region, which
enables the process of enculturation, the growing of an individual into a particular system
of linguistic perception of the world and participation in the centuries-old history of linguistic
production."
"Cultural power can...backfire when the choices of those who embrace Americanness in
language, accent, dress, or choice of entertainment stir resentment in those who do not. Every
time an Indian adopts an American accent and curbs his 'mother tongue influence,' as the call
centers label it, hoping to land a job, it seems more deviant, and frustrating, to have only an
Indian accent."
Myth and Ideology
"The notion of 'mother tongue' is thus a mixture of myth and ideology. The family is not
necessarily the place where languages are transmitted, and sometimes we observe breaks in
transmission, often translated by a change of language, with children acquiring as first language
the one that dominates in the milieu. This phenomenon...concerns all multilingual situations and
most of the situations of migration."
Mother Tongue The majority of authors relate the concept of mother tongue with the first
language learned and/or the language used in the home, and this plays a vital role in how people
understand the term. Skutnabb-Kangas identifies four possible criteria that could help in defining
the term namely origin, identification, competence and function which can be seen from the table
given below:
CRITERION DEFINITION
1 ORIGIN the language one learned first
2 IDENTIFICATION a. internal a. the language one identifies with b. external b. the language
one is identified as a native speaker of by others
3 COMPETENCE the language one knows best 34
4 FUNCTION the language one uses most
 Skutnabb-Kangas Four Possible Mother Tongue Definition Criteria (2008) These definitions are
taken in various combinations depending on the context they are applied in. Generally, for
linguistic majorities all criteria work side by side as for example, in the case of Francophones in
Quebec. However, Skutnabb-Kangas clarifies that the definitions by competence and function
may not be appropriate for linguistic minorities who live, work, and/or receive submersion
education (only/entirely in the majority language) in the majority language.
Therefore, mother tongue can be defined by origin and internal identification (without any
influence of external factors). However, there are exceptions like in the case of forcibly
assimilated (people who are forced to adopt a certain culture, etc.) indigenous individuals
(existing naturally in their adopted cultures, etc.) whose traditional language was never passed
down to them from a parent or grandparent generation; in this case it is not their first language
but it may become their mother tongue that they do not have any competence (expertise) in.
Individuals can have more than one mother tongue, and that mother change can change based on
all the definitions discussed above except origin - given that identification is one criteria;
universally and ‘fairly’ applicable that is taken into account when defining the mother tongue.
Some theorists believe that our interpretation of reality; how we understand our reality is
governed by language but most claim that language only has an influence on how we perceive
reality.
For instance, French grammar assigns masculine and feminine gender to all nouns while the
Plain Cree language does not make this distinction and incorporates another classification system
where nouns are indexed as being animate or inanimate; objects such as trees and rocks are
considered animate - reflecting the Plains Cree cultural belief that natural elements have a spirit
or life. The way these categories and classification are used is a surprise for the speakers of
European languages. Thus, there is a difference in the perception of French and Pain Cree
language speakers; their perception depends on how their languages are structured. This would
also make sense if we look at it in reverse; perception and cultural beliefs are encoded in the
language. Hence, it can be said that the language that has always been linked with a given ethno-
culture is able to name the artifacts and formulate or express the interests, values and worldviews
of that culture. In other words, it can be deduced that a nation’s language is a system of thought
and expression relevant to that nation and their view of the universe. The close bond formulated
between a specific language and culture implies that ethnic identity is rooted in the language
traditionally linked with the speakers of that particular language and culture.

Mother tongue learning

The importance of mother tongue language in education
A consequence of the ever-increasing popularity of international schools is the growth in the
number of children learning in a language other than their first. This can open opportunities for
the individual but, as Carolyn Savage  explains, continuing to develop the mother tongue is vital
to enhance learning.
Importance of first language
We are living in a time of unprecedented travel, with technological advances and globalization
offering more and more people the opportunity to explore and live in cultures that are not their
own. International schools have been established for decades now and are rapidly growing in
popularity, particularly amongst local populations, as they offer easier access to higher education
opportunities around the world. As a consequence, the number of children learning in a language
other than their mother tongue is growing rapidly.
Research indicates that having a strong mother tongue foundation leads to a much better
understanding of the curriculum as well as a more positive attitude towards school, so it’s vital
that children maintain their first language when they begin schooling in a different language.
Developing the mother tongue
When children develop their mother tongue, they are simultaneously fostering a whole host of
other essential skills, such as critical thinking and literacy skills. It is this skill-set that they take
with them into formal education, and research tells us that any skills and concepts gained in the
learner’s home language don’t need to be re-taught when they transfer to a second language. For
example, if a child has developed the ability to guess the meaning of a word through its context
or to infer meaning by reading between the lines, these skills are easily transferred when they
begin studying in a second language. It is much harder, however, to teach these abstract skills
directly through a second language.
It’s also well known that a strong mother tongue foundation equips children with the skills they
need to learn additional languages, allowing them to transfer their understanding of the structure
of language to several new languages. The intuitive understanding of grammar that develops
when children learn their first language can easily be passed on to other languages. With
multilingualism becoming an increasingly sought-after attribute within the workplace, this
advantage cannot be overstated. Globalization and increased co-operation between nations
mean that, in many organisations, it has become a requirement to have language skills in
addition to being a specialist within a particular field.
Language and mother tongue also play a huge role in the development of personal, social and
cultural identity. Children with a strong foundation in their first language often display a deeper
understanding of themselves and their place within society, along with an increased sense of
wellbeing and confidence. Naturally, this flows down into every aspect of their lives, including
their academic achievement. 

Question:
What are ‘language Attitudes’ and how are they built? Explain with the help
of appropriate examples.
Answer:
Summary
Language attitudes are evaluative reactions to different language varieties. They reflect, at least
in part, two sequential cognitive processes: social categorization and stereotyping. First, listeners
use linguistic cues (e.g., accent) to infer speakers’ social group membership(s). Second, based on
that categorization, they attribute to speakers stereotypic traits associated with those inferred
group membership(s). Language attitudes are organized along two evaluative dimensions: status
(e.g., intelligent, educated) and solidarity (e.g., friendly, pleasant). Past research has primarily
focused on documenting attitudes toward standard and nonstandard language varieties. Standard
varieties are those that adhere to codified norms defining correct usage in terms of grammar,
pronunciation, and vocabulary, whereas nonstandard varieties are those that depart from such
norms in some manner (e.g., pronunciation). Standard and nonstandard varieties elicit different
evaluative reactions along the status and solidarity dimensions. Status attributions are based
primarily on perceptions of socioeconomic status. Because standard varieties tend to be
associated with dominant socioeconomic groups within a given society, standard speakers are
typically attributed more status than nonstandard speakers. Solidarity attributions tend to be
based on in-group loyalty.
Language is an important symbol of social identity, and people tend to attribute more solidarity
to members of their own linguistic community, especially when that community is characterized
by high or increasing vitality (i.e., status, demographics, institutional support). As a result,
nonstandard language varieties can sometimes possess covert prestige in the speech community
in which they are the speech norms. Language attitudes are socialized early in life. At a very
young age, children tend to prefer their own language variety. However, most (if not all) children
gradually acquire the attitudes of the dominant group, showing a clear status preference for
standard over nonstandard varieties around the first years of formal education and sometimes
much earlier. Language attitudes can be socialized through various agents, including educators,
peers, family, and the media. Because language attitudes are learned, they are inherently prone to
change. Language attitudes may change in response to shifts in intergroup relations and
government language policies, as well as more dynamically as a function of the social
comparative context in which they are evoked. Once evoked, language attitudes can have myriad
behavioral consequences, with negative attitudes typically promoting prejudice, discrimination,
and problematic social interactions.
People have attitudes/feelings/beliefs about language in general, their language, and the language
of other people. They may feel that an unwritten language is not a 'real' language. They may feel
shame when other people hear their language. They may believe that they can only know one
language at a time. They may feel that the national language is the best language for expressing
patriotism, the best way to get a job, the best chance at improving their children's future.
Attitudes cannot be observed directly but are demonstrated through actual behavior – for
example, how people treat speakers of other languages (avoidance, approach), or in their desire
(or not) to learn another language. The convergence of one’s speech to conform to another’s
speech suggests a “positive attitude” toward the other’s speech. By the same token, divergence
suggests an intention for the opposite outcome.
Attitudinal studies aid in identifying how people of one language group view the personal
character and social status of speakers of another language and how they form associations about
other languages. Therefore, the assessment of language attitudes aids in grouping communities
on the basis of their intergroup affinities and, in combination with other methods, in estimating
potential extensibility of materials.
Since attitudes cannot be studied directly, the assessment of language attitudes requires asking
such questions about other aspects of life. For example, a person can be asked about their
opinion of a person whose speech sample they just heard. The responses reveal attitudes about
both people and their language. Opinions and attitudes are noted about how those being
interviewed might be willing to accommodate to the people and languages that they just heard on
the recordings. Language attitudes can be identified by simply asking why certain languages are
in use (or not). For example:
 For what activities is the first language thought to be inadequate? Give reasons.
 For what activities is the second or third language not thought to be adequate? Give
reasons.
 Is it “good’ to speak X language? Why?
 Could someone who speaks only X language get a good job? Why?
 What language do you think that God likes? Why?
 Would you ever use (L2, trade language, national) for…funeral, singing, etc.
 Can you think of a situation in which it is best not to use your mother tongue? Why?
 What is the most useful language to know around here? Give reasons.
Attitudes are personal beliefs, but there are patterns of attitudes throughout a community. Similar
people will have similar attitudes and a profile of the community can be developed.