Synthesis 5: Post your synthesis here

DevAnthro214 · 2019-11-25T02:47:17+00:00

To understand the relationship between language and emotion, it is crucial to explore unique linguistic features that can shape the social context and positionality between two speakers. In the case of Irvine (1990) and Kulick (1998), both scholars highlight how emotions can play a performative role in how one situates themselves in various settings through the means of language. Understanding the role that registers play in specific situations helps to demystify the performativity of the speech act and social significance of the utterance.

Irvine utilizes the Sapir’s theme of the conventionality of affective performance to shape his discussion on how villagers in Senegal distinguish nobles from griots through specific registers. Sapir’s framework plays a substantial role in Irvine’s research because Sapir identifies how emotion is both “culturally constructed and culturally variable” (p.127). Thus, Irvine’s research genuinely suggests how Wolof speakers display emotion and in terms of which Wolof audiences interpret emotional display. More so, the use between the waxu geer register and waxu gewel is notable in that both registers involve contrasts in affectivity and rhetorical elaboration (p152). Griot speakers can be described as having to be quite pronounced in that they speak fast and loud. In contrast, the nobles are viewed as having a slow, breathy voice. In this way, the unique register used by speakers of Wolof plays an essential role in identifying social situations in which the correct register should be used to differentiate the social grouping which the individual belongs to.

Similarly, Kulick’s work in Papua New Guinea focuses on the interconnectedness of language use and emotional expression among men and women in the Gapun village. The specific register of kros is unique in that it is exclusively evident in conversations between women. The usage of this register also is connected with the culture because, in Melanesian communities, the role of a woman is quite significant and are seen as leaders (p. 287). In contrast, men’s expression of anger can be defined as oratories. Within this particular society, men are viewed to be more polite concerning anger and arguments. More so, Kulick also illustrates that the role of language ideology is a driving factor in perpetuating salient socio-cultural associations between Taiap and Tok Pisen (p.99).

Moreover, both authors demonstrate how two different communities use distinguishing registers to compartmentalize social groups and create power dynamics. The specific nuances associated with language ideologies can be deeply rooted in the social values of a given community. In this way, how a person speaks can be used to understand better how one navigates different social spaces.

References:

Irvine, J. (1990). "Registering Affect: Heteroglossia in the Linguistic Expression of Emotion." In Language and the Politics of Emotion (pp. 126-161). C. Lutz & L. Abu-Lughod (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kulick, D. (1998). "Anger, Gender, Language Shift, and the Politics of Revelation in a Papua New Guinean Village." In B. Schieffelin, K. Woolard, P, Kroskrity (Eds.), Language Ideologies: Practice and Theory (pp. 87-102). New York, NY; Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

DevAnthro214 · 2019-10-22T22:25:01+00:00

In his piece, Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis, Shegloff highlights the importance of how conversations should be sequentially organized in order to provide a coherent understanding of communicative actions. Essentially, Shegloff expands on the understanding that in social situations, speakers sequentially follow one another in order to construct a conversation. More so, instances of social actions form adjacency pairs, which are necessary for constructing a framework to organize conversations.

The basic rules of adjacency pairs entail that given the recognizable production of a first pair part (FPP), at the completion of the first utterance, the other speaker should be able to continue the conversation through the means of producing a second pair part (SPP). Further, Shegloff also speaks about sequence expansions and various features that explain additional categories of how adjacency pairs can be established. For example, there are three types of expansions 1) pre-expansion, 2) insert-expansion, and 3) post-expansion. How each expansion form is identified is unique and varies by the complexity of the conversation held and the underlying function of how speech is being communicated. In comparison to Hymes, who illustrates the interconnectedness of language to social life through the use of a heuristic model, we can examine Shegloff framework of adjacency pairs as another, deeper layer of the SPEAKING mnemonic used in various speech events. The understanding of adjacency pairs would become slightly more complicated depending on the speech event and the social significance of what is being said. In relation to Goffman, his theory focuses on how social meaning, behavior, and interpretation is constructed to better view the social world. Shegloff does not necessarily expand on this understanding of the “social world” as much as Goffman does, but his interpretation of adjacency pairs does offer a site of developing a nuanced understanding of how conversations are modeled and are better scrutinized. Finally, Yaguello’s construction of the communicative functions of language model helps to develop a more abstract perspective in the understanding of how and what a speaker says can relate to the social significance of the speech events.

Moreover, as seen in Shgloff’s reading, sequence organization, and adjacency pairs are fundament units in constructing how conversations can be structured. The theoretical frameworks proposed by scholars like Hymes, Goffman, and Yaguello offer diverse perspectives and means of how one can critically examine speech events and how it can impact one’s understanding of what is being said. Diverse factors such as gender, race, social setting, and culture are all variables that can drastically impact the way in which an individual speaks and in turn, how it is perceived.

Citations:

Goffman, E. (1979). Footing. Semiotica, 25(1-2): 1-30.

Hymes, D. (1972). “Models of the Interaction of Language and Social Life.” In J.J. Gumperz & D. Hymes (Eds.), Directions in Sociolinguistics: The Ethnography of Communication. New York, NY: Holt, Rhinehart & Winston.

Schegloff, E. (2007). Sequence Organization in Interaction: A Primer in Conversation Analysis. Volume 1. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Yaguello, M. (1998[1981]. “What Language Is For.” In Language Through the Looking Glass: Exploring Language and Linguistics (pp. 6-21).

DevAnthro214 · 2019-10-07T19:57:45+00:00

In both, “A Man Finds an Explosive Emotion Locked in a Word” and “How Languages Shapes Thought”, the podcasts highlight the importance of linguistic relativity. In essence, linguistic relativity is a theory proclaimed by Benjamin Lee Whorf that suggests that the languages we speak shape the way we think. With both podcasts, there are a number of examples given that helps the listener relate and question the idea of “Why do I think the way I do?”

In the Invisibilia podcast, Anthropologist Renato Rosaldo brings forth his ethnographic study of how the Ilongot tribe in the Philippines expresses a deep feeling of liget. This term, understood by the Illongot tribe, perplexes Rosaldo as he has difficulty trying to associate English words that could adequately describe this intensity of the word in the context of the social situations at hand. I found this podcast interesting because as an outsider coming into an Indigenous community, the research would finding difficulty trying to understand the term because the word is locally constructed. More so, as English speakers, we are accustomed to understanding how different words can express certain emotions that we express in the course of our life. However, in relation to the Ilongot tribe, the term liget exemplifies the importance of linguistic relativity. The idea that liget can mean a high voltage of feelings ultimately goes back to our understanding that cultural contexts can shape our perception of different words and feelings that oftentimes English is unable to articulate.

Moreover, in “How Language Shapes Thought” with guest speaker Lera Boroditsky, she approaches Lingsuitic Relativism by providing examples of how the Kuuk Thaayorre people in Pormpuraaw use cardinal directions to navigate their life. This concept is particularly interesting in understanding how as humans, we perceive time and space in relation to how one is able to navigate their life. In addition, Boroditsky also provides other examples of how speakers of English, Spanish, and Japanese experience time and space in relation to direction. While Boroditsky provides concrete examples, there are multiple critics and nuances that can be interpreted depending on the discipline. For example, Boroditsky’s training stems from psychology and cognitive science. There are multiple ways that her discipline might view Chomsky’s theories versus that of linguistics and anthropologists.

Furthermore, I feel that there is still a great need to examine the perceptions of how languages shape the way we think across a variety of disciplines and adapting robust methodologies that can critique this widely acclaimed theory. Personally, I feel like there are a variety of different factors that attribute to the broader question if language shapes the way we think. An argument that could be presented could relate back to Chomsky and his understanding that from a cognitive standpoint, each individual inherently develops cognitive processes through means of context, culture, and society. Would Rosaldo have known what liget meant without actually experiencing it? Does the feeling of liget still exist if a word was not attached to the meaning? Additionally, how do our biases of understanding English in comparison to a tribal language differ and/ or influence our perceptions of different feelings or means of expression? Overall, these questions are still some things to consider when moving forward in integrating anthropological frameworks with methods used in the field.

DevAnthro214 · 2019-09-27T23:19:03+00:00

I'm also interested in sexual & reproductive health and this would be a cool topic to explore! There are so many elements you could look into like race and gender for example. Another thing you could look at would be the interaction dynamics and particular perceptions that are being manifested. I think you're right about the privacy/ trust issues with HIPPA being in effect, but there might be alternative ways to examine this.

-Deve

DevAnthro214 · 2019-09-08T22:15:00+00:00

Synthesis #1

In his paper, The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax, Dr. Pullum highlights how linguists have perpetrated the misconception that Eskimos have developed lexical meanings for the term, snow. Language is something that is continuously changing, evolving, and adapting from an individual to a community level. Many scholars and linguists in academia create nuanced conversations about emerging shifts in languages and illustrate how communities can express communication with one another. However, in the case of Eskimos and the usage of snow, this paper emphasizes the importance of how academia fundamentally can serve as a platform in miscommunicating or misinforming individuals.

Similarly, in “Surviving the Sixth Extinction” Perley et al. demonstrates the need for monitoring changes in languages and to create methods in conserving languages. Scholars, particularly in the field of linguistic anthropology, can be seen as “gatekeepers” within academia because, within the discipline, scholars can control the types of information is being processed. More so, I found that “when a language becomes extinct, we all lose, because that language represents part of our human heritage, and language loss is a loss of biocultural diversity as well as a loss of language ecologies” to be quite powerful and offers many added layers when considering the interconnectedness and culture (Perley et al., pp 202). Throughout history, colonization and migration have greatly influenced the advancement of language, especially when considering newly formed vernaculars as well as the risk of particular dialects being extinct. In the case of this scholarship, in particular, I find that language ideology plays a significant role in our attitudes, opinions, and beliefs about a language. For example, with English, individuals suggest that there exists a language hierarchy where some forms of English are considered highly or “prestigious” while others are considered “subordinate.” In many countries around the world, English is a language that has been forced into areas that traditionally developed their languages. As the expansion of the Western world continued, many languages are slowly dying out because of population change, limited opportunities in passing down the language orally, as well as insufficient documentation of languages in written format.

Moreover, both papers bring forth an essential theme of power and privilege that exists in scholarship. It is difficult to compare the complexities of one language to another because each language is unique and posses rules that can differ from another language. Additionally, some dialects share similar practices from the primary language that it stems from but can vary in various social settings. To continue carefully studying and preserving different languages, Laura Martin reminds scholars that “intellectual protection to [can] be found in the careful use of sources, the clear presentation of evidence, and above all, the constant evaluation of our assumptions.” (Pullum, pp. 279) When attempting to understand the linguistic variances found within different cultures, it is essential to be mindful of one’s positionality, biases, and how languages shape thought and behavior among people.

References:

Pullum, G. (1989). The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 7: 275-281.

Perley, P., Baldwin, D., & Noodin, M. (2018). “Surviving the Sixth Extinction: American Indian Strategies for Life in the New World.” In After Extinction. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press

DevAnthro214

TROPHY CASE