The Concept of Language and Power in the Korean Educational Context - Assignment Example

Assignment 1 Name Date Course Introduction Language is an important tool that gives individuals a fighting chance in the struggle to be heard. It plays an important role in terms of communication and it is also linked to power. Robbins (2001) argues that in the modern society, power is not exercised through the use of force or coercive means. Power is instead used for shaping and controlling the thoughts of others and hence influencing them. Language is also used for the purposes of wining the public support and changing some of the world views. Powerful people in the society are increasingly using language for the purposes of constructing and maintain their power in the society. It is for this reason that Joseph (2006) indicates that language is a social practice by which power relations are established and sustained. Over the years, the institution of marriage has been undergoing a lot of changes. The wording in the marriage vows usually communicate a powerful message which is an indication that power is related to language (Janks, 2010). However, over the years, the wording in the marriage vows has also been undergoing a lot of changes. The paper thus discusses the concept of language and power in the Korean educational context with an example of changes of wording in marriage vows. Discussion Marriage vows as well as the marriage ceremony are considered as an important social situation. Over the centuries, the marriage vows have always been the same and the bride is usually required to promise obedience to the groom. This is usually done through the use the word ‘obey’ in the marriage vows (Mukhopadhyay, 2011). It is a must for the bride to use the word to show her commitment and promise to the groom. Marriage is a social event and the wedding vow is used to express deeply held values such as love and romance and loyalty. Power relations usually exist in the social context. The existence of the power relations is usually reinforced by the use of language. Language can also be used for the purposes of creating and marinating the power in the social context. Power in the social context can be exerted through the absence or presence of textual reference. The language used during communication among the people who are closely related may be loaded with power and authority. According to Joseph, (2006), power can be manifested through the use of language during the social interactions between the individuals. The social practice of language is therefore important in terms of creating as well as maintaining power. The construction of power by the individuals as well as the institutions in the social situations can lead to the changes in the social relationships. Language is mainly used by the individuals and institutions for the purposes of promoting their ideological interests or preserving their authority (Vaidehi, 2013). In an article published by the guardian Newspaper, the wording in the marriage vows will change during the royal marriage of future duchess Cambridge. The article indicates that Kate Middleton who is the princess will not be using the word obey during her royal wedding (Mukhopadhyay, 2011). The word has traditionally been used in the church as well as outside the church during weddings. The brides have always used the marriage vows with the word obey without raising any objection.To most people, the use of the word obey indicates that the bride is fully committed to the groom and will respect the husband at all times. The word has always been used in the other royal weddings as part of the British tradition. However, the article indicates that the mother in laws of the princes also changed the wording in the wedding vows and the word obey was not used. The change in the wording of the marriage vows has been justified by an example where one of the churches also dropped the use of the word (Mukhopadhyay, 2011). The aspect of modernity has also been highlighted in the article. However, the media report indicates that the princess is hardly a modern woman. According to Vaidehi (2013), this is an indication that the change in wording of the marriage vows has nothing to do with the issues of modernity and traditions. The article also indicates that most of the young couples are penning their own marriage vows. Changes are being made to the wedding vows with the young couples editing the traditional marriage vows (Eades, 2006). Power is usually developed through social interactions that are marked by hierarchy and asymmetry (Janks, 2010). The changes in the wedding vows can be interpreted as using the language to create power. A princess under ordinary circumstance is a powerful figure and is obeyed by all the subjects. The princess instead of openly displaying that she is powerful is using language to do so. The marriage vows that contains the words obey is an indication that the wife will be submissive to the husband as opposed to the ordinary meaning of the word. However a princess being a powerful figure does not need to be submissive to anyone including to her husband. According to Crawford (1999), language has therefore been used in the marriage vow for the purposes of indicating that the princess is powerful regardless of whether or not she is married. The omission of the word obey in the wedding vows was done deliberately by the princess in order to create power. This therefore communicates to the people that the princes is still powerful even after marriage and cannot be compelled to obey her husband against her wish. Although the prince is also powerful and needs to be obeyed, the changes in the marriage vow indicate that the princess is also an equal party to the marriage and holds the same power just like the prince. The people who are in power usually use language for the purposes of promoting and constructing their dominance (Miller, 2009). Langue is therefore important in changing how the people perceive and think about social phenomena. The right word at the right place and at the right time is important in terms of expressing power and dominance among individuals as well as institutions. Language is an important powerful tool that is widely used for winning the public support when dealing with different circumstances. The struggle among different communities is a common social problem in the modern society. Private as well as public discourse is usually used for the purposes of expressing power and dominance (Janks, 2010). The media in most cases usually use language for the purposes of expressing power and dominance when dealing with the social issues. However, the use of language has the potential of causing misunderstanding among the people. It may also distort the facts related top power in a quest to express dominance. The princess in the article appears to have the power to define and to make the issue stick. The presence of such powers is an indication that the individual has political power. The creation of new terms is an indication that power is being created through the use of language. This means that anyone who is capable of creating new terms holds some form of power. The changing of the marriage vows leads to the creation of new terms. This is an indication that language was being used by the princess for the purposes of creating power. The right words when used can play an important role in terms of creating power by the individuals as well as institutions (Menard-Warwick n.d). The introduction of a new term can be used for the purposes of legitimizing certain actions which are aimed at creating power. Language has also been used by different institutions for the purposes of creating power. The governments in different parts of the world have used language for creating power and portraying dominance in order to gather public support. The United States Government mainly utilizes language for the purposes of promoting its foreign policies (Miller, 2009). For instance, world war on terror has been used to portray some of the movements as villains in order to gather public support for military action. The government for instance used the word homicide bombers when describing the Palestinian men and women who were blowing themselves up in public places. This delegitimizes the actions of the bombers as well as the actions of the Palestinian cause for an independent state. The language used has therefore influences the public opinion (Eades, 2006). The diplomats in most instances use language for the purposes of showing that their country is powerful or for the purposes of maintaining the power dominance of their country. The use of language to create and maintain power has thus been copied by the individuals for their own personal gains. The use of language to create power has both positive and negative impacts on the ordinary people. Most of the ordinary people find themselves at a disadvantage when language is used to create power. Language is therefore a powerful tool that is closely related to power and it is continually being used in different institutions (Robbins, 2001). Conclusion In conclusion it is evident that language can be used for the purposes of creating as well as maintaining power. Both the individuals as well as institutions can use language for creating and marinating power. The public opinion is usually influenced through the use of language and hence leading to the creation o power. It is evident that the princess used language for the purposes of maintain power. This was after she deliberately changed the wording in the marriage vows. It is evident that the changes created a lot of opinions among the members of the public. The use of language for creating and maintaining power may however lead to different opinions. It is evident that the right words needs to be used in order to ensure that power is created. List of References Crawford, A. 1999, We can’t all understand the white’s Language” An analysis of monolingual heal services in a multilingual society, International Journal of the Sociology of Language, Vol. 136, pp. 27-45. Eades, D, 2006, Lexical struggle in court: Aboriginal Australians versus the state. Journal of Sociolinguistics 10/2, 2006: 153^180. Guinea Society. American Anthropologist; 103, 4; Academic Research Library pg. 901. Guinea Society. American Anthropologist 103(4) 901-912. Janks, H. 2010, Literacy and Power, Routledge, New York. Janks, H. 2010, Literacy and Power, Routledge, N.Y. pp. 35-60 Robbins, J., 2001, God is nothing but talk: modernity, language, and prayer in a Papua New Joseph, J. 2006, Language and Politics, Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh. Robbins, J. 2001, God Is Nothing but Talk: Modernity, Language, and Prayer in a Papua New Miller, V. 2009, Introduction to the Power Matrix, JASS Associates. Menard-Warwick, J. The World Doesn’t End at the Corner of their Street: Language ideologies of Chilean English Teachers. Mukhopadhyay, S, 2011, Kate Middleton’s Wedding Vows: What’s in a word, The Guardian. Retrieved on 31th August 2015 from, . Vaidehi, R., 2013, Language Policies and (Dis) Citizenship: Rights, Access, Pedagogies. Read More