Linguistics - Essay Example

Linguistics Essay The same gloss, ‘man’, is frequently given for the elements anthrop and andr. Compare the words anthropocentric and androcentric. How do their meanings differ and what differences between the roots anthrop and andr does this illustrate? What process from the ones discussed in class (metaphor, metonymy, polysemy, etc.) could explain the relation between the two meanings and their glossing as ‘man.’ What specific factor (social, cultural etc.) do you think might be responsible for this type of extension? The two elements anthrop and andr are used in English words having been passed down from Greek originally. We know the element anthrop from such words as anthropology meaning the study of human beings or philanthropist and misanthropist which refer to people who either like their fellow human beings and are kind to them, or hate their fellow human beings and are unkind to them. In the adjective anthropocentric the meaning refers to a tendency to regard human beings as the most important thing in the world, even though there is a much bigger picture which sees human beings as only one part of a complex universe, and by no means the central or most important part. The adjective androcentric also puts humans at the center of the universe, but in this case the meaning of the original Greek element andr specifies that the male of the species is meant. The element andr signifies only a subset of what anthrop signifies, namely the male portion. It is usually contrasted with the element gyn which signifies the female subset of what anthrop signifies. We can say therefore that the two elements anthrop and andr contain elements which have a similar meaning, in so far as they both refer to human beings, but that anthrop is more general, referring to all human beings, while andr is specific, meaning just the male human beings. This distinction explains also the meaning of words like polyandry, literally meaning many men, which signifies the practice in some cultures where one woman has several different permanent sexual partners. The word androgyny contains elements of both male and female, and this illustrates very nicely how a gender specific meaning is attached to the element andr. This explanation of the early origins of the elements anthrop and andr is very clear and straightforward and it works well for English words derived from them. Problems and ambiguities arise, however, when both words are glossed with the English word man. People often say that anthropology is the study of man, or mankind, for example and contrast this with animals or rocks etc. While in Greek anthrop is not exclusively masculine, and refers to human beings, man is very definitely associated with the male. Using the word man to refer to all human beings is an extension of its original meaning. In English there are three genders, male, female, and neuter, but they are not equal in status. Denning et al. hint at this when they define masculine in the glossary: “The masculine is traditionally considered the default gender, so that adjectives… are usually cited in the masculine gender” (p. 289). The key word in this definition is the word “traditionally” because it reveals that language is subject to customs and traditions that have developed over time. There is no syntactic or logical reason to position one or other gender in this position of prominence, but there is a very strong cultural tendency to do so. The English language exists in a culture which regards the male as the “default”, in other words the normal, usual and most important category, while the female is a secondary category. This makes it possible for the word man to be used in a generic way, referring to both men and women, and not in a specific way, referring to only males. Such a process is an example of polysemy creeping into the English gloss, where the one word man carries more than one meaning at the same time. This double meaning was not contained in the original anthrop because it always was intended to refer to both male and female. It would not be possible to use the word woman or womankind in this extended way, because it specifically excludes any male persons. The word woman has not been extended in the same way that the word man has been in English. When we look at the element andr in modern English we see the word android which literally means “like a man.” The Greek element is clearly confined to the narrower meaning of “male human being” but in English science fiction the term android is used to refer to artificial machines, created to look like human beings. The gender is questionable in the case of androids, because some of these machines look male, while others have a very feminine appearance. In literature they can be referred to as “he” or “she” or “it”, depending on the fictional characterization of the machine. Logically, one might have expected the choice of the word “anthropoid” rather than “android” because it is more generic, but language development does not work according to strict logical sequencing. Social, cultural and aesthetic considerations come into play and make some formations more likely than others. We can say that the element andr was widened or generalized to accommodate the modern concept of a humanoid machine. Interestingly, the word robot which is not from Greek at all, and the word droid which is a contraction of the word android are gaining in popularity, perhaps because people are uncomfortable with the masculine connotations of the word android and looking for something more obviously neutral to signify the non-human and ungendered, or differently gendered nature of the machines. The use of man to gloss anthropocentric and androcentric is examples of semantic change. As Denning et al, remind us “changes can be challenging to analyse when they occur in long chains. Any given change is the result of some kind of mental association…” The very specific connotations of male and masculine which attach to the element andr have made the word androcentric almost a term of abuse in some circles. From a feminist perspective, this is word has connotations of an unjustified emphasis on the male, and therefore something to be avoided. The word therefore has acquired negative connotations. It is likely that these terms will be subject to further variation in use, as society struggles further with issues of politics and gender, seeking to redress the current imbalance in favor of the male. Reference Denning, Keith; Brett, Kessler, and Leben, William R. English Vocabulary Elements. Second Edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. Read More