Language and Power - Literature review Example

Language and power Name of the Student: Name of the Instructor: Name of the course: Code of the course: Submission date: Language and power The concept of power has been linked to language in different societies around the globe by diverse scholars. This is founded on the understanding and rationale that based on the fact that power occupies a core niche in the efforts to understand the society, then it is integral to gain a comprehensive understanding of the language as one of the core means through which power is conveyed, produced and eventually reproduced (Thomas et. al., 2004). The analysis of language and power is propelled by the need to understand power, not from an individual perspective, but rather in a sociological version of power. This is central in understanding where power comes from and the nature of its social construction and maintenance. In addition, this latter approach triggers an understanding of the operations of power in groups where language is utilized in the formation, organization, conducting and ending conflicts with other groups (Sutton, 2010). Against this backdrop, this paper will focus on different realms that exhibit the relationship between language and power, for instance, in politics, legal systems, gender relations and medical contexts among others. This will entail analysis of key texts in each section aimed at generating a comprehensive understanding of the language and power correlations in these contexts. Unit 2: The Politics of Language This analysis will focus on the work Overview: How Politics Permeates Language (and vice versa) by Joseph (2006). This work is founded on the hypothesis that actually, language possesses a political dimension, a notion which is shared by diverse scholars from different field of applied linguistics. Perhaps the most profound correlation between language and politics is epitomized in the utility of language by the people who are in power, or aiming to achieve power to achieve their predetermined ends. In a traditional perspective, this is evident in realms of rhetoric while in the contemporary world, this is evidenced by the link between control and propaganda (Joseph, 2006).The close connection between language and politics is also evidenced by the fact that there is usually an atmosphere of contention of which particular region is credited for being the cradle of a particular language and how this language has evolved through diverse epochs, for instance, English. In this regard, Joseph (2006) determined that the discourse of who actually has the absolute authority of a specific language as well as the boundaries of this language is a political-linguistic issue. Lastly, language assumes a political dimension in a bilingual or multilingual region whereby there is usually a contention when one language is chosen over another to be used in prestigious functions. Thus, Joseph (2006) noted that the ultimate choice of which language to use in specific circumstances makes language a political matter. In addition, the context of the policing the use of certain language aimed at ensuring social order in realms like education makes language a political issue. Thus, the fact that language is related to how people live, relate to each other and adjudicate their issues cement the fact that language is political. Unit 3: language, power and medical contexts Crawford (1999) cited that the discourse of language is also evident in the medical context which is centered on the power relations between patients and the medical practitioners. This anomaly is further amplified in the western biomedical model whereby there is inherent disregard of the patient’s construction of his/her illness in favor of the doctor’s gaze at the patient which is often considered as ‘objective’. In this regard, the interpretive language of the doctor becomes paramount over that of the patient and evidence has revealed that this approach usually goes wrong in multiple ways. The above fact is supported by Minas (1990) who determined that the construction of illness is rarely a simplistic contemplation of the disease process but rather, encompasses an entire maze of the profound meanings for the sufferer in psychological, emotional as well as social perspectives. This reveals a close correlation between language and power in the medical realms. The context of language power in the medical context is also epitomized in societies where the doctor neither speaks nor understands the language of the patient. In this case, the service of an interpreter is called for, but in most cases, the interpreter censors the discourse from the patient, isolating a key complaint that can be easily translated into a medical terminology understandable to the doctor (Crawford, 1999). This evidences a greater focus on the elevated power of the interpreter and the doctor at the expense of the patient in linguistic terms. Lastly, Katon and Klainman (1980) noted inconsistencies in the level of understanding on the part of the interpreters in South Africa regarding the cultural medical concepts of the local folks, their norms and indigenous concepts and thus their interpretation is divorced from the native perspective of the patient. This culminates in loss of imperative information in the interpretation process which further evidences the close link between language and power in the medical perspective. Unit 4 language, power and the legal system The relationship between language and power is also evident in the legal systems in diverse societies whereby the choice of words to be used in the litigation process plays an integral role in the confrontational legal system (Eades, 2006). This situation is usually graverduring the cross-examination process where the lawyers make extensive efforts to discredit the witness(s) recounts. This fact was evidenced in Australia during the Pinkenba case. The victims (3 aboriginal boys) lacked any formal education to sharpen their linguistic competence used in the courtrooms and thus, the cross-examining lawyers used their extensive linguistic strategies to discredit, falsify and manipulate the evidence by these boys. Eades (2002) went further to argue that the conscious exploitation of the cultural diversity in communication was core to the defense strategy in the aforementioned case. This culminated in a verdict being arrived at by the jury that the boys were not abducted but they were rather unruly street kids. Thus, the above case evidences the power of language in the choice of words in the legal systems. In addition, there is usually a context of labeling whereby the lawyers are usually trained on the ways to control the way that events and people are perceived with precise choice of labels. This gives them an upper hand in the course of cross-examination whereby they use this against their witnesses in the course of litigation. Lastly, Drew (1992) puts into utility the term ‘alternative description’ to denote a common strategy in the courtrooms to alter the descriptions by witnesses or changing a particular state of affairs. This reveals an extensive language-power relation in the legal system. Unit 5 Language ideologies It is imperative to point that modernity has been for some time been characterized as a culture (Robbins, 2001). In this regard, the struggle with modernity has in imperative respects been a struggle with the modern ideas about language. This is based on the fact that language is a central and rudimentary element to the everyday life and so is the also any effort, whether conscious or unconscious, whether modern or not aimed at its reconstruction. The context of language ideology is exemplified in religious practices of the Urapman people in Papua New Guinea who have extensively embraced the tenets of Christianity. As Robbins (2001) noted, there is a tendency among the Christians to handle speech in a generic perspective and extensively rejects formal rituals, thus resulting to the perception that Christianity is a religion that is almost comprehensively constituted of language. Nonetheless, despite their eventual conversion of the Urapman people to Christianity, they still have a clear distinction between speech (weng) and action (kemin). Consequently, they highly regard and exhibit more value on action over speech and continuously cling to their rituals preferences in the Christian worship. Thus, despite their commitment to Christianity, many of the people in this society struggle with the reliance on speech as opposed to the ritual action. On the contrary, the modern linguistic ideology which is embedded in the Christian religion binds meanings, intentions and truthfulness together which is entrenched in the ethnography of modernity which is commonly referred to as philosophy of language. Against this backdrop, Shapmin (1994) and Luhmann (1984) determined that the ideological creation of subjects who are truth-telling was core to the development of modern science, and the language used therein. The prominence of modern religious and scientific linguistic ideology underpinned above portrays the power in language in modern times when juxtaposed with prominence of actions and rituals in the traditional set-up and the struggle to blend the two paradigms. Unit 6: Language and gender Newman et. al. (2008) cited that the diversity in the ways that women and men put language into utility has been an interesting discourse for a long time. The aspects of language and power have also been perceived to be entrenched in gender relations. This fact is evidenced by Cameron (2005) who cited that there is inherent linguistic gender diversity which is explicitly expounded in terms of far reaching social structures, for instance, divided gendered substructure or male dominance. Despite the diversity among the dominance and the difference scholars in regard to gender and language, both of these schools of thought described the differences in language use between men and women as being the outcomes of early socialization (Cameron, 2005). Thus, the context of gender in the society which is directly influenced by power in terms of domination (mostly male domination) determines how individuals are socialized, how they interact and their eventual language use. Another interaction between gender and language is also evident in the public domain whereby approximately three decades ago, women were denied access to language, speech and literacies which are fundamental in the entry into the public domain, for instance, into political power. Thus, they were segregated in the public realms due to their manner of speaking as well as writing (Cameron, 2005). Despite the fact that even today the public domain which is characterized by immense power still remains heavily under male dominance, scholars have argued that it is implausible to attribute this to the nature of female socialization or the general lack of language skills among women as a group which limits their power in the public domain. In this regard, Cameron (2005) determined that the generic linguistic behavior of the women is an inherent reflection of their understanding that for them to be perceived as ideal society members, they are obliged to put extra efforts in exhibiting their adherence to specific behavioral norms which are tied and endowed with specific symbolic weight (Cameron, 2005). Unit 7 Sound and power Pollard (2003) exemplified this phenomenon using the language of the Rastafari which is an expression of a way of life and philosophy of a movement that developed in Jamaica as a profound response to the socio-economic and political realities which placed the black man at the lowest echelons of the society, deprived of power and recognition. In relation to language and power, the members of the Rastafari movement developed their own language and coined their own words which represented their understanding of reality around them. This is best epitomized by the use of the word ‘downpressed’ in place of ‘oppressed’ to bring out the harmony between meaning and sound. But perhaps the most imperative part of this language is the adoption of the sound /ai/ which Pollard (2003) cited to be the most robust sound in the Rastafarian language. In a rudimentary sense, the meaning of this sound is twofold; firstly ‘I’ (ego) and ‘eye’ (organ associated with sight. Both of these interpretations have a profound meaning, mostly the ‘I’ sound which brings out the link between sound and power (Pollard, 2003). Thus, the development of the language among the Rastafari people is closely tied to power in the sense that the resultant world carried with them a profound meaning of the present reality and the need to rise above the western domination in terms of religion, culture and the overall way of life. Conclusion From the above discourse, it is apparent that there exists an extensive relationship between power and language in different realms that molds the socio-economic, legal and political realities in the society. In addition, it is prudent to note that the manifestation of language and power in these realms occurs at different levels and at different magnitudes. References Cameron, D (2005). Language, gender and sexuality: Current issues and newdirections. Applied Linguistics, 26(4), 482-502. Crawford, A. (1999). We can't all understand the whites’ language': An analysis ofmonolingual health services in a multilingual society.International Journal of theSociology of Language, 136, 27-45. Drew, P (1992). Contested evidence in courtroom cross-examination: The case of atrial for rape. In Paul Drew and John Heritage (eds.) Talk at work: Interaction in Institutional Settings (p. 470-520). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Eades, D (2006). Lexical struggle in court: Aboriginal Australians versus the state.Journal of Sociolinguistics 10(2), 153-180. Eades, D. (2002). Evidence given in unequivocal terms: Gaining consent ofAboriginal young people in court. In Janet Cotterill (ed.) Language in the Legal Process(p. 161-196). Houndmills, U.K.: PalgraveMacmillan. Joseph, J (2006). How politics permeates language (and vice versa). Chapter 1 language and Politics Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Katon, W. & Kleinman, A. (1980). Doctor-Patient negotiation and other social science strategies in patient care. In L. Eisenberg and A. Kleinman (eds.) The Relevance of Social Science for Medicine,. Boston and Seattle: Reidel. Luhmann, N (1984). The Differentiations of advances in Technology: The Genesis of Science. In N. Stehr & V. Meja (eds.) Society and Knowledge: Contemporary Perspectives in the Sociology of Knowledge (p. 103-148). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books. Minas I., (1990). Cross-Cultural Communication in mental health settings. In proceedings of the conference on cross-cultural communications in the health profession, A. Pauwels (ed.). Melbourne: National Centre for Community languages in the Professions, Monash University. Newman, M. L. et. al. (2008). Gender Differences in Language Use:An Analysis of 14,000 Text Samples. Discourse Processes,45, 211–236. Pollard, V. (2003). Sound and Power: The language of the Rastafari. In S. Makoni, G. Smitherman, A. Ball & A. Spears (eds.) Black Linguistics: Language, Society and Politics in Africa and the Americas. London: Routledge. Robbins, J (2001). God is nothing but talk: modernity, language, and prayer in aPapua New Guinea Society. American Anthropologist 103(4), 901-912. Shapmin, S. (1994). A Social history of truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-Century England. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sutton, R. M. (2010). The creative power of language in social cognition and intergroup relations. In H. Giles, S. Reid, & J. Harwood (Eds.), Dynamics of intergroup communication (pp. 105-115). New York: Peter Lang. Thomas, L. et. al., (2004). Language, Society and Power. An Introduction.2nd ed. London: Routledge. Read More