ANT253 NOTES

docx

School

University of Toronto *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

253

Subject

Linguistics

Date

Jan 9, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by AgentCloverEel31

ANT253 NOTES – READINGS Week 1: Intro Reading One = Lippi-Green Language ideology or Science Fiction? What is language ideology, and how does it affect our understanding of language? Language ideology is the set of beliefs, attitudes, and values that shape our understanding of language and its role in society. It influences how we perceive different languages, dialects, and accents, and how we use language to construct social identities. Language ideology can also affect language policies and practices, such as language education, language rights, and language planning How do language attitudes and beliefs shape our interactions with others Language attitudes and beliefs can shape our interactions with others in many ways. For example, they can influence our perceptions of people's intelligence, education, social status, and cultural background based on their language use. They can also affect our willingness to communicate with others, our choice of words and expressions, and our interpretation of their messages. Language attitudes and beliefs can lead to linguistic discrimination, prejudice, and stereotypes, which can have negative consequences for individuals and communities Can language be a tool for social change, and if so, how can we harness its power? Yes, language can be a powerful tool for social change. By changing the way we use language, we can challenge and transform social norms, values, and beliefs. For example, we can use language to promote inclusivity, diversity, and equality, to raise awareness of social issues, and to advocate for social justice. We can also use language to empower marginalized groups, to resist dominant ideologies, and to create new forms of identity and community. To harness the power of language for social change, we need to be aware of our own language attitudes and beliefs, to listen to and respect diverse voices and perspectives, and to use language strategically and creatively to achieve our goals This chapter discusses the relationship between language, ideology, and discrimination in the United States. It introduces the concept of language ideology as a set of beliefs, attitudes, and values that shape our understanding of language and its role in society. It also raises crucial questions about the relationship between language and social identity, the mutability of language, and language rights. The chapter emphasizes the importance of establishing common ground based on established facts about language structure and function before exploring these issues. Finally, the chapter highlights the potential of language as a tool for social change and the need to harness its power strategically and creatively.

The chapter introduces the concept of "language ideology" as a set of beliefs, attitudes, and values that shape our understanding of language and its role in society. It also discusses the concept of "language rights" as the rights of individuals to use their own language and to have access to education, employment, and other opportunities regardless of their language background. Additionally, the chapter raises questions about the "mutability" of language, which refers to the extent to which language can or should be changed to meet the needs of individuals or communities. Reading Two: Chapter One How does language shape our social interactions? Language is inherently social and is not just a means through which we act upon the social world; the use of language is itself a form of social action. 3 The language we use can index social relations, identities, or values, "pointing to" such important aspects of the sociocultural world and even creating, reinforcing, or challenging those very relations, identities, or values. 21 For example, the way we address someone (e.g. using formal or informal pronouns) can indicate our level of respect or familiarity with them, and the words we choose to use can reflect our cultural background, social status, or political views. Therefore, language can shape our social interactions by influencing how we perceive and interact with others, as well as how others perceive and interact with us. Can you provide more examples of socially embedded language practices? Certainly! Here are a few examples of how language can be socially embedded and culturally influenced: - Mimicking the voice of a character from a comedy show can indicate that the speaker is part of a cool, hip, in-group that watches the show. 21 - Labeling someone as an "enemy combatant," "freedom fighter," "terrorist," or "insurgent" can index the speaker's political views about the conflict in question and can have real effects in the social world. 21 - Code- switching or translanguaging between two or more languages, dialects, or social registers can index different processes involved in a person's ethnic, racial, gender, and/or socioeconomic identity formation and can have different social or even moral connotations, depending on the situation. 21 I hope these examples help illustrate how language is not a neutral medium for communication! How can we become more aware of the socially charged language we use in our daily lives? Becoming more aware of the socially charged language we use in our daily lives requires a conscious effort to reflect on our own language practices and the contexts in which we use them. 3 Here are a few strategies that can help: 1. Pay attention to the words and phrases you use in different situations and consider how they might be perceived by others. 2. Reflect on your own cultural background, social status, and political views, and how they might influence the language you use. 3. Listen actively to others and try to understand the social and cultural contexts that shape their language practices. 4. Read and learn about different cultures and perspectives to broaden your understanding of the

socially charged nature of language. 5. Engage in conversations with people from diverse backgrounds to gain a deeper appreciation for the ways in which language can shape social interactions. By being mindful of the socially charged nature of language and actively working to understand and appreciate different perspectives, we can become more aware of our own language practices and how they impact our interactions with others. Summary: The PDF discusses the socially embedded nature of language and the linguistically mediated nature of social life. It argues that language is not a neutral medium for communication but rather a set of socially embedded practices that shape our social interactions. To become more aware of the socially charged language we use in our daily lives, we need to reflect on our own language practices and the contexts in which we use them. Key terms: - Multifunctionality: the idea that language serves multiple functions beyond just conveying information, such as indexing social relations, identities, or values. – Language ideologies: the beliefs, attitudes, and values that people hold about language and its use, which can shape social interactions and power relations. – Practice: the idea that language is not just a set of abstract rules but rather a set of socially embedded practices that are shaped by and shape social interactions. - Indexicality: the idea that language is inherently context-dependent and that the meaning of words and phrases is shaped by the social and cultural contexts in which they are used. Key people: - Mikhail Bakhtin: a Russian philosopher and literary critic who argued that language is inherently social and that words have a socially charged life. – Alessandro Duranti: an Italian-American linguistic anthropologist who has written extensively on the social and cultural dimensions of language. – Michael Silverstein: an American linguistic anthropologist who has written extensively on language ideologies and indexicality. Week Two: Theories of Signs and Sign Relations Reading: Chandler What are some examples of signs that we encounter in our daily lives? According to 16 , some examples of sign-systems that we encounter in our daily lives include the deaf-and-dumb alphabet, social customs, etiquette, religious and other symbolic rites, legal procedures, military signals, and nautical flags. Additionally, 26 notes that language is a highly conventional sign, while iconic signs involve some degree of conventionality and indexical signs direct attention to their objects by blind compulsion. How do Saussure's and Peirce's models of the sign differ from each other? As noted in 17 , the most obvious difference between Saussure's and Peirce's models of the sign is that Saussure's model is dyadic, while Peirce's model is triadic. In Saussure's model, the sign

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

consists of two parts: the signifier (the form which the sign takes) and the signified (the mental concept or meaning associated with the signifier). In contrast, Peirce's model includes a third term beyond the sign itself: the object or referent to which the sign refers. Peirce's model also emphasizes the interpretant, which is not an interpreter but rather the sense made of the sign. Additionally, while Saussure's model focuses on the arbitrary nature of linguistic signs, Peirce's model includes a place for materiality and for reality outside the sign system. Can you explain the concept of a "sign vehicle" and how it relates to the overall meaning of a sign? According to 2 , a sign is composed of two parts: the signifier and the signified. The signifier is also known as the "sign vehicle," and it refers to the form that the sign takes. For example, in the case of a word, the signifier is the sound or written symbol that represents the word. The signified, on the other hand, is the mental concept or meaning associated with the signifier. The relationship between the signifier and the signified is arbitrary, meaning that there is no inherent connection between the two. Instead, the relationship is established through social convention. The overall meaning of a sign is created through the interaction between the signifier and the signified, with the signifier serving as a vehicle for the signified. The PDF discusses the concept of semiotics, which is the study of signs and symbols and their use and interpretation. The text explores the models of the sign proposed by Ferdinand de Saussure and Charles Sanders Peirce, noting that Saussure's model is dyadic and focuses on the arbitrary nature of linguistic signs, while Peirce's model is triadic and includes a place for materiality and for reality outside the sign system. The text also introduces the concept of the "sign vehicle," which refers to the form that a sign takes, and distinguishes it from the signified, which is the mental concept or meaning associated with the signifier. Key terms and people include semiotics, sign, signifier, signified, Ferdinand de Saussure, Charles Sanders Peirce, and the arbitrary nature of signs. Week Three: Language and Thought Ahearn Chapter Five – Language thought and culture How does language shape our perception of the world around us? According to Whorf's hypothesis, language shapes our perception of the world by providing a system of interrelated categories that produce an overall worldview in people who speak that language 3 . Many linguistic anthropologists agree that language has a significant influence on culture and thought, and that the particular language you speak might predispose you to view the world a certain way 1 . However, it is important to note that this influence is more likely to be predispositional rather than determinative, meaning that it does not prevent you from challenging that view 1 .

Can we think without language, or is language necessary for complex reasoning? This is a debated topic among linguists and cognitive scientists. Edward Sapir believed that language has a strong influence on thought and that our language habits predispose certain choices of interpretation 2 . However, it is also suggested that language might not be necessary for complex reasoning, and that some forms of thinking might be possible without language 1 . For example, some studies have shown that non-human animals are capable of complex problem-solving and decision-making without language. It is important to note that the relationship between language and thought is complex and multifaceted, and more research is needed to fully understand it. In what ways do cultural norms and values influence language use and development? Cultural norms and values play a significant role in language use and development. Language is a social practice, and it reflects and reinforces cultural norms and values 1 . For example, certain languages might have specific words or expressions that reflect cultural values or beliefs. Additionally, language use can be influenced by social factors such as gender, age, and social status. For instance, some languages have different forms of address for different social contexts, such as formal and informal language. Furthermore, cultural practices and beliefs can shape the development of language over time, as language evolves to reflect changes in society 1 . The PDF discusses the relationship between language, thought, and culture, and how they influence each other. The key people mentioned in the text are Charles Sanders Peirce, Franz Boas, Edward Sapir, and Benjamin Whorf. Peirce's work on meaning-making is integrated into the theory presented in the text. Boas, Sapir, and Whorf are credited with laying the foundation for contemporary debates on the ways in which language, thought, and culture influence one another. The text also mentions the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, which suggests that language shapes our perception of the world by providing a system of interrelated categories that produce an overall worldview in people who speak that language. The text notes that many linguistic anthropologists agree that language has a significant influence on culture and thought, but that this influence is more likely to be predispositional rather than determinative. Finally, the text discusses how cultural norms and values influence language use and development, and how language reflects and reinforces cultural norms and values. Reading Two : Lakoff concepts we live by – unreadable Reading Three: MERTZ What are some core aspects of U.S. legal reasoning that this chapter explores?

This chapter explores attempts to define core aspects of U.S. legal reasoning 1 . It argues that there is a core approach to the world and to human conflict that is perpetuated through U.S. legal language 2 . However, it also examines the limits that legal epistemology may place on law's democratic aspirations 1 . How does legal epistemology impact law's democratic aspirations, according to the author's research? The author's research examines the impact of legal epistemology on law's democratic aspirations 1 . The study uses close analysis of classroom language to examine the limits that legal epistemology may place on law's democratic aspirations 1 . The conclusion also urges more fine- grained and contextual attention to the ways that school status and culture, as well as aspects of professorial style and classroom dynamics, may affect equality of opportunity in law training and subsequent practice What insights can be gained from analyzing classroom language in law school? Analyzing classroom language in law school can provide insights into the content of U.S. legal epistemology, which refers to distinctively legal ways of approaching knowledge 1 . The central role of discourse to law and other sociocultural processes is also highlighted, as the ideas that people hold about how language works (linguistic ideologies) combine with linguistic structuring to create powerful, often unconscious effects 1 . Additionally, analyzing classroom language can reveal the cultural invisibility/dominance problem in law school classroom interactions, where learning the apparently neutral language of the law appears to have different effects on students of different races, genders, and class backgrounds 3 . This PDF discusses the relationship between legal reasoning and legal epistemology, and how analyzing classroom language in law school can provide insights into the content of U.S. legal epistemology. Legal epistemology refers to distinctively legal ways of approaching knowledge, and linguistic ideologies combine with linguistic structuring to create powerful, often unconscious effects. The study uses close analysis of classroom language to examine the limits that legal epistemology may place on law's democratic aspirations. The author argues that there is a core approach to the world and to human conflict that is perpetuated through U.S. legal language. The cultural invisibility/dominance problem in law school classroom interactions is also highlighted, where learning the apparently neutral language of the law appears to have different effects on students of different races, genders, and class backgrounds. Key people mentioned in the PDF include Moishe Postone, Weber, Durkheim, and Susan Hirsch.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

Week Four: language, identity, and Indexicality Eckert unreadable Week Six: Language, Multilingualism and Globalization Ahearn Chapter 6 What is the difference between a speech community and a community of practice? According to 1 , linguistic anthropologists have shifted to alternative terms such as "communities of practice." These concepts allow for research that treats communities not as static, pre-existing entities but as emergent groups that are fluid and overlapping, crossing social and often international boundaries. While a speech community refers to a group of speakers who share a language or dialect, a community of practice refers to a group of people who share a common interest or profession and engage in collective learning and knowledge-sharing. How do linguistic anthropologists approach the study of language communities? As mentioned in 1 , linguistic anthropologists approach the study of language communities by treating them as emergent groups that are fluid and overlapping, crossing social and often international boundaries. The chapter seeks to encourage readers to question some of their taken-for-granted notions about the nature of such communities, uncover some of the assumptions and unstated social theories that often underpin such concepts as "speech community," and introduce readers to some of the most interesting research that furthers our understanding of the relationship between linguistic practices and social groups in global and multilingual contexts. Can age or hobby be used to identify meaningful social or linguistic communities? According to 1 , scholars have debated whether communities can be identified along the lines of age or hobby, as the cartoon that appeared at the start of Chapter 1 suggests is the case with young people and golfers. However, many linguistic anthropologists have shifted to alternative terms, such as communities of practice, which allow for research that treats communities not as static, pre-existing entities but as emergent groups that are fluid and overlapping, crossing social and often international boundaries. Therefore, it is not clear whether age or hobby can be used to identify meaningful social or linguistic communities.

The PDF discusses the challenges involved in identifying communities of language users as objects of linguistic and social analysis. Some key terms and concepts discussed in the PDF include: - Speech community: A group of speakers who share a language or dialect. – Linguistic community: A group of people who share a language or dialect, and who may or may not interact with each other. – Speech area: A geographic region where a particular language or dialect is spoken. – Speech network: A group of people who interact with each other through language, but who may not necessarily share a common language or dialect. – Communities of practice: A group of people who share a common interest or profession and engage in collective learning and knowledge-sharing. – Linguistic anthropology: The study of the relationship between language and culture, and how language is used in social contexts. - John Haviland: A linguist who provides an example of one family that might constitute a speech community. – Emergent groups: Fluid and overlapping groups that cross social and often international boundaries. – Social theories: Assumptions and unstated beliefs that underpin concepts such as "speech community." The PDF emphasizes that the specifics of how, why, and even whether these generalizations actually hold true in particular cases must be explored through empirical research, and this sort of research requires a clear notion of what constitutes a meaningful social or linguistic

ANT253 NOTES

Related Documents