As a Communication Major who specializes in the Critical Approach, I love to talk about the big, overarching influences that shape how we construct our perceptions of the world. Things like history and dimensions of power. So I thought that I'd share with you a paper I wrote about the English language and how it operates as a new form of colonialism. Sound fun? I thought so too!
Okay; I know Wikipedia is not a scholarly source. But it had it the best definition of colonialism I found: “Colonialism is the establishment, maintenance, acquisition and expansion of colonies in one territory by people from another territory. It is a process whereby the metropole claims sovereignty over the colony and the social structure, government, and economics of the colony are changed by colonizers from the metropole. Colonialism is a set of unequal relationships between the metropole and the colony and between the colonists and the indigenous population” (Wikipedia.org).
In the other words, the dominant European and American cultures of the early centuries (15th - 20th) exercised imperialism over less prominent cultures. This was chiefly to absorb the resources of those nations, but a secondary gain was the spread of culture. Colonialism was in many ways an evangelistic movement reminiscent of the Crusades in which cultural aspects of these dominant societies, such as Christianity, customs, and language, were essentially forced on to the native populations of the colonies. In fact, Imperialism is the chief reason English is so widespread throughout a world in which only a relatively few nations use English as their native or primary language.
Colonialism is generally thought of to be a thing of the past, however our use and continued propagation of the English language functions in much the same way as Imperialism. As mentioned earlier, one of the major affects of colonialism was the spread of the English language. As a majority of countries continue to teach English, they are implicitly saying that knowledge of English has a certain value to it. This has implications about those who speak English as well; those who do are seen as being powerful and able to have worldwide influence. It is a mark of intelligence.
Colonialism is generally thought of to be a thing of the past, however our use and continued propagation of the English language functions in much the same way as Imperialism. As mentioned earlier, one of the major affects of colonialism was the spread of the English language. As a majority of countries continue to teach English, they are implicitly saying that knowledge of English has a certain value to it. This has implications about those who speak English as well; those who do are seen as being powerful and able to have worldwide influence. It is a mark of intelligence.
Additionally, the use of the English language itself shapes how we construct our perceptions of the world. As a Western language, English has a particular way of seeing the world and thus uses specific words and phrases to describe that world. Those who speak English have to learn about those words and phrases and choose between them when speaking. For example, when speaking of the concept of love, an English speaker will have a certain understanding of such a phenomenon based on the language available to them and their understanding of those words and phrases.
Labels which are constructed by and understood within the context of the English language are another example of this process. As my Intercultural Communication book says, “Labels, as signifiers, acknowledge particular aspects of our social identity… [They] communicate many levels of meaning and establish particular kinds of relationships between speaker and listener” (Martin & Nakayama, 2009, p. 238). Particular words that have been created in the English language have a certain amount of power and determinism in them which affect how we construct our perceptions of the world.
Labels which are constructed by and understood within the context of the English language are another example of this process. As my Intercultural Communication book says, “Labels, as signifiers, acknowledge particular aspects of our social identity… [They] communicate many levels of meaning and establish particular kinds of relationships between speaker and listener” (Martin & Nakayama, 2009, p. 238). Particular words that have been created in the English language have a certain amount of power and determinism in them which affect how we construct our perceptions of the world.
For example, the term “privileged” has certain associations when used in English that can differ greatly when compared to its use in other languages. Again, “Discourse is tied closely to social structure, so the messages communicated through the use of labels depend greatly on the social position of the speaker” (Martin & Nakayama, 2009, p. 239). I would here expand that the messages communicated by labels also greatly depend on the method of that communication, namely, the language in which those labels have been constructed.
Furthermore, the politics of language continue to influence people’s lives. The idea that America is strictly an English speaking nation continues to be a hot-button issue to this day. You only have to look so far as the Republican presidential primaries to see examples of this conflict. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and Former Senator Rick Santorum have been particularly vocal about making English the official language of the nation. To make his point, Santorum gave an impassioned speech during one of the primary debates about how his parents were immigrants and considered it a privilege to come to America and adopt its cherished traditions, including speaking English. He concluded by insisting that America is in fact a melting pot of assimilation, and not a salad bowl (a phrase used to in more recent years to encourage the appreciation of the native cultures of immigrants).
Furthermore, the politics of language continue to influence people’s lives. The idea that America is strictly an English speaking nation continues to be a hot-button issue to this day. You only have to look so far as the Republican presidential primaries to see examples of this conflict. Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and Former Senator Rick Santorum have been particularly vocal about making English the official language of the nation. To make his point, Santorum gave an impassioned speech during one of the primary debates about how his parents were immigrants and considered it a privilege to come to America and adopt its cherished traditions, including speaking English. He concluded by insisting that America is in fact a melting pot of assimilation, and not a salad bowl (a phrase used to in more recent years to encourage the appreciation of the native cultures of immigrants).
Obviously, Santorum was simply playing to the nationalism of the Tea Party debate crowd, however his statements over this issue indicate the effects of the spread and maintenance of the prominence of the English language; which is to say that because of is prominence, speakers of English live with the assumption that their language and ways of constructing reality are in the fact the best and that essentially everyone else in the world would be better off to adopt their way of doing things.
This is ultimately what has led to the strength of the movement to spread English around the world and secure English’s place of prominence in American culture. It is no less than the field of communication’s favorite subject: hegemony! Dominant social groups maintaining order by generating consent to their parameters through the production and distribution of ideological texts (such as the English language) which define social reality for the majority of the people? (Cloud, 1996). The hegemony of the English language certainly sounds like colonialism and, after deeper scrutiny, can certainly be found to have similar affects on both the colonizers and the cultures which are subject to the imperialism of these dominant groups. And you won’t find that on Wikipedia!
Works Cited
Cloud, Dana. (1996). “Hegemony or Concordance?: The Rhetoric of Tokenism in ‘Oprah’ Winfrey’s Rags-to-Riches Biography.” Critical Studies in Mass Communication, vol. 13, p. 115-137.
Colonialism. (n.d.). Wikipedia. Retrieved from < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonialism>.
Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Intercultural communication in contexts. (5th ed.). New York: NY: McGraw-Hill.
This is ultimately what has led to the strength of the movement to spread English around the world and secure English’s place of prominence in American culture. It is no less than the field of communication’s favorite subject: hegemony! Dominant social groups maintaining order by generating consent to their parameters through the production and distribution of ideological texts (such as the English language) which define social reality for the majority of the people? (Cloud, 1996). The hegemony of the English language certainly sounds like colonialism and, after deeper scrutiny, can certainly be found to have similar affects on both the colonizers and the cultures which are subject to the imperialism of these dominant groups. And you won’t find that on Wikipedia!
Works Cited
Cloud, Dana. (1996). “Hegemony or Concordance?: The Rhetoric of Tokenism in ‘Oprah’ Winfrey’s Rags-to-Riches Biography.” Critical Studies in Mass Communication, vol. 13, p. 115-137.
Colonialism. (n.d.). Wikipedia. Retrieved from < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonialism>.
Martin, J. N., & Nakayama, T. K. (2010). Intercultural communication in contexts. (5th ed.). New York: NY: McGraw-Hill.
No comments:
Post a Comment