Module 12: Does Language Shape Perception?

Many different people over the years have argued that the language we speak determines our perception of the world around us. Known as linguistic relativism, proponents of this viewpoint argue that speakers of different languages view the environment through the lens of their language. For example in color perception, linguistic relativists argue a speaker of a language with only a limited number of color words may not see color the same way as a speaker of a language with numerous color words. 




Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf collectively came up with a hypothesis supporting linguistic relativism known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Since this hypothesis has been proposed, it has come under harsh scrutiny by the scientific community. One of the most highly contested issues concerned the Hopi language. It was proposed that since the Hopi language did not have immediately obvious words to describe time, speakers of this language did not have the same conception of time as speakers of English or other European languages. 

Ekkehart Malotki criticized this viewpoint of the Hopi language in his book Hopi Time. He was able to show that although the Hopi language did not have exactly the same words for time as the English language, it did have other words and word forms that expressed a concept of past, present and future. Other studies have similarly confirmed his result and thus refuted relativism. 

Due to the presence of significant scientific evidence, it is my personal belief that language does not dictate perception. Our innate cognitive mechanisms contribute to our perception, and these are not determined by the language environment in which we are raised. Language may influence how we communicate our thoughts, but it does not change our ability to think.  



References 

Linguistic Society of America. 2016. "Language and Thought." http://www.linguisticsociety.org/resource/language-and-thought (accessed November 14th, 2016)

Malotki, Ekkehart. 1983. Hopi time: A linguistic analysis of the temporal concepts in the Hopi language. Vol. 20. Walter de Gruyte. 

Module 11: Is Language Learning Innate?

The argument regarding complicated cognitive process being describes as the result of "nature" or of "nurture" has been ongoing for decades. This debate has extended into linguistics. Some linguists argue that language and language development is the result of innate and highly specialized mechanisms. Others argue that language is no different from any other general cognitive process and is the result of statistical inference.

Those who choose to see language as the result of general processes often use statistical models to make their claim. They attempt to show that language is purely a mathematical operation; humans learn how and what to say on the basis of probability and generalizations. They have been likened to other neural network models which strengthen the connection between a stimulus and a response based on the frequency of occurrence. These mathematical models have been criticized because they generally only use simple sentences in the English language as validation of their viewpoint. When these models expand to sentences with more complex syntactical structures, they do not as accurately depict human language. Therefore some argue the view that language is acquired on the basis of probability is not truly able to capture the intricacies of human language. 

The other approach stems from biology as opposed to mathematics. As opposed to viewing language as a general and learned process, language is viewed as an innate and highly specialized process. This viewpoint was first proposed by Noam Chomsky and since has been endorsed by many other linguists. Proponents of this viewpoint argue that language is unique to humans and at birth we have all of the mechanisms necessary to become fluent in a language. This model has been criticized as being too simplistic and underestimating the effect of environmental cues on language acquisition. 

It is likely that both models have relevance to the account of language learning. It is wise not to discredit either as being unrealistic. As more research is conducted, a fuller picture of the language acquisition process can be painted. 

Module 10: Branding and Broadening

In everyday speech we often refer to objects by their most common brand name. This process is so automatic and embedded in our collective consciousness that we often do not realize we are using a brand name word. We mistakenly assume that the brand name word is actually the generic term used to describe the object.

Using brand names to refer to generic objects is an example of the linguistic process of widening or broadening. Widening occurs when a over time a word that was formerly used only to refer to a specific concept now refers to more general concepts (Harley, 2006). In the case of brand names, the name of the company or manufacturer is commonly used to describe all objects of that kind even if they are not directly affiliated with that brand.

Some common instances of brand name widening are shown below. It is interesting to note that the brand names chosen to represent different objects vary with the location of use. For example Hoover is only used to refer to vacuum cleaners in England whereas in the U.S. the generic term is used.

Hoover (instead of vacuum cleaner)

Kleenex (instead of tissue)

Q-tip (instead of cotton swab)

Advil (instead of ibuprofen) 

Semantically, the brand words carry the same weight as the generic terms. No one is confused if someone asks them for Advil instead of Ibuprofen. Therefore, it is important to note that using brand names instead of generic names is not linguistically incorrect seeing as it does not impede understanding in everyday conversation.

References 


Harley, Heidi. 2006.  English Words: A Linguistic Introduction.  Malden, MA. Blackwell.

Module 9: Military Slang Formation

If you have ever listened to a conversation between two soldiers or even watched a military inspired movie, you probably noticed that military speech is often filled with so many unknown words it can seem like an entirely different language. The military is notorious for shortening and abbreviating words to make conversation more efficient. But how are these new words formed?

One way is through the process of clipping. Clipping refers to shortening a multiple morpheme word to just a single morpheme (Harley, 2006). Clipping can occur either by removing the first, middle or last morphemes of a word. 

Removing the last morpheme of a word is arguably the most common form of clipping and can be seen in the military slang word commo (Military.com, 2016). Commo refers to communications equipment or personnel and is formed by eliminating the final morphemes of the word communication. 

Another common way military slang is formed falls under the category of Initialisms. Initialisms take the letters from a multiple word concept and string them together to form a new word. Acronyms result when this new word is pronounced as a continuous phonological word. Alternatively, abbreviations result when each letter (or initial) in the word is pronounced individually (Harley, 2006). 

The military slang word BOLO is an example of an acronym. It is pronounced as /bowlow/ and stands for Be On the Look Out. In contrast, the word CP, standing for Check Point, is an abbreviation as each letter is pronounced individually (Its Crew, 2016). 

There are many more examples of Military slang that follow these two general methods of new word formation. Seeing as seconds can make a difference between life and death, shortening and abbreviating words in military conversation is essential for survival and success. 


References 

Harley, Heidi. 2006.  English Words: A Linguistic Introduction.  Malden, MA. Blackwell.

Its Crew. 2016. "Military Acronyms, Terminology and Slang Reference." http://www.itstactical.com/intellicom/language/military-acronymsterminology-and-slang-reference/ (accessed October 19, 2016)

MilitarySlang.com. 2016. "Glossary of Military Terms and Slang." http://www.military.com/join-armed-forces/military-terms-and-jargon.html (accessed October 19, 2016)

Module 8: Shakespeare's Still Relevant

When many of us think of Shakespeare, we often think of long complicated texts that bear little significance to our everyday lives. We associate Shakespeare with a form of English that is hard to read and to understand. Some of are brought back to shudder inducing English classes in high school where we were forced to analyze the complicated soliloquies of Hamlet or Macbeth. But Shakespeare should not only be associated with these outdated ideas and language. Many of the words we use today were first seen in the writings of Shakespeare. These words are so common we may not even be aware of their Shakespearean origin. 

Shakespeare was an extremely creative thinker. This creativity allowed him to take advantage of the rules of the English language to create new words that better suited the meaning he was trying to convey in his writing. 

One was in which Shakespeare created new words was through the addition of affixes to previously existing words. He often added prefixes that negated the original word, therefore changing its meaning. This allowed Shakespeare to write more concisely seeing as he could use a single word instead of a negating word (like not) in addition to the original word. Two such examples (resulting from the addition of derivational prefixes) are the words inaudible and uncomfortable as seen in the text below. 

“Let's take the instant by the forward top; for we are old, and on our quick'st decrees the inaudible and noiseless foot of Time steals ere we can effect them.” -  King of France (All's well that ends well. Act V. Scene III)

“Despised, distressed, hated, martyr'd, kill'd! Uncomfortable time, why camest thou now to murder, murder our solemnity?” - Capulet (Romeo and Juliet. Act IV. Scene V)

Shakespeare also frequently created blend words to express a more specific meaning. He did this by combining two previously separate words into one continuous word. One such example is the word cold-blooded, which he used to describe a character who was vindictive and heartless. Another example is when he used the more specific word eyeball instead of the preexisting word eye. His first usages of both words can be seen in the text below. 

“Thou cold-blooded slave, hast thou not spoke like thunder on my side, been sworn my soldier, bidding me depend upon thy stars, thy fortune and thy strength, and dost thou now fall over to my fores?” – Constance (King John. Act III. Scene I)

“Go make thyself like a nymph o' the sea: be subject to no sight but thine and mine, invisible to every eyeball else.” – Prospero (The tempest. Act I. Scene II)

The next time you use any of these words think of Shakespeare and maybe cut him some slack for being a master manipulator of English grammar and not just the reason you dreaded English class.  


References

Mentalfloss.com. 2016. "20 Words We Owe to William Shakespeare." Retrieved from http://mentalfloss.com/article/48657/20-words-we-owe-william-shakespeare (accessed October 11, 2016)

Module 7: Overgeneralization and Overextenstion

Complex languages such as English pose a challenge for children attempting to learn them. There are rules, exceptions to those rules and exceptions to the exceptions of those rules. This can be confusing for a child to navigate when learning language grammar and syntax. 

Children, like most people, want to find the simplest and fastest answer. Once they learn a "regular" rule in a language, they assume that rule is always followed. This leads to a process called overgeneralization, which is "applying a regular morpheme to a stem that normally selects an irregular homoseme (Harley, 2006)." The child still has an understanding of the meaning and the function of the morpheme shown through their selection of a homoseme (a morpheme of the same meaning and function) of the correct morpheme. Overgeneralization stops when the child memorizes the irregular rules of their language. 

Examples of overgeneralization include:

When attempting to say the plural of fish, a child says fishes instead of fish 

Saying I goed to school yesterday instead of I went to school yesterday

The use of the word putted instead of put to express the past tense of the verb to put as seen in the carton below

When learning a new language children also tend to use one word to describe multiple different things. Referred to as overextension, this often results in frustration as parents struggle to figure out which of the meanings of the word their child is trying to convey at that moment. However it should be noted that overextension is not random. A child does not usually use a word like car to describe an animal at which he or she is looking. Instead, overextension is usually applied to the words with the same lexical category, showing the child is grouping words based on semantic similarity. 

Examples of overextension include:

Referring to all four legged animals as dogs 

Calling all types of fruit apples 

The exaggerated and humorous example illustrated in the cartoon below (I apologize for the language!)

References

Alleydog.com. 2016. "Overextension." http://www.alleydog.com/glossary/definition.php?term=Overextension (accessed October 11, 2016)

Harley, Heidi. 2006.  English Words: A Linguistic Introduction.  Malden, MA. Blackwell.

Module 6: Bushisms

Former U.S. President George W. Bush is rather infamous for his unique way of speaking. One of the most noticeable things that made George Bush's speech unique was his choice of words. He often invented or combined words when speaking in the heat of the moment. The term "Bushisms" has been coined to refer to the distinctive words and phrases used by the former President (Harley, 2006).  

One of his more recognizable Bushisms is the word "misunderestimated." He used this word on November 6th, 2000 to describe a situation where his opponent both misunderstood and underestimated him (Time Inc. Online, 2016). 

In using the word misunderestimated, George Bush created a blend word. A blend word occurs when two or more phonologically separate words are combined to form a single new word. Often this blend is achieved by attaching morphemes from one word to the other.

Misunderestimated is made of 4 morphemes. They are (in order of attachment) as follows . . 

Estimat - The root morpheme derived from the verb estimate

-ed - an inflectional suffix used to mark the verb estimate as past tense

under- - a derivational prefix that changes the meaning of the verb estimate to a verb meaning "to guess/assume a valuer lower than the actual value."

mis- - a derivational prefix from the word misunderstood used to change the meaning of the verb underestimated to a verb representing George Bush's meaning of being both misunderstand and underestimated

In this way it can be seen that to create the Bushism misunderestimated, the two morphemes from the word estimated (estimat- and -ed) must be combined with the shared morpheme under- (from both misunderstood an underestimated) as well as with the morpheme mis- from misunderstood. 

Although at first they may sound silly, Bushims often are linguistically correct and follow the rules of affix attachment in English grammar. 

References

Harley, Heidi. 2006.  English Words: A Linguistic Introduction. Malden, MA. Blackwell.

Time Inc. Online. (2016). Merriam Webster Online. (2016). "Top 10 Bushisms". Time Inc.. http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1870938_1870943_1870945,00.html (accessed September 28, 2016)