Category: Language

Language plays a very important role for humans, it is a unique feature of human society to distinguish it from other animals. Language is used as a means of thinking, or it is also understood that language is the ‘shell’ of thinking, the mode of expression that wants others to understand the thoughts, needs, desires of the village through words. Language energizes the brain, forms thoughts and makes it possible to communicate in a complex way. The vocabulary, idioms and slang that make up our language will largely determine how we see and understand the world. If you only knew one language, the world would have clearer restrictions. But is speaking bilingual or even multiple languages all that is required? Does that really open the world for us when Google Translate can do it simply with one click?

The brain is an extremely flexible organ, from birth to old age, the brain grows, adapts, learns and remembers, even after an injury. Language is an essential part of how the brain works throughout life, but like the brain itself, science has not been able to give a complete picture of how language can communicate in the interstitial path nerve system.

The brain, like any other type of muscle, is also active, and actually being fluent in two or more languages is one of the best ways to keep them healthy and help prevent the process of degeneration, like dementia. In fact, bilingual people have noticeable symptoms of Alzheimer’s disease more than 5 years later than people who speak one language and speak only one language. This is a significantly longer period than what modern medicine or pharmacy can do. Surprisingly, this benefit is noticeable even for illiterate people.

Knowing two languages actually benefits more specifically and specifically for people who often speak two or more languages at the level of a native speaker, and it is important to change the language more often: The brain of New Yorkers of Puerto Rican origin who use both Spanish and English in everyday life are actually more agile than those who know a language. A study by the Singaporean research group who grew up and used authentic Asian accents and English often came to the same conclusion. That is people who know two languages often do not change languages or use only a limited language like just at home, showing much less benefit.

Cultural conditions are also a big challenge, saying more than one language helps us feel more connected to the world, or maybe we have one more “personality’. Numerous studies support this view, showing that bilinguals score higher on tests that show a more open minded and culturally sensitive mindset and a more relaxed time when looking at things from another cultural aspect. Therefore, knowing two languages is considered to make people know two cultures or more cultures if you speak more than two languages, a great advantage skill in today’s borderless world, move and get used to new cultures as well as new people.

Language helps us understand this world and can even affect how we view and describe the world. According to a recent study of German and English speakers, the hypothetical worldview of German speakers is considered a holistic view – they tend to look at events in a holistic way. can – meanwhile, English speakers often pay attention to one thing and focus on one action only. Because this trend seems to stem from a difference in grammatical actions. Another example, there is no doubt that Finnish and Arabic speakers can describe the world differently. The Arabs rarely need 40 snow-related words or phrases like the Finns, and there is a big difference in the way an Arab describes their experience of a land. If one speaks both Finnish and Arabic, will not they lead to these two relatively different ways of describing the world which will lead to a different and wider view?

People who speak many languages report themselves as being different when using different languages and expressing emotions according to the language they are using. When assessing risks, bilingual speakers tend to make more economical decisions in the second language. In contrast to the mother tongue, the second language often tends to lack the false biases that can affect perceptions of risks and benefits. In a nutshell, the language you use can really affect your thoughts and behaviors.

Introduction

Human language is unique and vastly different from the sounds and noises of animals. It just so happens that humans’ position in the words is unique as well. We have created a regulated system of survival, generally referred to as civilization or society. Just like we are the only specie capable of language exchange we are the only specie with this highly complex and developed living circumstance. It might seem obvious that these two are linked, that we would not be able to have reached these heights of intelligence and society without the existence of language. What then is language, and why is human speech so unique? How does our intelligence and perception of the world affect language and how does language in turn affect our perception of reality? In short, can reality, as we claim to know it, exist without language?

More than just phonemes

In the first place, language is primarily a system of phonetic symbols for the expression of communicable thought and feeling. However, language is also used for perception of the surrounding world; understanding and interpretation of the world; recognition and memories of things and times; concentration and problem-solving; cooproration and interaction with others; as well as the development of social identity, self-confident and social belonging. (Linell, 1982, p.31)

We need a agreed upon system to convey information to the people around us. Without language Homo Sapien (Sapien) would not have been able to build civilizations. A society is built on rules, values and status. Language is needed by every individual in order to develop social identity and social belonging. Language is used to convey value to objects and abstract functions. All animals seem to communicate with each other in some form. Animals in a pack can share their food, have heirachesies and have pair bonding, however, they cannot have property, marriages or money. This is because those are agreed upon institutional forms of powers, rights and obligations. (Searle, 1996, p.70) Thinking about property, marriage or money, is to think about abstract values given to certain abstract functions or things. Marriage in itself cannot exist without the word. Symbols for marriage like rings or a signed contract may exist, but ”Marriage” still remain just a word. We can not see or hold it in our hand. We, as a society, agreed upon the value and function of the word. Language can covey value to things, such as paper becoming money or a profession having a certain status within society. The status of something, however, only exists if people believe it exists. (Searle, 1996, p.69)

Whenever we give a name or label for something, we also exclude all the things that is not included in that label. Therefor, whenever we agree to give something a name, eg. a rose, we also agree on what flowers or things that are not included in the description. Everything else becomes non-roses.

If we continue the example with flowers; a person familiar with the different names of flowers- Amaryllis, Dendrobium Orchid, Phalaenopsis Spray etc – would be more probable to be aware of the differences and able to point them out. They would also be able to convey information to another person much easier since they have names and words to do so. For anyone not possessing these specified labels flowers would be just flowers. However, even without being able to label the flowers with their correct names, anyone can see that there is a variety of differences within the label of flowers. The difference exists whether or not we have the knowledge to point it out.

How then is a person’s view of reality affected by the language they speak? According to the Sapir/Whorf-hypotheses our mother-tongue language determines what we are able to think. We are completely controlled by the limitations of the language we speak. The reality we create for ourselves, how we make sense of the world is, according to the so-called strong interpretation of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, also called linguistic determinism, controlled by the words we have to describe it. A specific culture’s language can express concepts unique to that culture that are impossible to express in the language of another culture. The language is adapted and created in order to be able to describe existing concepts. The concepts still exist and might even be visible for outsiders, but without a language sufficient to describe the phenomena it will never be fully understood by an outsider. A member of the culture who does indeed have the correct terminology to describe it can. ”We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation. ”(Sapir, 1983, p.69)

The reason we need words to describe certain things is because or thoughts are built up around language. Thinking without language would be without consciousness. We would be creatures of instinct, much like animals.

The mental images which are a word

According to the empiricists philosopher John Locke, man have an infinite multitude of thoughts. These thoughts are invisible and hidden from others, and since the comfort and advantages of civilization would not be possible without some of these thoughts to be uttered, man invented certain observable signs with which ideas could be made known to others. (Collin, 2000, p.17)

The philosophical school of empiricism believed that ”ideas” were the main components of human thoughts. These ideas were copies of former experiences made by the senses. The consciousness, according to the empiricists, contains nothing which had not been previously in the senses. When we talk about a ”pear” we recall the pear’s smell and taste, and by using the word ”pear” we refer to these mental images which for us constitute the word’s content of meaning.

A parrot can learn to repeat human sounds, but for the parrot these sounds are meaningless since they are not accompanied by the correct mental conceptions. Animals do use sounds to communicate with each other. The difference is that for animals each sound has a specific meaning, as for humans sounds themselves are meaningless. However, sounds can be created to form meningbearing entities. The number of phonemes in a human language varies between 10 to 100. The uniqness of human language comes from the ability to combine these sounds to make an infinite amount of messages (Parkvall, 2006, p.13) An individual knows approximately 100 000 words. There are room for creations of numerous more, but it seems as we have no need, use, or maybe ability, to comprehend more.

Our minds are like a library of mental images. In this library or dictionary, a connection is made between a word and its meaning. Associations are not only made between words describing the outer world- and meaning, but associations are made within the library. When a test group was asked to mention the first word that came to their mind when they heard the stimulus word Table, 84% responded Chair. (Sigurd, 2007, p.117) This indicates that our minds are organized by domains or categories.

The meaning of words

Connotation is the notion that words or phrases have strong emotional association and coloration. The specifics of connotation are of course variant from person to person. There are several levels in play here. First we might notice the general meaning and value society gives to a word. Secondly, each group of interest will add on their values, it is known for example that ‘one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedomfighter.’ Depending on the interests of the group in question, and their position in society at large, the connotation given might be quite different from the rest of society’s. And finally, the individual in themselves make connotation according to personal experiences. It is of significance what words we choose and use in our thinking process. In his book Mind, Language and Reality1 (1995) Torsten Thurén states: ”New words make it possible for us to see and acknowledge things we have not noticed before. Words also control the mind- it is therefor important to be aware that words are not reflections of reality rather they contribute in the construction of it.” (28)

Human language could be described as a refection of human consciousness. In an online physiological publication (2000) Golubkov states ”There is an integral model of reality imprinted in the language, the one that coincides with the real-life activities of people and, thus, it has been ‘naturally verified’ to be true to actual experience.” This references to the actual physical things-objects and activities- that are universal and exist for all people and in all languages. Things like food, air, or water are more or less concrete and provable. These can as Golubkov calls it be ”naturally varified.” Concepts on the other hand, are were it gets tricky. Concepts- freedom, marriage, power, God- are relative and in many ways connotative.

The question of translation

Then yet again, we should not rule out the ability to learn new languages. When we learn a new vocabulary does or mind expand? Maybe, if the language is different enough from our own. Chances are, however, that if a language is very different from our own so is the corresponding culture. Language could be described as words stored in the mind as pictures (Gärdefors, p.8).When translating flower to fleur, the image of a flower remains the same in the mind of the speaker. Therefor, the obtainment of languages similar to each other (e.g indo-european) does not in fact expand the mental library of images.

Conclusion

I have tried to show that language is a regulated system of mental images. These images differ from person to person but are generally agreed upon by the society where the language is used. The status or value of something is fluent and in many ways personal to the speaker. I have tried to show that language is individual yet agreed upon. It seems that we live in several layers of reality. We may be aware of how our perceptions differ from others, that is, we can realize that our connotations are different from others’. In the end it comes down to the eternal question: What came first, thought or language; the chicken or the egg?

References

1. Collin, Finn; Finn Guldman. (2000) Språkfilosofi- en introduktion. Falun: Nya Doxa.
2. Dahl, Östen. (2008) Språkets enhet och mångfald. Poland: Studentlitteratur, Pozkal.
3. Linell, Per. (1982) Människans språk. Gleerups. Malmö.
4. Golubkov, S. V. (2000). The language model of personality and its perspectives within psychology. PsychNews International, Vol. 5, Issue 1. URL http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/-expert/ ftp_51/pn5_-_d.htm
5. Sapir, Edward. (1983). Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture, and Personality. Edited by David G. Mandelbaum. University of California Press.
6. Sigurd, Bengt; Gisela Håkansson. (2007) Språk, språkinlärning och språkforskning. Hungary: Studentlitteratur.
7. Thurén, Torsten. (1995) Tanken, språket och verkligheten. Stockholm: Tiger förlag.

The phrase ‘The pen is mightier than the sword’ is a common epithet that extolls the power of words. It is correct that it does; language is one of the most powerful tools a person can wield. Language is as capable of carrying a person to greatness as it is capable of crucifying them. But is it always for the best that words have such power? After all, any tool can be used for ill pursuits. Language, though frequently credited with virtue, can also be a terrible weapon, depending on the context in which it is used and the context which it references. The casualties of context can be vast. For instance, when a politician, a highly public figure, uses language that normalizes racism, the effects can be observed across an entire voting base. Or, when one subset of a populace demonizes and degrades another through the use of hate speech, repercussions ripple across millions of lives.

Politicians are known for using words as weapons in order to beguile the public. Sometimes this is to the benefit of society, when a politician convinces in order to bring out the best in a nation. Frequently, however, people in positions of power promote agendas that are to the detriment of society. One tactic used by some politicians is called dog whistle politics, which Emile Therien defines as “political messaging employing coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general public but has a different or more specific resonance for a targeted sub-group”. This works through the use of specific phrases, which, while seemingly innocuous, tell racists exactly what a politician’s stance is, appeal to unconscious bias in others, and entirely slide under the radar for many.

Specifically, the tactics of dog whistle politics are used by politicians in person and in advertisements. A notorious example of dog whistle politics in advertising is the advertisement used to promote George H W Bush in the 1988 election cycle. This ad featured an African-American man by the name of Willie Horton, who was convicted of both murder and rape, and accused Bush’s opponent of being soft on crime (Political ad: “Willie Horton”, 1988). The imagery depicted in this ad and the content it describes “played into white fear and African-American stereotypes”, and so in the eyes of supporters, connected Bush’s opponent with a lenient stance on crime, and connected African-Americans with violence (Criss, CNN). This careful use of word choice and imagery allowed Bush’s campaign to profit off of the racists sentiments of some voters without seeming to directly support them, which in turn allowed Bush to retain the support of voters that did not want to be associated with racism.

In more recent times, other politicians have used similar language-based tactics to evoke racist sentiments. President Trump frequently uses dog whistle tactics in his speeches and remarks. For instance, on the campaign trail, prior to his election, Trump made the following statement at a political rally: “When Mexico sends its people… They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with [them] … They’re rapists,” (Washington Post Staff, 2015). This word choice is a fairly simple example of dog whistle politics; first, Trump made a broad, negative statement about Mexicans, stating that many or all of them are a), not good people, and b), rapists. This alone would not qualify as dog whistle politics; it’s not subtly racist, it’s just racist. However, following this statement, Trump made a vague, appeasing sort of caveat, stating that “And some, I assume, are good people,” (Washington Post Staff, 2015). This provides the sympathizing viewer the moral distance to justify Trump’s remarks, and agree with them, without directly admitting to or claiming racism. However, it is the specific phrase ‘I assume’ that truly makes Trump’s words powerful; it completely delegitimizes the idea of non-criminal Mexicans in the mind of the beholder, but does so in a way that could be played off as a mistake. It is that following statement that made Trump’s statement not just a racist appeal, but a tactic that normalizes discrimination.

So what is the driving mechanism of dog whistle politics? It is clear that all of the power derived from these tactics is rooted in indirect meaning and deniability. In order to convey socially unacceptable meanings, politicians rely on context. In the context of Horton’s race and the negative stereotypes some people associate with African-Americans, the Willie Horton ad is pretty obviously race baiting; outside of that, it may appear to simply be an advertisement declaring a candidate’s stance on crime. And it is herein that we can see the true power of subjective language; since there are multiple interpretations of the advertisement, depending on the context from which you view it, this allows the politician using the ad (and any of their supporters) to pull a sort of gaslighting and claim that any racist sentiments that you view in the ad are your own projections, and that you are seeing what you are expecting. Without this subjectiveness and context-based understanding, the ad would be much less potent; as Jennifer Saul notes, most people don’t want to be thought of as or think of themselves as racist, so when they are unlikely to agree with obviously and indisputably racist sentiments (Saul, 2017). Based on the power of dog whistle politics, it is clear that a large part of what turns words into weapons is their subjective context.

Although one might be tempted to think that the context of language is a subtle machination, based on how context is used for power in dog whistle politics, it is also completely overt in certain applications. The context of language doesn’t only grant indirect power; it is also what gives slurs and hate speech their direct, threatening, offensiveness. Slurs are a subset of hate speech, which is defined as “words or symbols that are offensive, intimidating, or harassing, and/or that incite violence, hatred, or discrimination on the basis of a… distinguishing status” (Shelton, 2015). The very definition of hate speech elucidates the power of words; it is speech that incites violence, and intimidates. Therefore, the language of hate is powerful because of the effects it wields and is associated with; even if a person delivering a slur is not immediately also delivering physical harm, the threat is inherently present.

Historically, hate speech has led to severe violence. In multiple instances, an increase in the frequency, severity, and openness of hate speech has preceded extreme racial and ethnic violence. A particularly well-known and infamous illustration of this is the massive hate propaganda movement led by the government in Nazi Germany leading up to, and during the Holocaust. The Nazi Party and its supporters dehumanized Jews by calling them subhuman, and refering to them as rats (Smith, 2011). The results of this dehumanization are horrifying; millions of Jews and others deemed undesirable were killed, and many of them painfully. The causal link between language and violence is evident; as David Smith says in his book in reference to the propaganda promoted by the Nazi Party, “thinking of humans as less than human paves the way for atrocity” (Smith, 2011). The violence and horror perpetrated by the Nazis in the 1930s and 1940s was caused by the dehumanization provided by hate speech. The weaponization of language during the Holocaust was no isolated incident; derogatory speech has preceded and encouraged violence throughout human history. In the 1990s, the Rwandan Genocide was the culmination of years of escalation in discrimination against the Tutsi, much of which was codified in language (Lynne, 2012). Hate in language has frequently heralded hateful actions.

Language is verbal violence; a single phrase can encapsulate centuries of hatred and subjugation. This intense concentration of context can be used to assert power. As Ishani Maitra states in her essay Subordinating Speech, hate speech can give the speaker authority by removing the authority of the recipient (2012). Slurs and other forms of hate speech can do this because of the context they carry. Hate speech is an inherent threat of violence. As previously demonstrated, hate speech has long been associated with acts of extreme violence, such as genocides, so when a speaker utilizes hate speech, they are invoking a history of extreme violence. In essence, the speaker is saying, “I would hurt you”. Hate speech does more than subordinate the individual; by referencing societal prejudices and long-standing norms of discrimination, the use of hate speech reinforces these concepts. As Michael Moore said, the “ use of some words and expressions… shapes [reality]; in addition to recording past prejudices, it also legitimizes future ones,” (2002). By continuing to uphold language with roots in subjugation, we are continuing to subjugate.

For centuries, language has been a powerful tool. Politicians have spoken words that inspire thousands to violence, and the subjectivity of language has allowed some of them get away with it. Ordinary people fling words that have effects that they understand, but contexts that they do not. Language has been a weapon. Words with cruel histories have preluded violence, and their use perpetuates fear. Despite this bloody history, communication is not a crime. After all, though any tool in the wrong hands is a weapon, the tool itself cannot contain evil. Words, though frequently wielded to harm, are equally powerful in healing. No matter their motivation, however, every human should remember the force with which they speak.

Since its invention in 1992, texting has become a universal staple. It has allowed us to go day by day to communicate with each other in a quick more efficient way. We use texting to be more direct, or even to let someone know you are running late. Since texting has become a popular form of communication. Today younger generations have created a new form of speaking called “text-speak”. This new way of speaking has become a dialect of its own using slang terms, and abbreviated words. With text speaking being a swiftly way of communication. Younger generations are using this dialect as an informal way of communication in formal setting like our primary, and secondary education systems. Although communicating via text message is an efficient way of contacting someone; texting has a negative effect on younger generation through the way they think, speak, and write.

In our primary and secondary education systems today, teachers have a concern with the number of students that are texting during class sessions. With technology rising, and text messaging being so mainstream younger generations today are less literate than those who went to school in the 60s and 70s. In the article Is English Ruining the English Language writer Wil states “In 2013, the average school child struggles more with spelling, grammar and essay writing essential skills which before now were considered key to a good grasp of the English language.” Text messaging is creating a different spoken dialect, because the new slang and text lingo are being brought into the daily use of speech amongst the younger generations. It is more common in spoken language that we use slang. With slang being used daily, it advertises misspelling, and lack of standard English. The writer explains how “In much the same way that modern smartphone users are becoming bilingual, they’re also learning to swap between other, new types of communication.” In linguistics we call this code switching. Code switching is when an individual speaks more than one language is altering between them while having one conversation. Since this new form of language was brought up by the younger generations, therefore it is most common amongst them, and easier for them to switch back and forth.

Every new operations of communication like Facebook, twitter, and Instagram have it’s own set of rules, and for the individuals who use these sites on a daily have created their own sophisticated language use for the each of them. In the U.S there are many different types of dialects spoken. In states like Texas where their own dialect is being brought up, the individuals of this state can switch back and forth to a a form of English called folks. Today it is easy for people to swap between accents, and dialects, because of population growth, increased rates of moving, youth growth, the internet, and cell phones. Even in our modern forms of technology such as iphones can differentiate between each language, and dialect. In the article Digital Trends, writer states “Right now, English is the top language in the world by many measures, and is likely to stay that way, even as thousands of languages fail to make the transition to the digital world and die off in the next century. Only about 5 percent of active languages may make it, and only a handful will prosper in the same league as English.” This does not mean that Standard English is in the clear. With so many different countries speaking English as a second language. The English language itself with transform into a totally new dialect, and/or language with added words and use of slang from other countries. It is possible for English to become a foreign sounding language for the English native tongue. For example here in the U.S the percentage of the hispanic population is increasing which means Spanish is the second most growing and spoken language of the U.S. With these two languages being emerged into the same country with different groups of people a new form of language we call “spanglish” has been formed. This new form of speech is a mixture of both languages and used on a daily basis spoken by the younger generation.

When code switching is inbred into our daily conversations, we often forget the correct form and proper use of grammar in formal writings. Although texting language is a quick short way to get what you want to say across, it is important to keep formal and informal writing separate from one another. In the article Texting May Lead to Bad Grammar writer Gannon Megan explains about a grammar assessment test study that was done to middle school students in Pennsylvania. Each student was given a survey and asked to detail how many messages they send, and receive. The survey showed that students lacked grammar skills from frequently texting. When younger children are communicating via text speak on a daily basis, the grammatical rules and slang is being carved in their brains. As generations get older the way people communicate with one another changes. Growing up with in an era where technology is so advanced, students do not know that they are using text speak, because that is the form of communication that they always use. When we are updating our status on social media. We do not think about spelling words correctly so that instinctively translates to poor writing skills inside the classroom and in formal settings. This affects the development of their language skills. Writer Gannon states, “teens might not be initiating all their bad language habits, but might also be influenced by the grammatically incorrect messages sent from their friends and family.”

Although there are many negatives. There are equal amount of positives when it comes to texting. Texting has been an easy way to build friendships, and connections with people along with fast communication. Since texts are being read on a daily, it enhances one’s reading skills and ability to think. In today’s society individuals lives have changed because texting has become so efficient. Before texting people would talk on the phone if you wanted to contact someone or meet up in person. Article Texting Affect on Society explains how researchers in Israeli found that when an individual communicates digitally when they are distressed, it can decrease their state of mind. Texting allows one to talk with people about different topics that they would not normally talk about in person. When an individual is texting it allows them to be more direct and upfront with someone.

Parents are giving their children cell phones as early as early as elementary school for “emergency reasons”, but it is not doing the individual any good. When parents notice that their child’s grades are lowering that is when they need to take more control over the cell phone and set boundaries for the child. Having a cell phone is a privl

Slang words bring a trending evolution to the English language. Although slang is more common in speech, it is also common in writing as well. Though slang is not that pervasive in high school settings. Article How Slang Affects Students in the Classroom writer Ryan Lytle explains how college admissions have been receiving admission essays with slang words incorporated. College students see and know the difference in the words that they are using for essay writing. College is about adapting to a certain extent. A well informed and educated student that just graduated high school should be able to adapt. The future remains unclear with slang as younger generations are getting older. Children as young as elementary school are growing up with this new use of language so when they are older informal is the new formal for them.

A study was done to a group of student, and the each of them were asked to come up with 10 different scenarios. Each textism were split up into different categories. The researchers found that the ratio with word and textisms was associated with word reading. Although, speaking slang, and text speak affects the younger generations writing skills, it is developing their reading skills. In article How Texting Can Improve your Kids’ Reading Skills writer Albrecht explains that researchers from Stanford University found in a study they did that the impact of a text message that the child is receiving from their parents show progress in their reading. Helping your child in a productive way through texting Even if the text is in slang, the child sees it as a structured sentence allowing them to the practice their reading skills. In the same article the writer states, “ students whose parents got frequent personalized text messages tailored to their child’s skill level were far more likely to read at a higher level compared to the kids whose parents received less frequent impersonal text messages.” Age maturity has a lot to do with the way your speaking. When you get to a certain age your text grammar skills start to change and become more grammatically correct.

Today, English is used in some form by at least one person in three (Fishman, 1998). As Fishman (1998) notices, colonization is one of the main reasons for being English as a lingua franca. He continued that, from 1940 to 1990 more than half of countries which success to achieve independence, was before British colonies. Nowadays knowing a common language as a means of communication and transferring knowledge, is even more demanded than before especially among the literates. Global language is now some detachable part of many fields such as education, trade, international politics, and even social activities. However, the main threat of it is the danger of disappearing some languages. Every language needs to be protected not only as a national treasure but also as a precious source of information. This essay aims to declare firstly, the most important advantages of global language, then focuses on the consequences of predominant language, and finally suggests some solutions, and evaluates about that in which way they are useful or not.

As Walker (2009) argued, one of the main reasons which English is popular, is providing better chances for its learners in many areas such as education and job. Fishman (1998) also mentioned that nearly four-fifths academic references are written by it; therefore, learning it is highly recommended for updating knowledge. Moreover, it also has an effective role in improving international interactions between governments and closing the nations together. Fishman (1998) points that although the UK is not part of European Monetary Union, it is obligated to converse English in European Central Bank by its employees who are from different countries, and this is precisely what Walker (2009) expressed that they can now join to a greater community than before. Additionally, it can be used to tackle international issues such as politic (Walker, 2009). For instance, Gerhard Schroeder, the German chancellor, and Jacques Chirac, French president spoke English with each other in September of 1998, in their politic session (Fishman, 1998).

However, Wilford (2007) believes that the biggest threat of that is the possibility of disappearing small languages. He referred that there is a danger of vanishing approximately 50% of the world’s languages. Holman (2015) argues that losing a language equals by losing its precious information and background. Following this notion, Grimes (2012) mentions that every language engages with the culture of its people and there are numbers of valuable information in it like animal and plants’ names. Furthermore, some vocabularies or phrases lost their exact meaning by translating (Caplan & Douglas, 2011). Another problem with this phenomenon is that learning lingua franca is a heavy burden on children in some countries like China (Walker, 2009), and sometimes parents force their children to learn it by giving up speaking the native language because of the wrong idea that they cannot learn two languages together (Grimes, 2012).

Some solutions suggested preventing of extinction of languages. Caplan and Douglas (2011) conclude that avoiding the disappearance of a language by law could be an effective way for Maori in New Zealand to make it again as an official language in the late 1980s. Grimes (2012) believes that learning the mother tongue by parents and educational plans could be one of the best choices, for instance in Hawaii which their mother tongue has rescued from extinction recently; parents teach their children Hawaiian and in the University of Hawaii there is a program that teaches Hawaiian. Evidence shows that the studying on ancient script could help to revive some languages like Hebrew (Woodbury, n.d.), and according to Grimes (2012), around five million people in Israel now use it as their mother tongue. Multilingualism could help some nations to have both global language and their mother tongue, for example, India, Puerto Rico and Mexico which English is used there as a second language (Fishman, 1998).

Even though a global language potentially could be as a bridge for achieving a better life (Walker,2009), it can be a cause of disappearing some languages. Some solutions have presented by researchers such as establishing some laws by governments, teaching mother tongue by parents, educational plans and multilingualism. However, in some under developing countries because of having other more important prioriteis, such as food, drinkable water, and medicine, it is not reasonable to put such a budget on maintaining languages. Additionally, multilingualism could be a heavy burden on the government as they need to translate official documents in all of them for example in Canada it should be in both English and French; therefore, at least twice money need to spend for it. In conclusion the trend of global language because of its significant benefits is unstoppable; however, solving the following problems such as preventing of vanishing other languages needs to more research by experts as it is a complicated concern.

References

1. Caplan, N. & Douglas, S.R. (2011). History of the Maori Language, In Q: Skill for success 5, Reading & Writing, Oxford University Press, (pp. 6-8)
2. Caplan, N. & Douglas, S.R. (2011) What happens when a language disappears?, In Q: Skills for success 5, reading and writing, Oxford University Press, (p. 17)
3. Fishman, J.A. (2009). The New Linguistic Order, In English for academic study: Reading & Writing, University of Reading, (pp. 207,211,212)
4. Grimes, B.F. (2012). Global language viability: causes, symptoms and cures for endangered languages, (pp. 1,2,8,14-17) Retrieved from http://www.sil.org/sociolx/ndg-lg-grimes.html
5. Holman, B. (2015, January 27). What does the world lose when a language dies? [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lNjnE_-Log
6. Walker, J. (2009, February). The World’s English Mania [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.ted.com/talks/jay_walker_on_the_world_s_english_mania
7. Wilford J.N. (2007, September 17). World’s Language Dying Off Rapidly. Retrieved January 19, 2019, from https://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/18/world/18cnd-language.html
8. Woodbury A.C. (n.d.). What is an endangered language? In B. Betty (Ed.), Retrieved from https://www.linguisticsociety.org/sites/default/files/Endangered_Languages.pdf

While completing an exercise during the cross-cultural management class which needed us to rate certain factors according to their importance in selecting a leader to work on a project abroad, I had rated language as one of the most important factors that constitute a leader’s ability to be successful. Ironically when we got to see the ideal ratings, language wasn’t rated with the highest importance. This provoked me to dig deeper into this scenario to research about the role of language in multicultural teams and to what extent does language affect the team dynamics while completing a task. This paper would thus address how language forms a part of an individual’s identity and how it influences multicultural and multilingual teams.

With the fast-changing demographics due to the increased population movements within and across borders, individuals need to be comfortable working with team members with different background and cultures, leveraging the diversity of talent towards completing the task efficiently and successfully. But this perspective also highlights that the notion of a native speaker cannot be applied as the sole model in language learning, breaking the traditional monolingual bias. This also opens new perspectives in terms of the development of an individual’s identity and its professional skills. Language identities such as being multilingual or monolingual, or a native speaker of a language which an individual is attributed to, are based on its regional usage and are oversimplified as they do not consider an individual’s actual communication behaviour in multicultural contexts. The traditional notions of language are defied in such situations which require the participants to have a thorough knowledge of each other’s background. Globalization is an important factor that has contributed to the falling of the rigid borders of language identity. There are various aspects of an individual’s personal background including ethnic, social and racial culture which go far beyond the national culture and shape up the reactions and expectations of individuals.

Individuals use the resources acquired through their multiple identities to assimilate their behaviour in a particular situation with ease. Individuals learn to interpret social contexts through the interaction in different cultural settings, where they build on a skill-set through retrospection and use the acquired skill set in multicultural business environments. Thus, having individuals with a multicultural and multilingual background helps the other members in the team to gain new skills that they could apply in similar settings with members having different cultural backgrounds. Bicultural individuals have been found to have enhanced cognitive skills such as cross-linguistic awareness, high levels of tolerance and emotional management as compared to a relatively narrow competence that a native speaker might have over an idealized form of language. These individuals have a higher capability to gauge the context in multicultural teams and help alleviate the team resources. Out of the 31 participants who were asked whether being multilingual/multicultural makes any difference, all of them answered that being multicultural/ multilingual gives them an enhanced skill set to leverage in the global business environment.

It is often observed that speakers may switch languages or alternate between dialect while addressing a group of individuals with different backgrounds to create social meaning and communicate their message effectively. Multilingual speakers possess unique skills that empower them to negotiate their identities while working in various social contexts according to the unique needs each context demands. An individual leading a multicultural team would use such ways to create trust and promote shared values amongst the members. It can be a bit risky as there is always a possibility of groups and divisiveness, and the individual should have a clear understanding of the context and backgrounds of the people who are a part of that particular team. While talking to a few participants as a part of gaining insights for the research, it was quite interesting to note that, code-switching, outside of formal settings had quite a negative impact on the team members who were not a part of that conversation. Speakers switching to their native languages while socializing make their teammates feel excluded which affects the team dynamics negatively. Socialization processes taking place outside formal settings through verbal interaction plays an important role in consolidating working processes and building rapport and trust. Holding informal conversations and small talk through which the team members get to know each other, understand the backgrounds of their coworkers and get an insight into their identity. These activities require an extremely subtle and sensitive use of language.

Lingua franca, which is a term used for a common language used as a bridge to communicate for various reasons when the participants involved have different native languages. Multilingual individuals integrate various elements of their native language into the lingua franca. Language can be a divisive factor in teams, as it is an important factor of an individual’s identity which can lead to discrimination or status enhancement. The traditional distinction based on whether the individual is a native or a non-native speaker also contributes to these negative effects. Underlying tensions due to task-related difficulties can be aggravated and channelled through the language-based identity differences in some teams, thus language differences can act as a catalyst making situations worse. It is interesting to see that 12 of the 96 participants said that they were assigned lesser work related to speaking due to their lack of fluency. Such scenarios can negatively affect that individual, making them feel left out and affecting their performance as they lose interest in the tasks assigned to them.

Coworkers learn to understand and accept divergent discursive practices while working in diverse teams which can stop the language differences from being a divisive factor and help the team to be more open-minded, leading to enhanced cooperation. This solidarity is due to the metacognitive abilities that these individuals develop, individuals who aren’t bicultural/ multicultural as well, through their multicultural experiences making them more understanding and accepting towards the differences in the team. This can be tied to the findings from the survey where 40 out of the 96 participants said that they were encouraged by their team members to participate and were extremely supportive towards them when they were working in a multicultural team setting and the common language was different from their native language.

A study on building global virtual teams is a good example which emphasizes the importance of socializing beyond your assigned tasks. Individuals draw on the resources within their linguistic repertoire and their multiple identities. During our X-culture project, we relied on our skills gained by previous experiences working in multicultural/multilingual teams and by using the abilities to possessed being multicultural individuals ourselves. Getting to know the team members by learning about their culture, their identity and thus getting an overall idea of the context helped us in bridging the differences and improving our performance as a team. This can be explained through the notion of successful teams are the ones who have individuals willing to embrace change and learn new behaviours.

Cultural and especially language differences provide an opportunity for high-performing individuals to change and adapt to the differences, embrace the divergent discursive practices and thus understand the context of each individual in the team. Though almost 46 out of the 96 participants who took the survey said that they were more comfortable working in teams with members who speak their native language. Teams made up of speakers of different languages can face challenges with respect to sharing the same team identity and also exchanging ideas through informal exchanges outside of regular task processes. Hearing someone speak a non-native language or have an unfamiliar accent can distinguish a person psychologically as an outgroup member. Unless the individuals are required to speak the common language while completing any technical or other work-related tasks, they are likely to avoid communicating in that language due to the fear of being negatively perceived because of their lack of fluency. Individuals in such situations can be caught up in a dilemma where they have to choose between managing their identity and any potential tensions within the group arising due to the differences. It can take a lot of effort to conform to a multicultural team and individuals were more apprehensive about changing due to nervousness in being a part of a team with speakers who didn’t speak their native language. As learned during the course, change can often be perceived as extremely uncomfortable, but it is extremely necessary for an individual in a team to change in order to meet the expected performance goals that are expected from that individual.

In the end, I would just like to highlight that the team composition plays an important part in shaping performance. Having a balance and avoiding clustering by nationalities is pivotal towards forming trust and prevent teams from the bias occurring due to the domination by groups of similar minded people. These factors are necessary to build a shared team culture or “meta-identity” and prevent the formation of groups along the cultural and language differences. Fluency of a particular language or in-depth of knowledge of national culture is not as important as to the extent at which individuals use their metacognitive abilities towards learning about multiple languages and cultures. We can, therefore, look more into the language-general/language-specific skill set distinction rather than the notion of native/non-native speaker framework. It is slightly contradictory to note that almost 44 out of the 96 participants in the survey said that the difference between cultures and languages didn’t quite affect their team dynamics while working in a multicultural/multilingual team. An explanation for this can be attributed to other background factors and context. Individuals from a particular institution or an organization who are a part of that community who share the same values, ideas and objectives wouldn’t consider language and cultural differences as a major factor due to the experiences that have brought them together and be a part of that particular team.

References

1. Cohen, L., & Kassis-Henderson, J. (2017). Revisiting culture and language in global management teams: Toward a multilingual turn. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 17(1), 7-22.
2. Vigier, M., & Spencer-Oatey, H. (2017). Code-switching in newly formed multinational project teams: Challenges, strategies and effects. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 17(1), 23-37.
3. Woo, D., & Giles, H. (2017). Language attitudes and intergroup dynamics in multilingual organizations. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 17(1), 39-52.

An argument is a valid product of argumentative reasoning consisting of at least one claim and one premise. It is the process by which many claims are offered based on premises and one reaches a conclusion that is relevant and provides good grounds. Argumentation is the process by which arguments are dialogically and dialectically constructed.

Logic is the science that we use to explain or represent a consistent argument about a particular topic. Everyone argues their position at one time or the other and may choose to do so in various manners. However, a logical argument follows certain guiding principles or procedures in hope of arriving at a desired conclusion which is cogent and rationally acceptable. The ultimate goal is to present an idea that is both consist and coherent.

A logical argument follows a certain order. It starts with a proposition and ends with a conclusion. A proposition is the starting point of an argument or the statement that one is trying to prove. It is the equivalent of a hypothesis.

The premise is the statement or statements that follow the proposition. The premise is basically one’s evidence or reasons used to justify the proposition. Just like scientists must do tests and observations to prove that the hypothesis is true or false, a logical argument must present premises to prove that it is sound. The argument’s inference is based on one’s premise or evidence, and one may discover new statements. This is the process of using evidence to discover new propositions. After completing the cyclic process of stating our proposition and presenting premises or evidences that may lead us to new propositions, then we will arrive at a conclusion.

Need and Significance of Study

Teaching has gone a long way from the traditional lecturer-listener system to a more interactive experiential endeavour. Today, teachers are not just lecturers, but guides; students are not just listeners but co-explorers of knowledge. Education has become more interactive and experiential for both the parties. In the present era information resources are available equally to the teacher and learner and both collaboratively create new knowledge. Therefore in the present scenario we need students who have higher order language skills and logical reasoning especially at the graduate level. The present curriculum warrants active participation from the part of the students and one of the most important components of learning in college is academic discourse, which requires argumentation and debate. But these days argumentation and debate inevitably lend themselves to flawed reasoning and rhetorical errors. Many of these errors are considered logical fallacies. Logical fallacies are commonplace in the classroom. In is at this juncture logical argumentation gains significance in teaching and learning. The most immediate and obvious benefit of logical argumentation is that it will improve the quality of the arguments one use. When one create logically unsound arguments, you are much less likely to convince people that one have a valid point to make, or get them to agree with you.

As the need for logical argumentation in developing higher order language skills can be justified, it becomes inevitable that one teach the students on how an argument should and should not be presented so that it will be easier to un-muddle the ideas and reform them into a stronger pattern.

Another pertinent aspect in language development is that the students must develop the ability to think logically and inferentially about language and develop different skills for auditory and reading comprehension. The ability to understand complex sentence structure, the ability to obtain the main idea and details as well as understanding figurative language, making predictions and inferences play a crucial role in the skills needed for auditory and reading comprehension. These skills can be developed if one involves the students in direct use of the language and argumentation is one effective means. Hence the investigators attempted a study on the effectiveness of logical argumentation in enhancing higher order language skills and logical thinking.

Objectives of The Study

1. To prepare lesson transcript based on logical argumentation for graduate students
2. To test the effectiveness of Logical Argumentation for enhancing higher order language skill of language students at college level
3. To test the effectiveness of Logical Argumentation for enhancing logical thinking of language students at college level

Logical Argumentation

An argument is the process by which one explains how a conclusion was reached. Logic is the science that we use to explain or represent a consistent argument about a particular topic. Everyone argues their position at one time or the other and may choose to do so in various manners. However, a logical argument follows certain guiding principles or procedures in hopes of arriving at a desired conclusion. The ultimate goal is to present an idea that is both consist and coherent.

Higher Order Language Skills

Higher level language refers to skills that go beyond basic language abilities. Examples of tasks that require higher level language skills are those that require you to use language to:Reason,Provide explanations,Make predictions,Problem solve,Look at things from another person’s perspective and Recognise the difference between literal and non-literal language

Logical thinking skill

Logical Thinking. The ability of an individual to think in a disciplined manner or base his thoughts on facts and evidence is known as his logical thinking skills. Very simply, logical thinking skills mean incorporating logic into one’s thinking process whenever analyzing a problem on order to come up with a solution.

Methodology of the Study

Investigators adopted Experimental method for the study .Selected 90 Graduate students for the study .45 were grouped as experimental group and others control group.Pre Test on higher order language skill was given to both groups .Scores were tabulated . Experimental group was treated with Logical Argumentation and control group with Lecture Method .After the treatment again the same test was administered as Post Tests and scores were tabulated .

Since the investigator selected non – equivalent intact class group as it is inconvenient to sort out students into different equated groups, so it is necessary to analyze the data using statistical technique, Analysis of Co – variance (ANCOVA) in which the difference in the initial status removed statistically. Before proceeding to ANCOVA, ANOVA was done and the F ratio for the Pre Test and Post Test was computed.

The obtained F ratios were tested for significance. The obtained Fx value (Fx = 0.34, df (1, 88), p > .05) is not significant at .05 level of significance. It implies that there exists no significant difference in the Pre Test higher order language skills scores for students of experimental and control groups. The obtained Fy value (Fy = 72.93, df (1, 88), p < .01) is significant at .01 level of significance. It revealed that there is significant difference in the Post Test Higher Order Language Skills scores for students of experimental and control groups.

The obtained Fyx ratio was tested for significance and found that it is significant at .01 level of significance as the obtained Fyx (Fyx = 75.91, p < .01) is significant at .01 level of significance. It is clear from the result that the final means differ significantly after they have been adjusted for initial difference on Pre Test. Hence it can be concluded that Logical Argumentation is more effective than Lecture Method for enhancing higher order language skillsstudents at graduate level

The adjusted means of Post Test Higher Order Language Skills scores for students of experimental and control groups were computed. The difference between the adjusted Post Test scores was tested for significance.

It is clear that the calculated value of t (t = 8.71, p < .01) is significant at .01 level of significance. It indicated that the students of experimental and control groups differ significantly in their Post Test Higher Order Language Skills scores as they were adjusted to Pre Test scores. It is also clear that the mean scores of Post Test Higher Order Language Skills scores for students of experimental group (M = 67.57) is significantly higher than that of control group (M = 57.18). it leads to the inference that Logical Argumentation is effective for enhancing higher order language skills of students at graduate level.

The obtained F ratios were tested for significance. The obtained Fx value (Fx = 1.38, df (1, 88), p > .05) is not significant at .05 level of significance.It implies that there exists no significant difference in the pre test scores of logical thinking skill of students of experimental and control groups. the obtained Fy value (Fy = 9.49, df (1, 88), p < .01) is significant at .01 level of significance. It revealed that there is significant difference in the post test scores of logical thinking of graduate students of experimental and control groups.

The adjusted sum of squares for post test scores was computed and the F – ratio was calculated. The summary of ANCOVA of post test scores of logical thinking of students in experimental and control groups.

The obtained Fyx ratio was tested for significance and found that it is significant at .01 level of significance as the obtained Fyx (Fyx = 10.26, p < .01) is significant at .01 level of significance. it is clear from the result that the final means differ significantly after they have been adjusted for initial difference on pre test.

The adjusted means of post test scores of experimental and control groups were computed. The difference between the adjusted post test scores was tested for significance. The data for adjusted means of post test scores of students in the experimental and control groups.

It is clear that the calculated value of t (t = 3.20, p < .01) is significant at .01 level of significance. It indicated that the students of experimental and control groups differ significantly in their post test scores of logical thinking as they were adjusted to pre test scores. It is also clear that the mean scores of post test scores of logical thinking of students of experimental group (M = 40.10) is significantly higher than that of control group (M = 36.34). It leads to the inference that logical argumentation is effective on enhancing logical thinking of students at graduate level.

• The prepared logical argumentation material is effective in enhancing higher order language skills
• Logical argumentation is effective in enhancing logical thinking skill of students at graduate level
• The study also revealed that logical argumentation is an effective way to promote interest in learning

Conclusion

The study conclusively revealed that logical argumentation is highly effective in enhancing higher order language skills of graduate students .This study can be adopted in different levels of learning for enhancing not only language skills but also othe thinking skills and creativity of the learner.it will be helpful in developing listening and speaking skills of the learners

References

1. Candlin,C.N,&Edelhoff,C.(1982).Challenges: teachers hand book. Harlow: Logman.
2. Garrett, H>E.(1981).Statistics in Psychology and Education.Bombay:Vakils,Feffer&Simons Ltd.,pp.62-150
3. David ,W. &Stockburger.(2017). Introdotory Statistics Concepts, Models, and Applications.
4. www.cleverism.com/skills-and-tools/logical-thinking/
5. https://www.sarahbuckleytherapies.co.uk/2016/05/higherlevel_language_skills_by_kate_saunders.html
6. www.wisegeek.com/what-is-logical-reasoning.htm
7. www.allmathwords.org/en/l/logicalargument.html
8. www.thefreedictionary.com/logical+argument
9. https://study.com/academy/lesson/logical-argument-definition-parts-examples.html
10. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumentation
11. www.csun.edu/~hcpas003/argument.html

Text messaging is one example of interpersonal communication. People nowadays use interpersonal communication most of their time to communicate. Teenagers use text messaging as their number one way of communicating with their friends, family and even other people. The researcher decided to investigate on how text messaging influences teenager’s use of grammar and whether this effect is specific to grammar language in general.

To begin with, research suggests that by using text messaging there might be the formation of formal and informal modes in English. ¬¬ It is also shown that in teenagers, they create their own language and they use ellipsis and elision. They ¬¬¬tend to remove some words like in ‘Do you want to eat?’ to ‘eat?’, ‘kind of’ to ‘kinda’ which is grammatically incorrect and it is not formal.This is proven by time to time that they carry on this habit to their daily face to face conversation; ‘Give me a ring when you’re available’, ‘OMG, last night’s party was a blast.’ They still use elisions, ellipsis and also slang words which are considered informal.Ellipsis is the omission from speech or writing of a word or words that are superfluous or able to be understood from contextual clues.Elision is the omission of a sound or syllable when speaking (as in I’m, let’s, e ‘ en ).(Wikipedia)

In addition, the usage of text messaging increases the punctuation and grammar mistakes in children and teenagers.There was a study that looks out at children’s grammar ability when it comes to the usage of text messaging (Kemp et al., Wood et al.). The study involves 5-10-year-old children within a 2-day period on how text messaging affects their grammar assessment. It has been shown that text messaging has affected the way that children aged 8-10 years old. Theywere asked to perform a spelling task, and majority of the children made more grammar violations the same as they did in text messaging. The observation of the grammar violations has to do with the missing punctuation like ‘It was ace are you coming out later?’ which in mid-sentence it was missing a full stop or a comma, capitalization error ‘I am going to see tom tonight.’ Which was missing proper noun capitals, word and grammatical errors (missing words ‘ Am going out later’ which is missing a pronoun or a subject, lack of subject verb agreement ‘ Matt like fish’ the subject is singular while the verb is for plural , and grammatical homonyms ‘ Their going to town to buy sweets.’)(Wood et al., Kemp et al., Wiley et al. 2014)

Furthermore, text messaging hinders all types of communication including, written, face-to-face, and surface level. Research suggests that around 72% of teenagers text regularly, and one in three sends more than 100 texts per day (Pew Research Center). It can be seen that teenagers preferred text messaging as one of their method of communication.While texting hasn’t been around long enough for researchers to review its long-term effects on communication, there’s indirect evidence that it’s rapidly altering the ways people communicate with one another both via text and in person. Researchers said that people who have grown up to texting may have a poor writing skill than the people who regularly communicate using the correct grammar and sentences either face to face, phone calls, or even via e-mail. Teenagers or young adults might lose their ability to modify the tone when they’re speaking and their style depending on who they are talking to.

Language immersion is widely considered to be one of the fastest ways to learn a language. I personally can attest that it is very effective, having spent months living with Spanish-only households while attending Spanish immersion classes in Mexico. While that experience vastly improved my Spanish literacy, it did not however give me all the tools necessary to succeed in a Spanish-speaking country. I left comfortable and confidant with the language. And because I had background in English education I was able to apply my knowledge in advanced writing and language concepts to a new and unfamiliar language. Trying to learn unfamiliar concepts in a language you do not speak is incredibly difficult and overwhelming. Similarly, an English-only education does not adequately prepare an English as a second language (ESL) student to live the American dream. English literacy is essential to function in an English-dominated American population, however surface level language skills are not enough for any student to thrive in the American public school system.

The demand for trendy dual-language schools by privileged families is threatening the nation’s supply of dual-language educators, recruiting them away from the non-native English language learners who need them most. This pattern goes against core dual-language education values, catering to the desires of privileged families instead of educating English language learners to become part of the mainstream and embrace the American dream. According to Jennifer M. Ortman, chief of the Population Projections Branch of the U.S. Census Bureau, “the use of a language other than English spoken at home increased by 148 percent” between 1980 and 2009 (Ortman par. 2).

The English-only or English immersion method approach to English as a Second Language educating is a tough-love approach. Its supporters argue that dual-language education wastes time and money. They believe that cost-effective English-only education better prepares English as a Second Language students for an Americanized world. English-only proponents argue that rapid assimilation is in the best interest of students. One English-only advocacy group, ProEnglish, argues that dual language education diverts valuable time from core classes as students focus on learning English. As a result, they must work much harder if they ever are to catch up academically. They argue that America is the most powerful nation, and English is the international language, which makes multilingualism and dual-language education irrelevant. ProEnglish further explains that “graduating from high school without fluency and literacy in English deprives students of opportunity in an English-speaking country” (Bilingual Education par 2). ProEnglish cites a Lexington Institute study, that shows that many of the highest performing students in public school systems started ‘ with little or no English,” demonstrating the success of immersion for English language learners (Bilingual Education par 6).

ProEnglish’s cost concerns are valid, but perhaps not well-informed. Because public dual-language schools provide specialized instruction, it is often assumed that they are more expensive than their monolingual counterparts. I would argue, however, that by not supporting dual language education, we may end up paying significantly more money over time. Students who cannot understand their teachers, for example, may not be able to learn. They may struggle to attain English literacy, become frustrated, and drop out of school. An Ed Week article observes that “English-only education works when students work hard and are smart” (Mitchel par. 4). Otherwise, the approach can result in underperforming or, worse, escalating school dropouts. These failures could potentially cost the American economy billions of dollars in the long run. As the old adage says, “If you think education is expensive, try ignorance!”

The English-only immersion approach is fast and effective if English fluency is your only goal. Professor Jim Cummins, a bilingual education and cognitive development researcher at the University of Toronto, argues that non-English-speaking students placed in an English-only classroom may not learn anything beyond surface-level language skills in either language. A dual-language education system allows English language learners to continue growing deeper cognitive skills in their native language, even as they learn English. Cummins argues that with well-implemented dual language programs the “minority language can be used as a medium of instruction,” and that the “students’ proficiency in the societal majority language does not suffer” because advanced language concepts, academic content, and learning strategies transfer across all languages (Cummins par 5).

English-only advocates promote assimilationist education practices, arguing that English is the international language, and we need to prepare students to succeed in an English-dominant America. In recent history English has been considered the international language, the language of business, of trade, and of foreign affairs and diplomacy. But this was not always the case and it may be changing again, with such powerful nations as China, Russia, and Germany increasing their global economic influence. China threatens our spot for the dominant language of trade and business. With the gap between the U.S. and the other prominent nations closing, the future looks increasingly multilingual. Bénédicte de Montlaur, cultural counselor of France’s U.S. Embassy, argues that multi-language skills are crucial for staying competitive in an increasingly interconnected world. “The future in America, and everywhere, is multilingual,” he writes (De Montlaur par 15). Dual language is a decisive advantage if the U.S. wishes to stay globally competitive in the future.

De Montlaur cites a recent Pew study finding that only “20 percent of K-12 students in America study a foreign language” compared with an average of 92 percent in Europe (De Montlaur par 15). He passionately argued in a New York Times Op-Ed that “in an increasingly global world, Americans should be adding, not slashing, opportunities for their children to learn another tongue” (De Montlaur par 14). If the next generation of Americans wants to actively participate in a multilingual world, dual-language and multicultural education is crucial. Dual language programs help English language learners achieve the English literacy and fluency needed to assimilate and take part in the American dream. Simultaneously, they allow English speakers to learn a new language, thereby helping American business and culture better compete worldwide. All students benefit from a dual-language program, better preparing them to function competitively in a culturally and linguistically diverse America and world.

We, the people, use language every day to communicate, negotiate, express feelings, etc. We can call the language as a system of different symbols such as; writings which allows us to communicate our ideas when we do not have the opportunity to express in front of an audience. Thoughts and feelings with this I mean that we need language to be able to describe how we feel either physically or mentally. When we pronounce the word language many people create an idea that refers to a person expressing or communicating their ideas verbally. But it does not always refer to that language it also refers to when a person uses body and gestural language which is called non-verbal language. In this essay I will talk about how language affects culture and how language describe us who we are.

It is essential that the human being uses language because language allows us to establish communication with other beings, whether human or not. If we start to imagine how human beings communicate if language does not exist then we would be living in a confusing world. What I am trying to say is that human beings without language could not express what we feel much less to share ideas. According to David W. Haines the author of An Introduction to Sociocultural said “There might well be emotions without words, but it would be much harder to elaborate different kinds of emotions and certainly to communicate emotions.While language may be what make us most fully humans, we speak different languages.” There are people who are unfortunately born without the ability to speak for them, it is very difficult for them to explain how they feel, share their ideas, and say what bothers them. We can see that these types of people learn ASL language and with them they can talk to people who know how to communicate with them. Unfortunately, the ASL language is not very common in our society and that is why some people cannot express themselves as they really feel.

There are cases of human beings who only speak a language that is in extinction; those people are grown in rural places and most of them are indigenous. In the interview that David Treuer had he arguments that “Sure, that we live beyond and behind these ideas about what a “real Indian” is or a “traditional Indian” or what reservation life “is like.” And the ideas that people have about these things are typically poorly informed ideas and ideas drawn from the Indian of the imagination, James Fenimore Cooper’s Indians or the Indians one finds in Dances With Wolves, and so on. So our lives, their real dimensions, which I think are interesting and beautiful, often escape notice.” There are people who have a closed mentality and that is why when a person says that emigrated to America and says that he/she comes from Central America they come to think that they are people who come from an indigenous family and look closely at the way that the person speaking. Those kind of people come to believe that they have more power of a Latinos because of the fact that the indigenous people are seen as a very low race in the eyes of society. The same experience the author had with respect that society treats them differently because of the culture where he comes from and they will not see the positive side of a person coming from Indian family.

Language affects culture since you have to learn the manners that a certain culture has; if a person works requires giving business speech and is recognized globally then that person has to learn how he/she is going to treat his audience in each country he/she goes. If that person is going to give a speech in a part of middle east asia then he has to be very attentive to his body, verbal language, and voice since he could make expressions that go against that culture. According to the article “On the Evolutionary History of Culture” by Ernst Kapp arguments that “For the latter are projections of the organs of vocalization and hearing: in other words, they are the apparatuses through which the general aggregate of organic sounds, immanent in human enunciation,achieves a mechanically specific expression” When someone gives a presentation in public, they have to be aware of how they will be able to get the attention of their audience even if the topic they are going to talk about is not interested. Voice and management can be one of the main tools that can attract a person’s attention.

Language plays a very important role in our lives since we can express with it who we are. Society can come to assume that we have a certain personality based on our verbal and non-velval language. If a person comes from Asia, society assumes that they are people who are intelligent and who are very strict with their culture. However, the five senses that a person uses to describe another person may come to trick them and that leads them to create different assumptions. Most of us make this mistake in trusting our senses but we are used to it since it has been part of our lives.

In conclusion, language plays a very important role in our daily lives. We as humans use language, regardless of language, to create conversations, do business, describe how we are, share our point of view, share ideas, etc. There are people who come to make assumptions based on the nationality of an individual which is something that should not be done. Nationality does not defend us as a person and that is where language comes in and we use it to defend ourselves. We have to learn different verbal and nonverbal languages to be able to communicate with people from different countries since we don’t all share the same religion or culture.