Category: Linguistics

Introduction

Stanley Fish talks about the importance of sentence structure in instruction, relates it to life, and explains how these little aspects make up brilliant content. Chapter three and four discuss the contents of a good sentence and how the intended meaning does not matter in sentence structure.

People often get dazed by the brilliance of the world, inventions, and the human beings themselves. Human beings fail to look at the simple aspects or the efforts that lead to the genius creations, masterpiece novels, blockbuster movies, and personal fame. One may find it interesting to read a breathtaking novel, article or theater script.

However, most people end up admiring the final product without paying notice to the simple sentence structures that make up this interesting reads. Rhyming words, verb agreement, syllables, word choice, word order, use of vocabulary and wordiness affect the format of a sentence. People should start appreciating the small things in life because, without them, the greater outcomes would not be possible.

Analysis

John Grisham, Dan Brown, Sydney Sheldon, J.K. Rowling, and William Shakespeare are some of the worlds most notable writers of romance, fiction, adventure and poetry. Critics have always disregarded other upcoming writers or those writers who fail to evolve with time.

The novelists or movie scriptwriters who fail fall out of favor with the public due to lack of evolution or creativity. Stanley Fish states that a verbal fluency is achieved through hours of writing nonsense until a writer arrives at a final masterpiece (Fish 32). Fish uses the musical analogy to explain this fact. Most musicians scribble pages of lyrics trying to come up with the perfect song only to throw them away.

Classical musicians such as Mozart also experimented with notes and keys until that point they came up with their majestic musical movements and concertos. The key point is that the building blocks of these major and great works were simple musical notes, words, or syllables, which means that even meaningless sentences are useful in understanding sentence structure.

Noam Chomsky explains the concept of nonsensical ideas using the colorless green ideas sleep furiously sequence. The sentence has a well-structured format, but makes no sense. If one reverses the words to furiously sleep ideas green colorless, the sequence bears no grammatical or structural sense. Therefore, by looking at this example, one understands the simple aspects that make up a sentence.

Form is the building block of all inventions in the world of literature, poetry, and music. A sentence cannot be used to create great content without form (Fish 33). In comedy, people often laugh at Kevin Harts jokes without considering the effort it took to create a joke. The same applies to sentences. One needs to appreciate the effort, practice, and choice of a comedians sentence structure and form to draw meaning from the verbal content.

There are many people that are not funny, even if they were paid to crack jokes. Some things are just inborn in people and cannot be explained. Whether it is instinct, talent, research, experience, there are those people that do things better than others. The same applies for sentences because not all human beings use the same vocabulary. Not all people are outspoken and good orators or writers. Therefore, one should not work to be like other people.

On the contrary, people should write personal thoughts and make personal evaluations out of things. Some sentences may be strange to human understanding because of poor form. In Lewis Carrolls Jabberwocky, the phrase the slithy toves is easy to understand because the rules of structure state that the phrase should have a noun and an adjective (par. 1).

If the phrase consisted of two adjectives like the agitated beautiful, the sentence would not make sense. If one were to be told to substitute one adjective for a noun, most people would do it. However, few would explain how they did it and how they knew it was the correct thing to do (Fish 35).

The same case applies to cooking, cracking jokes, acting a film, writing a novel, composing music, or singing a song. Most people would not explain how they come up with the final brilliant ideas because they would have to consider the analytical and subconscious inferences they make without knowing they were doing it.

Making that extra mile of considering these analytical and conscious inferences enables one to understand the ideology of form and structure. Understanding this concept enables one to appreciate the various structures that are instrumental in the development of the jokes, movies, songs, novels, and poems that people admire today (Fish 36).

Conclusion

People should start appreciating the small things in life because, without them, the greater outcomes would not be possible. As shown in the analysis, grammatical and semantic structures make up literature, poetry, lyrics or other forms of content. Human beings should understand the building blocks of sentence structure and form to appreciate fully what the artist or writer intends to convey. Sometimes, people are quick to judge others but fail to notice the simple things in life because they are the key to innovation.

Works Cited

Fish, Stanley. It is Not the Thought That Counts. How to Write a Sentence: And How to Read One. New York: Harper, 2011. 32-40. Print.

Carroll, Lewis. n.d. Jabberwocky  Carroll. n.d. Web. 2014.

An enchantment is a feeling or a great liking for something which is out of the ordinary or unusual. It is more of a spell which is created using words (Gratz 24). The uses of enchantment can also be said to be the importance of fairy tales especially to children. The uses of enchantment were discussed in detail by an Australian philosopher called Bruno Battelheim.

He suggested that traditional fairy tales had some element of darkness, death, witches and injuries and gave children a chance to experience fear and grapple with it in a symbolic way. Bettelheim argued that if children engaged themselves with the socially evolved stories or tales, they would grow emotionally and they would be well prepared for the future

Fairy tales are not real but they tend to be very resourceful and they teach a lot. They seem to answer a deep need in all of us to find stories and situations that we can identify with in real life (Gratz 31). Bettelheim has been the best known psychologist to have developed a thought and argument that fairy tales are the best tool for promoting child development. Fairy tales usually get across different messages to children but the main message that it gets to children is that they cannot avoid the struggle against severe difficulties in life.

The struggles in life are therefore inevitable and hence the children need to be given guidance and direction in a symbolic manner on how to deal with them. This can be shown in the fairy tale Hansel and Gretel where the children had to struggle to survive the harsh conditions in the woods so far away from home and they also had to struggle to defeat the witch in the woods and find their way home through the thick woods.

Many modern stories that are written for children nowadays are usually for their entertainment and for the purpose of learning in class and they are not practical. This is because they usually give the child the picture and hope of eternal life and good things in life.

Fairy tales on the other hand are more practical and they give the child the picture of life full of struggle and human predicament for example many fairy tales usually begin with the death of a mother or father which is followed by agonizing pain and suffering of the dependants of that parent as it happens in real life (Bettelheim 97).

Other stories on the other hand, the parent usually age totally until he or she decides that it is time for the younger generation to take over and the young generation has to prove themselves worthy. This means that even if the parent dies, the dependants will not suffer much.

This can be shown by the fairy tale written by the Grimm brothers known as the three feathers where the king was old and almost dying and did not know which of his sons should inherit the kingdom. He then decided to give them a difficult test and the person who did best would inherit the kingdom. This tale engages the children and prompts them to deal with their dilemmas in life (Bettelheim 134). Another use of fairy tales to children is that it offers children the solution dealing with their dilemmas in a level in which they can understand.

The fairy tales are usually very simple and direct unlike the other modern stories which have more complex and developed plots. The fairy tales therefore gives the child a better understanding of how to deal with certain situations in life at their level of understanding. Unlike other modern stories where evil is just an imagination that is not real, in fairy tales, evil is as omnipresent as a virtue. This means that evil and virtue are looked at in the same way.

Evil and virtue are therefore said to be a duality in fairy tales and this duality poses a problem and struggle on how to deal with it or overcome it (Julavits 76). Evil is considered as an attraction and that is why fairy tales are good for the development of children. Most people fear evil and they usually develop certain skills or characters and strengths to help them deal with the evils they encounter. This therefore shows that evil is an attraction as shown in the fairy tale Hansel and Gretel.

Evil in this fairy tale is symbolized by the woodcutters wife who wanted the children to die. It is also symbolized by the witch in the woods who wanted to eat both Hansel and Gretel (Bettelheim 156). Fairy tales are also used to make children have an experience in moral education. The fairy tale Hansel and Gretel teaches children to be courageous and to be fair and do good. This is because those who did not act morally ended up dead like the stepmother of Hansel and Gretel and the witch in the woods

Evil people in fairy tales never win because they are usually punished. This does not mean that the virtue always wins in a fairy tale it only shows that the child identifies more with the hero and therefore the child will try to do what the hero does and be like the hero. This will help the child in developing good morals and doing what is right.

It is not like the virtue always wins or is always expected to win but the child always goes through all the trials and tribulations with the hero who finally wins at the end and therefore according to the child the virtue has won and he or she will try to practice the virtue.

This can be shown in the fairy tale by the brothers Grimm called Hansel and Gretel where a young brother and sister who were threatened by a hag and the two children save their lives by outwitting her. The child can relate to this fairytale and try to outwit the challenges that he or she is facing.

Fairy tales are therefore important in child development both mentally and physically because it prepares them to be able to deal with certain challenges that they face in real life. They always tend to imitate the hero and try and be like him in real life and hence they develop certain skills by trying to act like the hero. They also develop good virtues in the process

Works cited

Bettelheim, Bruno. The Uses of Enchantment: The Meaning and Importance of Fairy Tales. New York. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. 2010. Print

Gratz, Conrad. The experience of living with enchantment. New York: ProQuest

Julavits, Heidi. The Uses of Enchantment. London: Random House. 2008

In todays society, many people cannot differentiate between language and lexicon. Although the two are widely used by many people, it is quite interesting to note how the illiteracy of many when it comes to defining each one of them explicitly. Nevertheless, a few can differentiate the difference between lexicon and language.

Language seems to be quite familiar among many people. After all, each person speaks a certain language confined within an ethnic or race or a minority group of people. Language is a mode under which information can be encoded and decoded at the same time. Nevertheless, language is a broad word comprising of many information recipes that together form language.

From the nonprofessionals point of view, language is a medium through which, people pass or exchange emotions, ideas, and opinions. Language varies from one place to another due to different cultures and sometimes, the generations of the day. Therefore, in simple terms, grammarians define language as the channeling of opinions and feelings mainly through capricious indications like gestures, sounds, or verbal ciphers. Psycholinguistics classifies language into two main categories.

The first class of language is of course-spoken languages like English and French. The second class of languages comprises of written languages including the use of signs. On the other hand, cognitive psychologists do use the word language about an individuals cognitive competence when it comes to language use and applications.

On the other hand, the lexicon is more of an ingredient of language that language itself. Psycholinguistics define lexicon as a language rich of terminologies, words, and vocabularies forming lexemes- word actualizations. In addition to lexemes, lexicon follows linguistic rules like morpho-syntactic to induce a clear arrangement of vocabularies and words in somebodys psyche. Lexicon has numerous advantages, especially in cognitive psychology.

For example, under lexicon, different words forming a particular tense arrange according to lexical stipulations. Moreover, it introduces additional rules and language ingredients like suffixes and verbs to create a coherent language description. In most cases, lexicon consists of words from one type of language without mixing or characterization. (Aitchison, 2003, pp. 3-29).

In cognitive psychology, language hence, lexicon forms the basis of understanding individuals background abilities. Cognitive psychologists analyze an individuals language proficiency by referring to the lexical ability of that individual. In many occasions, an individuals richness in vocabulary is only measurable through mental lexicon and language mastery. If an individual has wide mastery knowledge of vocabularies of a certain language say English, without any hesitation, this person falls in the class of language orators.

Language comprises of numerous features that differentiate it from one communication mode to another. The figure below shows thirteen human language features relevant to human communication and understanding. The role of language features is to impart smoothness into language communication systems for effective communication.

The main basic features of the language include words, sentences, text, and phonemes popularly known as phonetics  each of these features playa n important role in executing proper language communication channels. For example, a composition of words forms a sentence. However, these words must follow certain syntactical rules. In other words, sentences ought to be grammatically correct structures word units to achieve cognition. (Hyde, 1998, Para. 2-11).

Furthermore, the construction of sentences relies on the part of speech used. Sentences convey a message to the reader or a listener. Different sentences comprise of different words that pose different expressions, questions, command, or requests.

The choice of words forming a sentence depends on the theme of discussion and the intended listeners. Nevertheless, the formation of sentence structures does not depend on the relationship between superseding and proceeding words but rather, grammatical structure. (Diane & Rolf, 2005, pp. 1-12).

Different words join under the grammatical rule to form sentence structures. For this reason, words are important in any communication system. This is because; no language can exist exclusive of words. Words can be either written or spoken. Writing is associated with literacy because; there are people who cannot write words they always speak.

On the other hand, people can change words into sign language and apply them to any communication system. Grammarians depict words to be units of language. Of great importance is the ability of words to induce sound and meaning for later feedback. Moreover, a word is a group of combined letters-morphemes, which represent a certain language.

Another feature of language is text. Words form sentences that people use for conversation. If someone writes words and sentences in a manuscript or a book to convey a message-conversation, undeniably, they become a text. Notably, it is the arrangement of words that result in the creation of sentences paramount in conversations.

Lastly, the fourth and most important language feature is phonemes-phonetics. Different languages with a different sound and writing styles do exist due to phonemes. Phonemes create sounds in languages, thus making one language to be unique from another. However, there is no further identification of sound not unless that sound use symbols. Each sound converses different meaning, thus, giving languages immense contrasts. Phonetics is the proper pronunciation of words according to the specific language. In phonetics, words classify into physical speech sounds to deduce a physiological meaning within a conversation.

Interestingly, all language features also act as levels of language structure and processing channels. This is because; nobody expects any language to exist without basic features like words, sentences, phonemes, and text. Proper pronunciation of letters forms words of certain languages. This is, of course, through the creation of familiar sounds, which the speaker must remember at all times.

Thus, without phonemes, words cannot exist; and hence language. The product of phonemes is words. Words form the smallest but most important unit of language. Consequently, words link according to syntactical rules to create a sentence structure used in conversations. The mastery of language depends on the ability to remember phonemes and words as the foundations of language.

Language is paramount in the study of cognitive psychology. Cognitive psychology deals with individuals mental abilities like memory, perception, behavior, language, and influence. Thus, language is an ingredient in the study of cognitive psychology. Through language, cognitive psychologists can identify hidden personal characteristic features, about knowledge: the brain stores words and phonemes for conversations. Thus, words and phonemes participate in the cognitive reasoning of an individual.

Psycholinguistics and cognitive psychologists do agree that language is a key feature in the study of cognitive psychology. This is because; the brain must remember the meaning of each phoneme and word for smooth communications. Additionally, the brain must store and retrieve the dissimilar sounds of these words and phonemes to learn a certain language.

Different languages have different phonemes hence, words. Thus, the mastery of any language depends on the familiarity and ability to remember the meaning of each phoneme and word. If a person hears certain words and understands them, then eventually the person can respond positively to those words whether it was a command, question or discussion. Thus, the brain plays an important cognitive role in retrieving the stored words from the memory bank for a conversation with other parties. (Sadurst, 2010, Para. 1-14).

In conclusion, language is fundamental to understanding an individuals intelligence and mind insight. Through ones language, a person who understands that particular language can easily know the cognition of another person.

Reference List

Aitchison, J. (2003). Words in the Mind: An Introduction to the Mental Lexicon. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers.

Diane, P., & Rolf, A. (2005). Grounding cognition: The Role of Perception and Action in Memory, Language and Thinking. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Hyde, K. 1998. The Features of Human Language. Web.

Sadurst. (2010). Lexicon and Language 74. Hubpages. Web.

Stories are an integral part of peoples lives. Whether told in person or read in books, stories help an individual shape their opinion about the world as much as communication with other people does.

Reading stories can be viewed as a form of one-sided communication. Since most stories are intended to get a specific moral or message across, stories play inspirational roles in peoples personal lives by providing them with experience and serving as cautionary tales about specific dangers.

The actual role of stories, in general, is quite hard to nail down due to the lack of homogeneity in the array of narrations that people hear or read daily. However, a closer look at the structure of most stories, i.e., the introduction, the list of the key points and the ending with a possible denouement, will show that, traditionally, stories are supposed to teach a valuable lesson or get a specific message across.

Some stories do so in a subtle manner, while some hammer theyre moral in a rather obnoxious way; however, each is designed to bear some significance for the interpersonal communication process, for the personal evolution of an individual or for the location of the role that the individual in question plays in the society.

The latter purpose of stories, in fact, should be listed among the most controversial ones. On the one hand, people need to locate their role in the society, and stories may help them understand the way, in which the world works, therefore, empowering them to choose a way to integrate into the society in question.

On the other hand, the narrations that point at the readers purpose in the universe exactly are most likely to be useless and even harmful, as they may delude or confuse the reader. At this point, it is important to bring up the fact that the stories that tend to answer questions rather than pose them to the reader, therefore, leaving no traceable sign of confusion, are not as good as they might seem.

A good story is thought-provoking; it must galvanize the thinking process, which cannot possibly occur if the key ideas are gift-wrapped and handed directly to the audience. Stories need to be challenging and compelling for the reader or the listener to retrieve essential information from them and become more experienced.

It should be born in mind, therefore, that the very fact of reading a story does not make the reading experience worthwhile; what turns it redeemable is the lesson that the reader learns in the process. Therefore, not all stories should be viewed as equally useful experiences.

This, however, invites the question of whether a story can possibly be devoid of any useful information entirely. No matter what the narrator decides to tell their audience about, there will always be a person, who is familiar with the subject matter in one way or another.

Nevertheless, this does not mean that the story in question is going to be fully pointless for the listener  or for the reader, for that matter. Even when rendering the issue that a person may already know enough about, the narrator is capable of mentioning something that will hold a value as an alternative way of viewing a certain problem.

Therefore, stories play a definitive role in our lives. Though some stories can be deemed as not quite useful in terms of acquiring specific knowledge or experience, each narration carries a unique message that needs to be integrated into ones vision of the world.

Despite the need to take some stories with a grain of salt, one must admit that serving as the means to provide a unique experience is the key role of most stories.

English language is one of the most spoken and widespread languages in the world. It is hardly to find a country, where English language will not be known or spoken. The reason for such popularity is colonial character of former British Empire. Being one of the greatest states, it has conquered huge territories. Englishmen brought to new territories their culture, traditions and language. Australia was one of the colonies of Great Britain. That is why, nowadays the national language of Australia is English. Though, it is not quite classic variant of English. Due to peculiarities of the language of locals, it was changed.

Nowadays, it has its own unique prosody. One of the main differences of the Australian variant of English is its unique pronunciation. It has a lot of common traits with New Zealand English and other variants of English language, peculiar for Southern Hemisphere. Moreover, there are different variants of pronunciation and dialects within Australian English. They are called General, Cultivated and Broad Australian.

Each of them has its own variant of pronunciation of certain vowels. Broad variant stresses nasality, elision of syllables, while Cultivated tends to copy British variant of pronunciation of vowels, however, the majority of people in Australia speaks General variant of language, though it is not the same as British. The main differences are in the pronunciation of vowels. The front vowels in Australian English are all raised if to compare them with the same vowels in British English. Moreover, the diphthongs /jY/ and /e:/ are usually pronounced in Australian English with negligible offglide.

Additionally, there is one difference in the pronunciation of consonants. The main aspect of Australian English is, that there are no glottal stops which are peculiar for British English. There are also some more differences in the pronunciation of vowels and diphthongs in Australian English. However, it is possible to say that these differences are not so significant and it is still easy to understand all variants of English for people which have the knowledge of Standard English. There is a tendency to consider Australian English to be similar to some dialects of British, such as Cockney.

Having analyzed the main differences of Australian and British variants of English, it is possible to make some conclusions. There is no such a great difference in pronunciation and phonologies of the languages. The main peculiarities and laws, according to which these language function, remain the same.

There was even a tendency at the beginning and in the middle of the 20th century which main aim was to make these variants closer by copying variants of pronunciation of vowels. That is why, it should be said that it is important for a clinician to take into account peculiarities of the language which appeared due to this process as it introduced some new variants of pronunciation.

Introduction

The aim of this paper is to provide an assessment of the ethnolinguistic situation of the major languages used in Rwanda. The country has been selected based on the fact that it uses several languages, which include Kinyarwanda, Kiswahili, English and French (Rosendal 23; Samuelson & Freedman 191-192). Some of the factors contained in the ethnolinguistic vitality model are used to conduct the assessment.

Assessment of the Ethnolinguistic Situation

Symbolic

Traditionally, the Rwandese people used three official languages namely Kinyarwanda, French and English. However, in 2008, the government announced that it was dropping French as one of the official languages in a decision that seemed to have been largely fueled by a diplomatic row with France (Samuelson & Freedman 191).

French is still used in many urban areas in Rwanda; however, the government is keen on propagating English as the leading language of science, commerce and economic development in the country and in its interactions with neighboring countries.

Demographic

Although Rwanda is a multilingual country, most people use Kinyarwanda to communicate. Indeed, in Rwanda today, Kinyarwanda is described as a critical element in the essence of Rwandan-ness (Samuelson & Freedman 192).

All the local people believe that Rwandans should speak fluent Kinyarwanda, and will readily scold any Rwandese national who is unable to speak it in a clear and coherent manner. This means that anyone who is not competent in using Kinyarwanda is viewed as an outsider in spite of the existence of other languages such as Kiswahili and French.

Institutional

Even though Kinyarwanda is the dominant language, English-speaking Rwandese people have more access to institutions such as government agencies, schools, industries and the media. As a matter of fact, they dominate the civil service and other government appointments. French-speaking Rwandese people have been relegated to the periphery as the language no longer serves any purpose in public affairs (Samuelson & Freedman 192).

Education

Rwandese nationals who can speak English well have more access to educational opportunities than their French-speaking counterparts (Samuelson & Freedman 194-196).

Although native nationals used to access opportunities of learning by virtue of the fact that Kinyarwanda was taught in school and also used as a method of instruction, the situation has since changed and English is now considered as the primary requirement in accessing educational opportunities. Kiswahili-speaking nationals are also at an advantage since the language is popular regionally as a medium for trade and commerce in the East African Union (Samuelson & Freedman 209).

Status and Prestige

East Africa is an Anglophone region, thus English-speaking Rwandese nationals are at an advantage when it comes to regional and international matters. Kiswahili-speaking Rwandese nationals are also at an advantage since most trade and commerce in the region is conducted using the medium (Samuelson & Freedman 209).

Utility

Surprisingly, a substantial number of media houses transact in French, although those transacting in English are rising at a faster rate (Rosendal 25-29). A small number of media houses and forums transact using Kinyarwanda, not mentioning that locals with Internet connection can stream Kiswahili programs from regional media outlets. Overall, English is slowly overtaking French when it comes to media presence.

Linguistic Capital

Although Kinyarwanda is widely used particularly among the rural folks, English has its own unique advantages and hence it is carried in high esteem. Kiswahili is rising as the language of trade and commerce, while French is slowly plummeting.

Conclusion

This paper has used factors contained in the ethnolinguistic vitality model to provide an assessment of the ethnolinguistic situation of the major languages used in Rwanda. Overall, it can be argued that Kinyarwanda determines and influences the interactions between locals, although English is fast taking its place as the official language of the country due to regional and international dynamics.

Everyday Multilingual Images of Rwanda

Works Cited

Rosendal, Tove. Linguistic Markets in Rwanda: Language use in Advertisements and on Signs. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. 36.1 (2009): 19-39. Web.

Samuelson, Beth Lewis and Sarah Warshauer Freedman. Language Policy, Multilingual Education, and Power in Rwanda. Language Policy. 9.3 (2010):191-215. Web.

It is imperative to understand that there are certain differences in the way a person uses language in particular environments. The way people communicate in different types of restaurants can be viewed as one of the best examples.

It needs to be said that the conversations that I have heard are extremely different. The first aspect that should be noted is that an extravagant restaurant is a much more appropriate place for dates and business meetings than a fast food restaurant. It has an enormous impact on the topics that are discussed, and relationships between the people are also often quite different. Close friends are more likely to talk about certain aspects of their lives, and they speak much more openly. Also, it is not hard to notice that a contrast in grammar is often present. People in expensive restaurants use complex sentence structures and unusual words very frequently.

Their language is much more sophisticated most of the time, and this fact cannot be overlooked. People that eat at fast food chains prefer the style that is much simpler. It needs to be said that certain age and social groups are more likely to visit such establishments because of income inequalities. Some of them are not as well educated as the people that have dinner at an expensive restaurant, and it has an influence on the grammar that is used in these settings (Finegan and Rickford 58). Differences in pronunciation should also be considered. The dissimilarities in intonation are especially easy to notice because people in fast food restaurants often talk much louder, and a particular tone of voice may be noted. It should be noted that individuals in expensive restaurants speak much more clearly most of the time because it is seen as an appropriate way for people of high status to communicate. It is paramount to understand it is more appropriate to use formal language in particular settings.

Differences in the use of hand gestures also must be discussed because they are an essential part of the process of communication (Goldin-Meadow 74). People in the fast food chains often communicate very expressively, especially when it comes to ordering food. However, there are always some exceptions because many do not want to follow the rules that have been established. It is also paramount to note that some individuals may replicate the pronunciation that is heard in certain settings because it is viewed as an appropriate way to communicate when one is in a particular type of a restaurant, and it needs to be considered (Agha 191). The biggest differences can be noted in the way that children speak in these environments. They act much more calmly in an expensive restaurant and understand that it is important to avoid certain words and phrases that they could use in other places.

In conclusion, dissimilarity in the way the language is used in different settings is definitely present. It is caused by numerous internal and external factors such as culture, traditions, and etiquette (De Busser and LaPolla 167). Also, it needs to be said that the way people speak in fast food restaurants has dramatically changed over the last years, and most people do not see the need to control the language in such environments. Overall, it is paramount for every individual to understand what language is appropriate in particular settings.

Discussion

The ways in which genders communicate among each other are dramatically different, and some of the main patterns should be discussed. It must be said that females use much more words to express their opinions most of the time, and males prefer rather short sentences. Also, women may switch the topic during the conversations without finishing it, and men are likely to make sure that it is fully discussed before changing the subject. Differences in the words that are used are also quite noticeable.

The fact that males do not try to keep an eye contact with each other most of the time like females is also worth noting. It is imperative to say that such behavior is not that easy to see if one does not focus on these aspects of communication. However, I have observed these patterns quite often in different settings. It is imperative to note that an environment has an enormous influence on the way a person communicates. For example, a school may teach one that it is essential to display particular behavior (Gamble T. and Gamble M. 193).

Tannen lists some of the patterns that can be noticed if one pays close attention to the interactions between people of the same gender, and topics for discussion is one of the most important aspects that needs to be discussed (265). It can be seen that boys and men are more likely to talk about particular day-to-day activities rather than their personal lives, and they do not focus on social aspects as much. However, it must be said that the modern society is always changing, and some of these patterns may stop being relevant in the future.

Works Cited

Agha, Asif. Language and Social Relations. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Print.

De Busser, Rik, and Randy J. LaPolla. Language Structure and Environment. Amsterdam, NL: John Benjamins Publishing Company. Print.

Finegan, Edward, and John R. Rickford. Language in the USA. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, 2004. Print.

Goldin-Meadow, Susan. Hearing Gesture. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 2003. Print.

Gamble, Teri, and Michael Gamble. The Gender Communication Connection. 2nd ed. London, UK: Routledge, 2004. Print.

Tannen, Deborah. You Just Dont Understand. New York, NY: Morrow, 1990. Print.

Chapter 7 of Introduction to American Deaf Culture discusses the American Sign Language, ASL. The chapter first fights misconceptions that people have about sign language. Thomas Holcomb recognizes the ability of the American Sign Language to express hypothetical and abstract issues. He sees it as a language that does everything that other languages that use the spoken word do. He refutes common dogmas that suggest that sign language is less expressive, and signers cannot express differences in the tenses of different verbs and other impractical issues about language (Holcomb 127). The writer goes further to warn people against taking a restrictive approach towards American Sign Language. He, instead, advises them to adopt a prescriptive approach in order to understand how the American Sign Language works.

Therefore, according to Thomas Holcomb, American Sign Language is not a weak language compared to other languages. It is as expressive as the American English Language and all other languages (129). The second major issue that arises from Holcombs arguments in this chapter is his assertion that the American Sign Language has a close relationship with the deaf culture. He argues that American Sign Language is the main language that the American deaf community uses. Therefore, it is part of their culture. In the initial chapters of the book, he defines the American Deaf Community as people who share the use of ASL and other common interests (Holcomb 21). He further argues that nobody can separate ASL from the deaf culture (117).

I strongly agree with Holcombs assertion that the American Sign Language is not limited in scope and vocabulary. It is wrong to argue that the deaf community cannot joke among themselves, talk about future events and other abstract issues. It is not rare to see deaf people chatting for more than one hour. I have once attended a scouting competition where some troupes of deaf scouts also participated. I observed them keenly, and realized that they could do everything that normal people do. They laughed, took turns in conversations, quarreled, developed plans for accomplishing chores in their camps, and even prepared for inspections. All these activities show that they are capable of talking about the future, cracking jokes, talking about feelings such as anger, and organizing themselves through appropriate communication. Therefore, it is wrong to say that ASL has a limited scope of vocabulary. I concur with the writer that the American Sign Language is not a weak language in any aspect.

However, my argument that ASL does not have a limit in the scope of its vocabulary does not mean that the number of lexicons in ASL is equal to the number of lexicons in spoken English. What I mean is that members of the deaf community can talk about almost everything that English speakers can discuss. Therefore, analyzing ASL requires a descriptive approach as Holcomb suggests. Analysts need to determine whether the recipient receives the message the signer intends to pass across or not. They should not expect signers to pass the message in the exact manner that the speaker could transmit it. It would be unfair to the deaf community considering that they do not have the ability to speak. Therefore, nobody should come up with rules prescribing how deaf people should organize their nouns, verbs, sentences, or use prepositions. The messages they transmit are the most important things in their communication.

Apart from portraying ASL as being capable of expressing everything that other languages express, Holcomb also argues that ASL is the foundation of the American Deaf Culture. When I looked at this argument together with his first statement that a culture entails members of a linguistic community, I realized that their facts were similar. Therefore, I concurred with the assertion. Members of the community are usually the building blocks of culture. Deaf people share a culture only among them, as most of their families are not deaf and cannot understand them. Holcomb reiterates this assertion by choosing a poem that says; only a deaf person can understand what it means to be deaf (28).

Their language helps them understand each others way of life. Holcomb describes the American culture as an individualistic way of life unlike other cultures, which are usually collective (22). According to him, an individualistic culture entails all citizens fighting for their rights whenever they feel that the authorities are violating them. Members of the American deaf community are Americans just like other people. Therefore, they have to fit in this culture using their own means, and because they cannot use their voices in agitating for their rights, they usually use ASL. I agree with Holcombs view of ASL as a facilitator of the deaf culture in America. It would be very difficult for them to socialize among themselves and with other citizens if there were no ASL.

In summary, I agree with Holcomb that ASL is a very strong tool of communication. It is capable of transmitting any message from one person to the other. I also concur with him that ASL is very important in the development of the American deaf culture as it helps deaf people communicate amongst themselves and with other citizens of America. These are the main ideas in chapter seven of Introduction to American Deaf Culture.

Works Cited

Holcomb, Thomas K. Introduction to American Deaf Culture. 1^st ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 2013.Web.

One of the linguistic communities in Southern California is Armenian community that has its own history and cultivated traditions. This paper examines the statistics of the Armenian language native speakers, history of immigration, primary features of the Armenian language and its role in the modern community of its native speakers, including the perception of the younger generation of the diaspora of American Armenians.

Section I: Surveys and Statistics

In California English is not only most spoken language, but it is an official language according to the law. That is the reason the native speakers of other languages tend to restrict the usage of their mother tongue only to the communication at home or with the other members of the linguistic community. According to the 2010 United States Cencus, the even thought the majority of people only speak English, there are proofs of the increasing role of other languages in the fabric of American community (Ryan 6).

The Armenian language in the United States is mostly spoken in the Southern California, where the majority of the Armenian diaspora lives. The Armenian language belongs to the Indo-European language family and constitutes one of its independent branches. It is mostly spoken in the Republic of Armenia; however, the Californian diaspora of Armenians is second biggest in the world (Bakalian 15).

According to the 2007 United States Census, 19,7 % of American population spoke the language other than English at home (Shin and Kominski 2). 18,6 % of them are the native speakers of the Indo-European languages other than English and Spanish, which is 3,6 % of the population of the United States.

Naturally, among this group of people not everyone is the native speaker of Armenian since the share also belongs to other Indo-European languages including the Germanic languages, such as German, Yiddish, and Dutch; the Scandinavian languages, such as Swedish and Norwegian; the Romance languages, such as French, Italian, and Portuguese; the Slavic languages, such as Russian, Polish; the Indic languages; Celtic languages; Greek; Baltic languages; and Iranian languages (Shin and Kominski 2).

However, given the fact that the representatives of Armenian diaspora mainly inhabit the area called the Little Armenia in Los Angeles, it is still a strong linguistic community of Southern California.

Another statistical evidence that indicates the growing role of the Armenian-speaking community is that Armenian was defined as one of the languages that had fewer than 200,000 in the 1980s, but more than doubled during the period (Shin and Kominski 2).

In the 2011 United States Census, the figure were not significantly, but representatively different. It indicates the precise number of the native speakers of Armenian that, as to 2010, was 240,402 people, compared to 100,634 in 1980 (Ryan 7).

It means that the number of Armenian community members increase is 139 %. However, the native speakers of languages other than English are located unevenly on the map. Thus, metropolitan areas such as New York, Los Angeles, and Chicago generally have large proportions of people who speak a language other than English (Ryan 10).

There are probably two main factors explaining this fact. Firstly, larger cities can provide more economic perspectives for immigrants, considering the bigger job rotation and a higher number of job opportunities. The second influential factor is the tendency to integrate with the linguistic community, i.e. most communities of native non-English speakers inhabit the same area or district in the metropolitan space (Alba et al. 468).

For the Armenian-speaking community in Southern California, it is so-called Little Armenia, a territory of Los Angeles neighborhood, located in the eastern segment of Hollywood district in between Hollywood Boulevard, Vermont Boulevard, Route 101 and Santa Monica Boulevard (Takooshian par. 13).

Section II: History of immigration

There are numerous diasporas of Armenians around the world, but the beginning of their immigration to the United States dates back to the end of the 19th century. It was the phase of the violent and non-serene times in the Ottoman Empire, where many Turkish Armenians lived.

The Armenian minorities were treated as the giavours (non-Moslem infidels), and it resulted in mass massacres on the ethnic and religious grounds, and in the genocide of a million Armenians during the World War I (Takooshian par. 10). Those events became the reason for the massive immigration of Armenians to the United States of America.

The Armenian immigration to America can be divided into three main waves: the first one consisted of Turkish Americans who left the Ottoman Empire before WWI, the second one took place after the massacres of 1915-1920, when during the short period more than 30,000 Armenians, including professionals and skilled workers fled their homeland (Bakalian 16).

The third wave was the longest, it began after the World War II, as the result of Armenian minorities forced out of Turkey initially into the Middle East. Then because of tendencies of nationalism and Islamic fundamentalism in Arab countries, many Armenians were driven away first from Egypt (1952), then Turkey again (1955), Iraq (1958), Syria (1961), Lebanon (1975), and Iran (1978) (Takooshian par. 10).

This wave of immigration took the longest time and brought to the asylum in the United States most of the Armenian-ancestry population. However, we cannot still suggest that the third wave of immigration is over since the evidence of U.S. Census shows the increase of the American-Armenians of almost 140% since the 1980s (Ryan 7).

Section II: Linguistic features

The Armenian language belongs to the Indo-European language family. Comparative linguists Aikhenvald and Dixon suggest that Armenian is somehow related to Greek, mostly in terms that both languages were isolated, and that is why no extremely divergent dialects and no further specifications occurred within both of them (Aikhenvald and Dixon 49).

In general, different regional specifications of one language develop and evolve so divergently that eventually they become separate languages. However, this did not happen with the Armenian language; therefore, it represents the whole separate branch of the Indo-European family.

Nevertheless, Armenian shares many linguistic features with the subgroup of the Indo-European family, including Greek and Indo-Iranian languages. Among those features are the general structural organization, the prohibitive formation of negation, and augment-prefix, the prefix constituted by a single vowel or turning the initial vowel into diphthong as a variety of non-present inflexion that is also found in Sanskrit (Aikhenvald and Dixon 57).

The presence of such inflexions and the similarities with Sanskrit mean that Armenian is a synthetic inflexional language.

Section IV: Language use and Language Maintenance

The writer of Armenian ancestry Anny Bakalian suggests that there is a large separation inside the Armenian community. There are those who accept ethnic assimilation and do not speak the native language at home, and those who maintain the cultural and linguistic heritage (Bakalian 3).

Mostly, the tendencies demonstrate that those American-Armenians of Southern California, not speaking English at home are often people who prefer to live near the linguistic community of their native language, in Little Armenia. Therefore, the language is maintained due to the fact that speakers use it outside their home as well, since they live in the surroundings of the native speakers.

There are more than twenty all-day Armenian schools, the majority of which, including five high schools, such as Ferrahian High School, is located in Southern California (Bakalian 269). In the 1990s the enrollment of those schools was no greater than six thousand pupils (Bakalian 269).

However, their presence is important for the sustainability of the linguistic community, especially with the increasing number of Armenian immigrants. Such schools are usually bilingual because children master the Armenian language on different levels. Nevertheless, Armenian is used to teach Armenian history, culture, religion, and, of course, language.

Today Armenian culture represents itself in different media in Southern California. The Armenian newspapers the headquarters of which are based in Los Angeles and issued in both Armenian and English are Armenian International Magazine and Armenian Observer.

The English-language Californian newspapers for American-Armenians are California Courier and UniArts Armenian Directory Yellow Pages. There are also bilingual radio programs, like ones on the radio KTYM-AM (1460). As for availability of government documents, California Department of Motor Vehicles provides handbook and instructions in Armenian.

Code-switching mainly occurs, for example, in the encounters with non-speakers of Armenian, at governmental institutions, while asking for directions, both in and outside Little Armenia. The attitudes towards code-switching vary depending on the age and level of mastery of English. The elder generations majorly do not approve speaking English at home.

Thus, the younger generations are more likely to code-switch even in conversations between themselves. In some cases, even the code-mixing is observed, especially, for the American-Armenians raised in Turkey or Russia, before immigrating to the USA.

As for the attitude to the native language, while older generations stay conventional, some of younger American-Armenians seemingly were not very approving about the Armenian language and found it declining and the knowledge of it not useful, even though they cannot avoid using it in everyday life.

Works Cited

Aikhenvald, Alexandra, and Robert M. Dixon. Areal Diffusion And Genetic Inheritance. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 2006. Print.

Alba, Richard D. et al. Only English By The Third Generation? Loss And Preservation Of The Mother Tongue Among The Grandchildren Of Contemporary Immigrants. Demography 39.3 (2002): 467-484. Web.

Bakalian, Anny P. Armenian-Americans. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers, 1993. Print.

Ryan, Camille. Language Use in the United States: 2011. United States Census Bureau, 2013. Web.

Shin, Hyon B., and Robert A. Kominski. Language Use In The United States: 2007. United States Census Bureau, 2010. Web.

Takooshian, Harold. Armenian Americans. EveryCulture, 2015. Web.

It has been quite a while since the Jewish Diaspora established itself in the United States. However, decades from the moment when it did, the language issues persist. Although Yeshivish has evolved from a pidgin into a full-fledged language, it is still related to several prejudices concerning Jewish people and, therefore, downgrades the status of a person speaking in it a few notches in the eyes of a typical resident of the U.S.

Speaking of the key specifics of the Yeshivish language, one must mention that the name, which seems a mix between Hebrew and Hispanic, must be quite misleading for those who hear of it for the first time. The Yeshivish language incorporates solely the elements of English and Hebrew; the suffix of the word Hedonic, in its turn, comes from the combination of the words Hebrew and phonics, or phonetics. Therefore, the name, reveals the specifics of its structure. According to the existing explanations, the Yeshivish language, which is often mentioned under the umbrella term Hellish (Aronson 118), is unique in its pronunciation and sentence structure, as well as the connotation differences between the traditional English phrases as they are rendered in the American and the Hebrew discourse.

When it comes to specifying the elements that set the Yeshivish language aside from the rest of languages that emerged as a result of two or more languages fusion, one must mention its unique phenomenon of code-switching between the two languages. While other languages that were granted with a status of a pidgin traditionally tend to combine the grammatical structure of one language and the lexemes of the other one, Yeshivish borrows only the unique contextual usage of specific phrases and collocations, which would seem weirdly out of context when used by an American English speaker.

Herein the key problem with the Yeshivish language lies. With no other markers of its uniqueness other than the specific inflections and the unique contextual use of traditional English phrases and expressions, it seems to have no distinctions whatsoever. In other words, the Yeshivish language cannot exist as a separate set of rules and grammatical, phonetic or lexical principles  instead, its originality shines through only in particular contexts. As a result, it took quite a while for it to gain the status of a legitimate language.

The major problem with the Yeshivish language, however, is that it does not seem to help eradicate the prejudice that some American people have against the American Hebrews. While it is used by Hebrew Americas as the means to create their own exotic culture and retain their national identity, its reinforcement also contributes to specifying the linguistic tropes, which are an integral part of a stereotype of a Jewish person in the American society. Therefore, the promotion of the Yeshivish creates the premises for applauding the same thing that it criticized before.

Seeing how the aforementioned conversation scheme is very different from the one that the rules of the British or American English dictate, it is obvious that the person using it will be labeled as a foreigner; more importantly, seeing how the given trope I an integral part of an overall negative stereotype of a Jewish person in the American society, the rest of the negative stereotypical qualities are transferred onto the person using this pattern metonymically.

Another element of the Yeshivish language, the tendency to reiterate certain words with the addition of the prefix sch-, also contributes to the stereotypical negative image of a Jewish person. It is remarkable that the words themselves do not attain any negative connotation once the above-mentioned affix is added; without the original word preceding such an alteration, the latter would be considered gibberish. With the addition of the original word and the usage of the phrase in a particular context, the phrase in question is also technically considered rather neutral, though colloquial. Once the given stylistic choice is combined with other elements that are traditionally recognized as the ones that are characteristic of the Hebrew language and the Jewish culture, the negative stereotype of a Jewish person immediately takes its toll.

Speaking of which, the Yeshivish language also has certain phonetic specifics. According to what Lakoff says, it is characteristic of a representative of the American Jewish culture to pronounce W as V and insert Ts at the end of most words (Lakoff 247). However, phonetics is clearly far from being the key element that sets English and Yeshivish aside; unlike the rest of pidgins, the existence of which hinges on borrowing the grammatical structure of one language and the lexemes of the other one, Yeshivish seems to be a harmonic mix between the two, straight to the point where both languages are used in the word-formation process. The priority, however, seems to be given to English, with the addition of Yiddish suffixes to English morphemes.

How the people communicating in Yeshivish are typically perceived in the modern American society is far from being stellar; instead of valuing the Yeshivish as a unique language spoken by the people with a rich and unique culture, some residents of the USA consider the Yeshivish speakers as lacking education and intelligence. Aronson states openly that Yeshivish is often viewed as the kitchen English (Aronson 215), and, therefore, makes it clear that not only stereotypes that are traditionally related to Hebrew people, but also the image of a simpleton and an incompetent person are often associated with the language in question. Aronson defines Hebronics as a language with the traditional English word stock and a tortured grammar (Aronson 215), thus, making it clear that the mix of the Hebrew and English languages is seen as a mock-English speech in the American society.

The context in which the so-called Yeshivish language is traditionally used should also be brought upon to understand the oddly hostile attitudes towards the people speaking in it in contemporary American society. According to Aronsons assumptions, Yeshivish is traditionally used by the Jewish people who are willing to integrate into American society yet are highly uncertain about their success and, therefore, suffer from anxiety impressively. Such a behavioral pattern is, understandably enough, considered not quite acceptable and, therefore, the person speaking in Yeshivish receives a cold shoulder from most American residents.

Even though in 2014, the situation has seemingly improved, and the Yeshivish language has gained the status of an official language, with an English YeshivishEnglish dictionary having come out recently, the stereotypes that surround it persist. More to the point, seeing how in the previous paragraph, it has been stated that Yeshivish is viewed as a stage between retaining the Jewish national identity and acquiring the American one, the question whether Yeshivish has the reason to exist rises. After all, Yeshivish does not seem to create stronger ties between the immigrant Jews and the American Jews any stronger: As members of Jewish subcultures, speakers of Yeshivish and those engaged in Queer Yiddishkeit seem poles apart (Shandler 190). However, seeing how the language still allows for linking two different cultures, it needs to be supported as a legitimate language.

The evaluation of linguistic variety plays a major role in the given case since it helps define how far and in what aspects the Hebonic language has deviated from the traditional American English. It is crucial to use the concept of linguistic variety to assess the status of the language in question, as well as figure out whether the given linguistic phenomenon is treated positively, negatively or neutrally by the American English speaking citizens. It was only with the help of the concept of linguistic variety that the core changes to the American English I the process of its transformation to the Yeshivish have been defined.

Without the linguistic variety analysis, learning that most of the changes to the traditional American English have occurred on the semiotic level would have been impossible. Therefore, the evaluation of the language variety between the American English and the Yeshivish languages has allowed for defining not only the key differences between the two languages, but also the purpose for these differences to exist and, therefore, the status of the Yeshivish language in the contemporary American society. The act that the linguistic variety of the Yeshivish language concerned predominantly its semantics and semiotics has facilitated the possibility for improving the Yeshivish status in the American society and, thus, eliminating the existing prejudice against Jewish and Jewish American people.

Works Cited

Aronson, Stanley M. Perilous Encounters: Commentaries on the Evolution, Art and Science of Medicine from Ancient to Modern Times. Bloomington, IN Author House. 2009. Print.

Lakoff, Robin Thomas. The Language War. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 2001. Print.

Shandler, Jeffrey. Adventures in Yiddishland: Postvernacular Language and Culture. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. 2008. Print.