How I have changed my mind about language

Before I took this class, I believed that words that are not in the dictionary could not be considered as “real” words.  This perceived knowledge impacted the way I understood myself, my family/friends, and others different from me because I felt that the more well spoken a person is (grammatical, mechanical, etc), was directly related to and could ultimately determine the amount of respect that would be allotted to them.  It would constantly aggravate me when I would hear someone speak, or would read something that someone had written, and I would notice errors.  It was in my opinion, that that made a person sound extremely unintelligent and uneducated.  

I still have this disposition to a certain extent, but I now uphold a much higher tolerance (patients) and understanding for people and their idiolect.  I learned that although an "idiolect" is the personal dialect of an individual speaker, "we generally tend to sound like others whom we share the same similar educational backgrounds and/or occupations" (Yule 255).   I also learned of an experiment conducted by socio-linguist William Labov in the 1960s to see how speech could serve as a social marker.  A social marker is a linguistic feature that marks the speaker as a member of a particular social group (Yule 256).  During the experiment, Labov traveled to three different stores (all ranging in socio-economic statuses; upper-middle-class, middle-class, working-class) and “asked the salespeople specific questions in order to elicit answers with the expression fourth floor.”  At the conclusion of the experiment, it became prominent that “the higher the socio-economic status of the store, the more the /r/ sounds were produced as compared to the lower the status, the fewer /r/ sounds were produced by those who worked there” (Yule 255).  Learning about this experiment really caught my attention as it gave me insight that completely disregarded the ignorant standpoint that I once had regarding the way in which someone speaks.  It made me realize that just because someone does not present them self in a way that I deem proper, does not necessarily make them any less intelligent, it just proves that different groups of people adapt to the speech which they are raised around.  I also caught myself being hypocritical when I reflected on my own speech patterns.  I began becoming more conscious of the way I speak and to who I speak that way to, and realized that I often become extremely informal when talking to my friends.  This realization made me take a step back and really reevaluate myself and my assumptions about others.

The knowledge that I acquired throughout this course definitely changed how I understand and relate to others because it grounded me a tremendous amount and opened my mind to other cultures and various dialects.  Words are not limited to any one vocabulary.  There are an infinite number of possibilities and combinations to creating new and different words.  The best part of language is there is a word for most every different thought/feeling one could try to relay, and if one does not come to mind, there are not any limits or restraints to making up your own!  I have been able to participate in many more interesting and informing conversations just now having broader knowledge of language and all its different interpretations.

Final blog

In this blog, I will be discussing how Dr. Martin Luther King methods to promoting a non-violent practice and how these ideas further prove how the language of human rights work, how it is effective, and its limits.  To begin, I will specifically be concentrating on King’s essay titled “The Power of Nonviolence,” which is incorporated with many of his other writings in the novel A Testament of Hope.  In this essay, King writes of ideas such as not to humiliate but to win over, agape love, and some power in the universe that works for justice as a way to taking steps toward a less racist society. 

In his essay, “The Power of Nonviolence,” King explains the goal of a non-violent resister.  “A non-violent resister,” King states, “does not seek to humiliate or defeat the opponent but to win their friendship and understanding” (King 12).  King reminds us that violence leads to animosity while non-violence leads to compromise.  A non-violent resister pursues to confront an unjust system rather than individuals who happen to be caught up in the system.  When reflecting on the Civil Rights movement for equality, King states, “And this is why I say from time to time that the struggle in the South was not so much the tension between white people and Negro people.  The struggle is rather between justice and injustice, between the forces of light and the forces of darkness” (King 12-13).  The implementation of a non-violent practice to create equality was not to serve as a victory for the African American community but as a victory for justice and a victory for democracy among the people.  According to Dr. King, non-violent resistance is an “internal matter” that incorporates the “philosophy of love” (King 13). The only way to ultimately change humanity and have a positive, lasting impact on society as a whole is by allowing love at the center of one’s life.

King also writes of agape love as a necessary step to promoting this non-violent theory.  According to Dr. King, “Agape is understanding, creative, redemptive good will for all men.”  It is a “love which seeks nothing in return” (King 13). When one is able to reach such a level of selflessness, they begin to love people not necessarily because they are likeable, but because God loves them.

However, King addresses the inevitable truth that there are people who believe non-violence who do not believe in a personal God.  With this knowledge, he discusses how he believes that every person who believes in non-violent resistance does believe that the universe is on the side of justice.  There is something in the universe that unfolds for justice and so throughout all of the struggles that one faces, this may be what gives someone hope when all else is lost-- the belief that the universe is on the side of justice.

The aforementioned steps to implementing a non-violent movement prove that language can be used as a way to affirm rights and speak up for ones justices, or lack thereof.  It is ultimately effective as it approaches an unjust situation, not impulsively or irrationally, but in a manner that requires patients and enduring tremendous amounts of disappointment along the way. There are no limits to what one can accomplish with the use of nonviolence, though often, one may view the universe testing their limits.  How far is one willing to go to make a change? Human rights are understood as inalienable fundamental rights to which one is inherently entitled simply because they are a human being.  What King was moving towards was not only equality for the African American community, but equality for all.  King was an extremely well-spoken individual who relied on his words not to make a change but to inspire others to come together and make a change.

The most durable power

In this blog, I will explain Dr. Martin Luther King's ideas regarding his belief that the most durable power is love.  In his writing's, Dr. King expresses his theory to "love and embrace thy enemy."  He speaks about essentially being the bigger person, and learning to love under negative circumstances.  Obtaining justice requires a great deal of suffering and sacrifice.

Blog four: cluster reflection

I would have to say that the most common theme I have been privy to throughout the courses in the cluster is that of law and human rights.  The coursework for the cluster has required me to implement my knowledge of rights being affirmed and/or denied in instances such as when I have to use critical thinking to break down and decipher text or a passage, specifically in my essays.  The different disciplines approach the same or similar subjects and materials in different ways.  I feel as though political science has informed me of the civil rights and liberties I am allotted as a human being, linguistics has showed me exactly how I am able to communicate these rights, and English/American studies has taught me how to include them in my critical thinking strategies.  The social elements of the cluster have made it a much more interesting environment to learn in.  The diversity of the thoughts, views, and opinions of my classmates has made my interpretation of things much more open and allowed me not to be secluded to only one way of thinking; to really be able to take a neutral standpoint at times.  The integrated activity in LIB 110 has made it easier and more direct to see the connection between all of the courses.  I would like to be able to use all that I learn as a result of this cluster in future courses, which I have no doubts I will be able to do.  I believe that each skill I have learned and continue to exercise has the potential to assist me in many areas of learning and self expression down the line.

Main idea Tweets

In the book, A Red Record, by Ida B. Wells, she discusses many ideas of lynching in the South. She discusses race riots, constitutional equality, and anarchy. One of the thought justifications for lynching were said to be repressing African Americans to stamp out the possibility of race riots. Constitutional equality was questioned on both sides of the racial war. This document was designed to ensure no one is discriminated against, in this case, based on race. Though, lynchings were still being performed and the reasoning was said to be because of other things not regarding race. This absence of government, lawlessness, and disorganization in society can best be described as an anarchy; more importantly, a society that contradicts such an esteemed document.

Blog three: lynch law in all its phases

racial precedence - the condition of being considered more important than someone or something else solely based on ones race.

being trumped, favored, or having an unfair advantage.
ex. a white woman claiming rape compared to a black man claiming innocence.

In this blog, I will be discussing how racial precedence remained a prominent theme in post-Civil War times even after slaves were declared free and equal.  In the text Southern Horrors and Other Writings: The Anti-Lynching Campaign of Ida B. Wells, 1892-1900..."A white woman's word was taken as absolutely in this case as when the cry of rape is made, and he was freed" (Royster 56).  In this instance, a white woman's racial precedence had a positive outcome.  Even without an outcry from the woman herself, this man was jailed and would've been lynched.  However, when she spoke up, this man was released.  As many of the white woman had racial precedence in society when it came to things of this nature, many were too apprehensive to speak up.  The white male had power and control over the white woman who could've easily been considered as a pawn.  This apprehension of the white woman, who clearly had a voice, could've been a direct result of fear of the white male.  When observed from not only the African American community's fear of the white male, but the white woman's fear, as well, this example of feeling oppressed could be directly related to the perception of a white male dominated society.  This may also lead us into the speculation that this may have ultimately played a part in driving the white woman into the arms of the black man when referring to the topic of interracial relations.

Freewrite

Human Rights are the understanding, as humans, of what our natural born rights actually are.  Language assists in the defining of human rights.  The language of human rights relay laws that were specifically established to insure rights to us as human beings. Though, sometimes these laws contradict each other (e.g. the right to privacy and the right to protection; in specific situations, ones privacy is invaded to protect them). Language is a necessary tool in communicating what ones rights as an individual actually are.

Blog assignment two: explaining contradiction

The text, When I Was a Slave: Memoirs from the Slave Narrative Collection, edited by Norman R. Yetman, exposes the reader to the various confrontations and hardships a slave may have had to endure through a first person narrative.  Throughout each interview, many different perspectives are conveyed to show how, though frequently similar, no two enslaved persons experiences were the same.  This text discusses multiple instances when slaves were pronounced free, took advantage of their freedom, and left the plantations.  It also discusses the slaves who decided to continue working/residing on the plantations even after realizing their freedom.  The inconsistency of these actions are more commonly referred to as a contradiction.  

When interviewed, Boston Blackwell, a former slave, speaks of the year that Abraham Lincoln declared all slaves free.  He reveals the thought process behind his decision to escape later that year, as his master had accused him of stealing, and as punishment, threatened to whip him to death.  With this knowledge, Blackwell decided to runaway to the Yankee camp to insure his survival.  When speaking of his arrival, Blackwell says, “When we gets to the Yankee camp all our troubles was over...They was hundreds of runaways there” (Yetman 12).  This quote blatantly demonstrates how relieved many were to leave the plantations and begin their new lives.  However, many who receded from an enslaved existence were not adequately equipped to be exposed to the outskirts of the world of which they had come to know.  A majority of slaves had little to no reading or writing skills, and were not educated to the extent that society considered acceptable.  Though, this knowledge could possibly be categorized as semantics when compared to the freedom that these individuals were now able to enjoy.  Many were just joyous to be free of the restraints they had lived under for so many years.  

Frank Bell also served as a slave during the time of the Civil War.  He is one of those who stayed with his master after recognizing his freedom.  In his interview, Bell discusses his masters wishes for Bell to stay and to work for him as he is “of value in his trade.”  Quoting his master, Bell says, “He say, “Nigger, you’s supposed to be free but I’ll pay you a dollar a week and if you runs off I’ll kill you”” (Yetman 10).  This is an example of an extreme measure taken by a master to remain custodial of a slave, but nevertheless, it was often a common reaction.  Many slaves were threatened in one way or another concerning their newly found freedom.  Regardless of the cause, an overwhelming majority of slaves were not free when they were pronounced “free.” 

As shown primarily by comparing Blackwell’s and Bell’s experiences, each slave faced different encounters when presented with “freedom.”  However, the commonality that both examples share is that both men were still limited to the things that they were able to do.  Blackwell was restricted by his lack of knowledge, all the while Bell was still confined to a life not much different than that prior to the conclusion of the Civil War.  When the Declaration of Independence stated, “all men are created equal,” it failed to address the absence of recognition that this truth had gotten up until this point, meaning much of the damage had already been done.  Though, all men were supposedly considered equal at this point, since they were not treated in such a way until this document surfaced, most were ill equipped with many of the characteristics that all “men” should posses.  This is a contradiction within itself.

Senators blast FBI's anti-Muslim manuals

Language integrated in Law and Human Rights is a crucial aspect to understanding those laws and rights.  A recent news article discusses lawmakers that are going after the FBI after it was revealed that the Federal Bureau of Investigation had been instructing agents that the religion of Islam was on par with a cult and that devout Muslims are likely to turn to terrorism.  This accusation against the Islam community defies the second human right: don't discriminate.  It is, in my opinion, unjust to categorize all people that may practice a certain religion into one category based solely on the actions demonstrated by other individuals who may practice the same.  It becomes increasingly clear how language ties together with this news article being that actual documents were constructed to relay a specific criteria to the FBI that a terrorist is likely to fit.  Not only is this preposterous, but allowing actual terrorists to see proof that Americans do have such extreme and bigoted views can only add fuel to a fire that has continued to burn ten years after the September 11 terrorist attacks.

Blog assignment one: Bannaker and Equiano

In Benjamin Banneker’s letter to Thomas Jefferson, Banneker, a free African American astrologer, addresses his views on slavery and racial equality.  The letter states, in a powerful but respectful manner, the way in which Banneker is unsatisfied with the actions that have been carried out by Jefferson in the move towards equality for all.  He discusses topics such as promises made by Jefferson, the founding father and author of the Declaration of Independence, and the basic ideas of Christianity that were thought to be closely followed at this time. 

In the narrative of Equiano’s experiences on the slave ship, it is noticeable that the horrors involved were nothing less of disturbing.  Equiano often refers to the crowded, unhealthy living conditions that slaves were forced to undergo while in transit to be traded, and at one point in the text, speaks about the body’s of those who didn’t survive and were tossed overboard by the ship men without any signs of remorse.  Throughout the narrative, Equiano’s emotions are also relayed in a way that not only moves the reader, but is an accurate depiction of what he felt during the present time. 

If humans all felt the "same sensations," then wouldn't the slave-traders have been incapable of practicing slavery, and enforcing it through such lethal methods?

This is a complex question, therefore, has multiple “answers” and is widely based on ones opinion.  First off, I would like to define how I believe the term “sensation” to have been used in Banneker’s letter to Jefferson.  In my opinion, “sensation,” in this context, is used to describe emotions/feelings.  As human beings, I trust that we are all able to feel to a certain extent, some more or less than others.  But if something does not effect someone on an emotional level, it will not move them as it would someone to which it does.  The fundamental, crucial aspect to having an impact is making someone feel something.  As previously stated, it is thought that one of the essential properties of our chemical make up as humans is inevitably having the ability to feel, but that does not necessarily mean each individual possesses the same feelings.  Different things effect different people.  So, when the slave-traders were practicing slavery and enforcing it through such lethal methods, as unjustifiable as that may have been, I have no choice but to view it from a neutral stand point.  There are a plethora of variables to take into consideration, the first being that it was not effecting them personally.  When I say this, I mean it was not them who it was happening to.  So yes, while some people are able to feel compassion for others, some are not.  It goes back to the basic concept of right and wrong.  But who ultimately determines what is right and what is wrong?  Humans are constantly influenced by bias opinions.  Not to get off topic, which I tend to do, but the fact that as a high school graduate and legal adult, I did not know that slaves were enslaved because they were considered to be only three-fifths of a human until just the other day is… unfortunate.  But why was I not informed of this information prior?  Because many of the textbooks that we are all innocently (naively) educated from throughout our years of schooling are directly distributed from Texas, which, being a prominent place for slave-trade, portray history in the way it had been viewed from their development.  Not to be confused; this is an opinion, not a fact.  But this is my blog, and philosophically speaking, I could pick this apart and dissect it from multiple angles.  The debate goes on…

o, nɑ, nɑ, wəts maj nem?

The first syllable of "Dani" has the onset of a voiced, alveolar stop, with a rhyme of a low, front vowel, "da."  The next, and last, syllable's onset is a voiced, alveolar nasal, with a rhyme of a high, front vowel, "ni."

IPA transcription: dæni 

Start by placing the rough part of your tongue on the rough, bony ridge immediately behind and above your upper teeth, making a "da" sound, while slightly opening your mouth to create an "ehhh" noise, followed by a "neeeeee."

Follow me on Twitter!

@dstrubelbanks

...creative, right? ;)

The connection

In my opinion, The Language of Human Rights is the understanding, as humans, of what our natural born rights actually are.  This cluster is beneficial to relating these two topics by demonstrating that language, generally speaking (pun intended), assists in the defining of human rights.  Law and Human Rights go hand in hand in the sense that certain laws were specifically established to insure rights to us as human beings.  Though, sometimes these laws contradict each other (e.g. the right to privacy and the right to protection; in specific situations, ones privacy is invaded to protect them).  Language is a necessary tool in communicating what ones rights as an individual actually are.

In other words...

The only language I am able to speak, read, write, understand, and am proficient in is English.  However, I speak variations of the English language depending on who I am speaking to, the dynamics of the conversation, et cetera.  I would not necessarily categorize my disposition any different from what it is in school to what it is at home, at work, and/or with my friends because it really depends less on the environment and more on the relationship I maintain with the individual I am speaking with.  As with every encounter, there are exceptions.  Generally speaking, though, when conversing with anyone I deem to be my superior (an employer, a teacher, or a parent),  I try to be more reserved as compared to if I am speaking with one of my coworkers, a classmate, or a friend.  I would have to say that it is the same in the sense that I am rarely afraid or too intimidated to voice my opinion, but it does differ in that I try to filter myself more, especially when acquainting with someone new.
  
I do not recall exactly how I learned language in the way that I have, but I can imagine, first and foremost, my parents taught me a great deal.  But then again, I also have to take into consideration factors such as music, television, propaganda, being around other children, and various social environments.  Certainly my several trips to Disney World as a child must have had an impact.  From preschool, followed by kindergarten and elementary school, all the way through middle and high school; I believe all to have played a part in the vocabulary that I currently possess.
  
Language is actually an extremely significant part of my life, and not just for the obvious reason that I use it everyday.  But to me, words are such an intriguing unit of language.  The fact that with the proper knowledge of any given words definition, one can describe to someone exactly what he/she is thinking/feeling is amazing.  It aggravates me to no extent when I hear the phrase, “I don’t know how to explain it.”  My response then becomes, “Yes, you do! You just choose not to.”  There is not one word out there that one does not have the ability to piece together with others to give an accurate description of a thought or emotion.  Communication is crucial to maintaining a functional society; whether the President is informing US citizens on our economic status, one is arguing with their boyfriend/girlfriend, or a student is asking for help on a school assignment.  I would have to say that my personal language is rapping.  To me, rapping is an art form that allows one to manipulate words to create a message or a story.  I am creative with language in the sense that I absolutely love to create word play, similes, puns, metaphors, and everything in between.  I am also extremely sarcastic and have a dry sense of humor.  All of these things play a part in what makes me ME.  All of these things also involve the use of language and dialect.  So, yes, I would have to say that language is one of the most important aspects of my life, if not the most important.  In my opinion, knowing how to use language, communicate, and articulate properly has made a huge difference in my life.  Not only have I been better able to communicate an idea to someone, but I believe having an extensive vocabulary and knowing what you’re talking about gains someone more respect.  Not to get off topic here, but first impressions are a horrible judge of character.  Until you hear someone speak, and what they have to say, ones impression is invalid.  Don’t judge a song by its title.