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.