How I am Presenting My Analysis of Lakoff
In a somewhat rhetorical fashion, I am structuring this blog entry the way Lakoff has presented her arguments throughout “The Language War”. I will do this with Italics and parenthesis containing comments indicative of an outsider. (This just means it is more conversational and designed to simplify and explain.)
In a somewhat rhetorical fashion, I am structuring this blog entry the way Lakoff has presented her arguments throughout “The Language War”. I will do this with Italics and parenthesis containing comments indicative of an outsider. (This just means it is more conversational and designed to simplify and explain.)
Pronouns Show Where the Speaker Stands
I will attempt to construct this e-paper in such a way that you can get to know Robin Lakoff’s work the way I have. Though it may differ slightly from your understanding of it, I do not want this to divide us into you and me. There should be no them or they when discussing our views on this subject since it applies to all. Everyone will have a unique interpretation. (Like Ramage explained, you can only get the gist of someone.) This is just a piece of the puzzle. As part of the blog it serves the purpose to contribute to the collective examination of Lakoff.
I will attempt to construct this e-paper in such a way that you can get to know Robin Lakoff’s work the way I have. Though it may differ slightly from your understanding of it, I do not want this to divide us into you and me. There should be no them or they when discussing our views on this subject since it applies to all. Everyone will have a unique interpretation. (Like Ramage explained, you can only get the gist of someone.) This is just a piece of the puzzle. As part of the blog it serves the purpose to contribute to the collective examination of Lakoff.
The Title’s Ambiguity Represents the Complex Nature of Words
Even if you are unfamiliar with Lakoff’s book, it is evident from its title that it has something to do with a conflict involving language. It is unclear, however, exactly what is intended by labeling it “The Language War”. Is it referencing a war fought over the use of words, or does it mean one fought with them? I don’t think that there is a definitive answer to this, and that is the reason for the vague title. (In any case, it raises some interesting linguistic questions and challenges.)
Even if you are unfamiliar with Lakoff’s book, it is evident from its title that it has something to do with a conflict involving language. It is unclear, however, exactly what is intended by labeling it “The Language War”. Is it referencing a war fought over the use of words, or does it mean one fought with them? I don’t think that there is a definitive answer to this, and that is the reason for the vague title. (In any case, it raises some interesting linguistic questions and challenges.)
A War over the Meaning of Words
Lakoff says “Culture, after all, is the construction of shared meaning.” She states that we are interested in different media related stories because they are about how we define of ourselves. She states that there is an ongoing struggle to hang on to our personal meaning of words. We are comfortable when we know what is going on and are able to express ourselves. This is not always possible though because even if we say what we mean, people hear what they comprehend according to the connotations they have assigned. (Repetition helps to create this shared meaning.) If you are told countless times that you are dumb, you will know that word by how others perceive your actions. (Say, if you can not pass tests, you will fall into the culture’s definition of dumb and be forced to live with that label despite other elements of your personality that may make you smart.) Do you fight for your meaning of smart and dumb, or does the population decide your fate?
Lakoff says “Culture, after all, is the construction of shared meaning.” She states that we are interested in different media related stories because they are about how we define of ourselves. She states that there is an ongoing struggle to hang on to our personal meaning of words. We are comfortable when we know what is going on and are able to express ourselves. This is not always possible though because even if we say what we mean, people hear what they comprehend according to the connotations they have assigned. (Repetition helps to create this shared meaning.) If you are told countless times that you are dumb, you will know that word by how others perceive your actions. (Say, if you can not pass tests, you will fall into the culture’s definition of dumb and be forced to live with that label despite other elements of your personality that may make you smart.) Do you fight for your meaning of smart and dumb, or does the population decide your fate?
A War with Words
How do we assign meaning to words? With other words! (This merry-go-round of meaning can be dizzying.) This is where the status quo has the upper hand. (This applies to the conservative party as well, according to Lakoff.) Tradition needs no explanation because it is innately understood, even if it is wrong. The issue of politically correct words illustrates this point well. The Black Panthers successfully made it p.c. to call African Americans ‘Black’. This aided in the civil rights movement because African Americans were no longer defined by something that would make them seem inferior. Being ‘black’ (not ‘colored’ implying that they were diverging from the norm) enabled them to define themselves.
How do we assign meaning to words? With other words! (This merry-go-round of meaning can be dizzying.) This is where the status quo has the upper hand. (This applies to the conservative party as well, according to Lakoff.) Tradition needs no explanation because it is innately understood, even if it is wrong. The issue of politically correct words illustrates this point well. The Black Panthers successfully made it p.c. to call African Americans ‘Black’. This aided in the civil rights movement because African Americans were no longer defined by something that would make them seem inferior. Being ‘black’ (not ‘colored’ implying that they were diverging from the norm) enabled them to define themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment