“Words. Chamberlin talks a lot about language, in particular the strangeness and wonder of how language works. Stories, he says, “bring us close to the world we live in by taking us into the world of words” (italics mine,1). He describes learning to read and write as learning “to be comfortable with a cat that is both there and not there” (132). Based on Chamberlin’s understanding of how riddles and charms work, explain this “world of words.” Reflect on why “words make us feel closer to the world we live in” (1).”
According to Chamberlin, the so called “world of words” (44) is a world defined by both language and what we perceive to be reality. However, both are deeply intertwined and are trapped in a constant contradiction with each other. Riddles and metaphor, on a basic level, demand that we change our understanding of the language we know so well in order to “make sense of what seems like nonsense” (Chamberlin, 2121). Charms, on the other hand, do not ask for us to change our perception of the language itself, but ask for us to alter our understanding of our own reality (Chamberlin, 2389). Despite the differences in these concepts, they connect to the ultimate underlying theme of the stories we tell and the way they shape the world: the contrast between reality and imagination. The language we use ultimately allows us to simultaneously believe and not believe in a certain imagined reality (Chamberlin, 2112), and therefore each person’s “world of words” differs depending on their connection to language and reality.
Furthermore, words and language on a fundamental basis can bring us closer to our own world because language is largely responsible for creating and shaping our thoughts and emotions. Charlemagne is quoted as proclaiming something along the lines of “to speak another language is to possess another soul” (Shwayder, 2010). Studies have shown that thought patterns and emotional tendencies shift in people who are able to speak more than one language. This does not only apply to those who can speak multiple languages, but also applies between people who speak different languages.
In her TED Talk, Boroditsky points out these very differences in her observations regarding an Aboriginal group in Australia. The specific words and grammar structures which this Aboriginal group use in everyday language are centred around cardinal directions (unlike the English which we speak in Canada). This one particular difference changes the way this group considers other fundamental concepts, such as location and time. They possess a significantly different thought pattern than the majority of Canadian English speakers, and therefore, they also posses a very different world view. Boroditsky also comments on how some languages have many different words for colour while others only have a couple. For example, Chamberlin states that “the Blackfoot have nearly a hundred words for the different colours of horses” (Chamberlin, 2369) and would therefore also have a deeper and more expansive connection to the world around them in a way.
This is not to say that English speakers are not connected to their world through language. They are connected in a different way, but through the same means as any speaker of language.
No matter the language that is spoken, the words and sentances and grammer allow us as people to communicate with each other and interact with world around us, thereby bring us all closer to our own individual world’s.
References
Boroditsky, Lera. “How does our language shape the way we think?”. Edge. Edge Foundation. 6 November 2009. Web. 14 January 2019.
Chamberlin, Edward. If This is Your Land, Where are Your Stories? Finding Common Ground. AA. Knopf. Toronto. 2003. Amazon. Web. 14 January 2019.
“How Language Shapes the Way we Think – Lera Boroditsky”. 2 May 2018. Youtube. 14 January 2019.
Shwayder, Maya. “Change languages, shift responses”. The Harvard Gazette. Harvard University. 2 November 2010. Web. 14 January 2019.
Hi Cassie, thanks for the post and the really interesting links. Your discussion of the language
we speak and its impact on worldview is a very interesting compliment to Chamberlain’s book. It immediately made me think of the residential school system and the way in which young Indigenous people often had their native language beaten (literally) out of them. I imagine the architects of the system were very thoughtful in their choice of homogenizing language to fully assimilate indigenous culture into the incoming European one. This might also explain and further justify the ferocious efforts of the French to retain their language. I do see two sides to the coin, however.
I am currently in South Africa, where I have lived on and off for several years. The colonial system in South Africa was dramatically different than Canada. In SA , as you might know, they had a system called Apartheid which divided the country up strictly on racial lines (whites, blacks, coloured, Indian , Chinese) and enforced laws of segregation and great inequality. However, of specific interest to our discussion, is the fact that apartheid enforced linguistic segregation that led to a nation divided on racial but also linguistic lines. It has meant that today in South Africa, while English is still the language of power, there are 11 official languages that are strong and widely spoken. Un like Canada, where Indigenous languages are only now seeing a slow revival, in SA language is a great political force. It makes for a very diverse cultural fabric in the country but also creates enormous division. The country today is still very segregated and , while deep economic forces play a role, I would argue that language is also a major block to unity. This might be , in part, for the reasons that you mention. People think differently in different languages and people who think differently find it harder to be friends and work together.
I just wanted to offer that side of the coin.
Laen, thank you for your insightful comments. I never thought before to think of language as a potential barrier. I agree with your perspective that language can be both a connection between people as well as a divide. However, I don’t it is a divide because people who think differently find it harder to work together. Even though I speak English, and all my friends speak English, we all do not think the same way about things, but we can still be friends without conflict. I think, perhaps, the reason that language can create a divide between groups is because of a lack of understanding (or a general misunderstanding) and the unwillingness for groups to try to understand each other or how each other think. When you meet a new person, even someone who speaks the same language as you, it takes a certain amount of effort to understand who they are and why they are who they are. The effort would be more or less the same to learn to understand how a group who speaks a different language sees their world, as long as you are willing to put in the effort and have an open mind. A lack of effort and open-mindedness is where language as a basis of conflict may occur.
Cassie, thanks for your post, and Laen, thanks for such an interesting comment about your personal experiences with what Cassie and Chamberlin are discussing. It’s interesting to see the similarities and differences in the way we think and respond to the questions set out in this class. For my blog post, I answered this question as well, and I talked about the Inuit and their many many words for snow, and you discussed the different languages and cultures have differing numbers of words for certain things. But we also discuss other things that have no overlap; I almost see these blog posts as a kind of metaphor for what Chamberlin discusses in his book; we have a shared language, and therefore share some connection, but because we all have different lived experiences, we respond in unique ways.
I grew up speaking only English (unfortunately), and it’s only now, at 25 that I’m starting to learn another language. Even though I’m pretty limited in my skills in Spanish, I’m already seeing how incredibly mind-altering it can be to be able to think and speak in more than one language. As you mentioned, the structures of sentences can be so diverse and highlight different parts of different sentences and articulations as being more or less important. A key difference that I’ve found really difficult, but also really fascinating to learn about, is how Spanish speakers have two different verbs for “to be;” one is temporary and the other is permanent, and the fact that they have two opens up their language for things that are impossible in English.
I agree with you that English speakers are definitely connected to our world through language, but I’m wondering if you’ve given any thought to how we, as English speakers, use English. What do we consider important compared to other languages? I know that’s a difficult question to answer, especially if you are monolingual, and when I think about it, I don’t know if I have an answer. Do you think there are some groups of words that we have in English that really illustrate what we value as English speakers?
Do you think the advantages of having so many hundreds of different languages outweigh the disadvantages? You mention that language brings us closer to our own individual worlds, do you see this as a good thing or a bad thing?
Thanks!
Kirsten, thank you too for your comment. I am also a native English speaker who never achieved the level of Spanish necessary in order to actually start thinking in Spanish. So, as someone who has only ever thought in English, it is hard for me to even say what exactly in the English language displays what we value as English speakers. That might be a question someone who speaks English as a second language might be able to pinpoint more accurately than any guess I could possibly make. However, it is definitely a question worth exploring.
As for your second and third question, there are certainly many advantages and disadvantages towards having hundreds of different languages, however, I think a world with only one language would be horrifically dull. So much culture lives within a language – so many stories, experiences, and world views live in a language. Therefore, I do not think it is a bad thing that we have so many languages and so many different worlds built from those languages, I just think that (in conjunction with some of the points Laen and I brought up in the comment discussion above) the negative aspect of so many different languages is the conflict that arises from misunderstanding a foreign language and the culture that is associated with that language and that that misunderstanding needs to be overcome so we can all see the beauty in the worlds associated with languages we do not speak.
Hi Cassie! I very much enjoyed your post. As someone who volunteers on at the crisis centre in Vancouver, I very much understand the power that words have on people’s perception of their own world, as well as the power of words to heal. In the Change Languages, Shift Responses article, it appears like the conclusion is made that people respond differently to questions based on the language they are using. I wonder then, do you think there should be options in schooling in Canada to try and reverse the destruction of native languages? Do you think that if, not only there are natives learning native languages, but non-indigenous people taught these languages, that we then may be able to “find common ground” as it were? Do you think there would be more support for indigenous people’s if more people were simply in tune with the way they think, and to do this through language?
Thank you for your thoughts!
Hi Ross
I think that the school systems have considered including Indigenous languages as part of the curriculum in the past, however, particularly in BC, there are so many different Indigenous languages and dialects and sometimes very few speakers of the language or dialect that in many ways it is not generally feasible to include it directly in elementary or high school education. I do think, however, that we may be able to find that common ground if we were more exposed to these languages in general. A few years ago, I had the opportunity to visit the Royal BC Museum in Victoria and they had this fantastic exhibit called “Our Living Languages” (https://royalbcmuseum.bc.ca/visit/exhibitions/our-living-languages-first-peoples-voices-bc), which was very effective in exposing me to these unfamiliar languages and allowing me to really appreciate these languages. To sum up, I think the exposure to these languages is important, but I think there are other, more effective methods of establishing that exposure than just trying to integrate it into the school system.