Statement 1 – [1:20] Dr. Boroditsky notes that through language we have the ability as human beings to plant ideas into other peoples’ minds; the ability to plant new thoughts just by communicating these thoughts to another individual.
I found this to be a very powerful statement. I would add that how the receiver of information deciphers or values it, provides an important piece to how the information is stored and used. We know in communication, there needs to be a sender and a receiver. Both are necessary in order for communication to occur – if one party is missing, communication cannot occur. The idea of “planting” information into another person’s mind certainly sounds ominous. Considering how individuals can be easily swayed or open to misinformation demonstrates the power that language has on all of us (to varying degrees). To counteract misinformation, we need language and voices that value the importance of critical thinking; to have the ability to distinguish between fact and fiction. Personally, as a teacher, student and global citizen, it’s important for me to develop skills to make judgements based on fact, and learn how to gather facts from reliable sources. This includes being able to back up my own claims/opinions and to accept when I’m wrong.
Statement 2 – [07:10] Dr. Boroditsky talks about assumptions, noting that people will pick up on what is meant by a given statement even with limited info shared. Boroditsky uses the example, “It rained this morning”, pointing out that we typically only utter a small portion of a scenario. We “understand” what the speaker means in the statement, and we know to assume that it rained outside even though it was not stated; it’s implied. Most recipients of this message will understand its meaning. Why? Because we learn how to encode information.
This brought to mind my experience as a Kindergarten teacher. I know that much of my teaching has to be explicit and direct. This is especially true at the beginning of the school year when students and teachers are learning about each other, learning how we speak and how we communicate (verbal and nonverbal). Explicit teaching is important because without it, some students may not understand what is being asked of them; there may be confusion which can lead to frustration and anxiety. Some children are able to encode or differentiate more easily than other children. It’s important we consider each student and not compare them to one another. There is evidence that some (not all) children diagnosed with ASD, may find colloquial phrasing difficult to decipher. This can also be true of some students who are learning a second language. The information may be interpreted literally and not understood in the way it was intended. For example: “kick the bucket” (to die), “knee jerk reaction” (a quick response), or “elbow grease” (hard work). We cannot simply assume that all children will grasp what we are saying or asking. Providing a variety of ways to communicate a message helps in reaching more students. Ways that work for me are: re-phrasing; body language; sign language, varying my tone and delivery; being direct; slowing down my pace; repeating instructions; and, providing clear routines and expectations.
Statement 3 – [9:30] The quote by Frederick the Great of Prussia shared by Dr. Boroditsky resonated with me. It reads: “I speak English to my accountant, French to my ambassadors, Italian to my mistress, Latin to my God, and German to my horse.”
I would agree that people tend to have a number of “voices”. We communicate differently depending on the situation we are in. Speaking for myself, I communicate differently with my students, my colleagues, my Mom, my husband, my doctor, my pet, etc. I think we would find it impossible to speak to our spouse/partner in the same way as we do to our students. I think this could make for an interesting social experiment – to be required to use only ONE voice to communicate throughout the entire day or week. What would we learn about ourselves? How long could we do it before it felt uncomfortable or completely wrong? How would our communication be viewed? Would there be some value in changing our voice for certain situations?
Statement 4 – [26:00] Dr. Boroditsky speaks on how language allows us to “construe and construct events” and that “even simple events can be complicated”. Boroditsky uses the example of the event with Dick Cheney in which he shot his lawyer/friend while hunting. Boroditsky emphasises that depending on who and where the information about the event is communicated, the message may be translated quite differently depending on who and where the message comes from. Messaging “can bring flavour to a description” such as the examples Boroditsky provides from the Texas newspaper and The Onion to describe the Cheney event.
The Onion is a good example of an outlet that, for the purpose of satire, takes language to a different level and emphasises and construes and constructs an event to engage its audience of readers. As a personal anecdote, I remember the first article I read from The Onion from 1997 entitled “Studies Reveal: Babies are Stupid”. The article immediately caught my attention. For whatever reason, I have held onto a paper copy of this article since 1997. I never thought I’d have a reason to share it outside of my household. What I think drew me to it was its use of humour to poke fun at something that many people would be offended by; to take the vulnerability and sweetness of babies and turn it on its head with the use of words such as “stupid” because “90 percent of them [babies], when poked, failed to make even rudimentary attempts to defend themselves.” (The Onion, 1997). The choice of phrasing and words used to portray babies in a certain manner reveals its tongue in cheek and satirical nature. The article relies on the fact that most people love babies and that poking fun at babies is meant to be absurd to the point of eye-rolling. Like the Cheney example, it’s fair to say that our choice of language or voice depends greatly on the target audience. Of course, sometimes it works, sometimes it falls short.
Statement 5 – [29:00] Dr. Boroditsky discusses the difference between “accidents versus intentional” statement in the English language, for example, “I broke my arm”. Important information is left out of this statement. Is it intentional or non-intentional? We would need to ask questions or hear more information in order to understand exactly what occurred. Boroditsky notes that other languages need a distinction for intentional and unintentional acts. “Speakers of different languages who witness exactly the same event come away remembering different things about that event.”
In Kindergarten, I’m often left to decipher between stories that I’m told by students during disagreements or “fights” they’ve had. For example, this may be an incident on the playground in which one student comes inside crying saying they were shoved by another student, by which the “culprit” denies ever touching anyone. Oftentimes, key information is left out of the discussion. It’s up to me as the probing cunning adult to solve the mystery and get to the bottom of it. This requires good questioning and paying close attention to eye movement and body language. Since 5-year-olds have yet to learn the art of fibbing, the problem is typically solved quickly and we move on.
Statement 6 – [50:00] Dr. Boroditsky speaks about the important and difficult job of translators as they translate from one language to another. Considering all the various aspects and challenges with communication and language noted in Boroditsky’s keynote address, Boroditsky emphasizes that a problem with translation, even with well-trained translators, is that it’s “impossible to achieve exact translation across any two languages, even closely related ones.” [1:02] Boroditsky describes the cognitive effects that signers develop such as more acute visual attention than non-signers. Boroditsky provides an example of the difference between spoken language and sign language in which the sign for “eat” does not work. For example: “the acid ate through the shoe.”
For several years, I’ve taught my students ASL (American Sign Language) vocabulary, letters, and numbers, including a couple years when I invited a Deaf instructor to teach ASL vocabulary lessons to my students. I completed Levels 1 & 2 in ASL. My conversational signing skills are VERY limited, however teaching my students some basic signs, along with how to sign their name, I feel expands their language learning skills and supports communication and understanding. It also provides students with an introduction to a skill that they may explore further in their lives.
In Canada, there are approximately 647 active members of The Association of Visual Language Interpreters of Canada (casli.ca). Clearly, interpreters have an important role, and have a vital role especially when a message involves a life and death situation. In 2017, I watched an interpreter on TV who was definitely struggling. While Hurricane Irma was intensifying in Florida, a press conference was held to inform residents for mandatory evacuations. The message was for residents to leave low-lying areas and flood zones for higher ground and to stay at shelters. Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing residents received a different message: “pizza”, “bear monster” and “pray wait water”. Rather than the recommended black shirt, the interpreter wore bright yellow, making it difficult for residents to see his hands. After this debacle, the “interpreter” could not be reached for comment. It turned out that the interpreter had a Deaf brother and he was the only one available at short notice. The county later apologized for making a hasty decision and vowed not to make this mistake again.
Saturday Night Live joined the conversation with a skit (posted here).
References
Boroditsky, L. (2011). How language shapes thought. Scientific American, 304(2), 62-65.
Canadian Association of Sign Language Interpreters. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.casli.ca/
Caron, C. (September 17, 2017). Sign language interpreter warned of ‘pizza’ and ‘bear monster’ at Irma briefing. New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/09/17/us/sign-language-interpreter-irma.html
Saturday Night Live. (September 20, 2013). Cold opening: Bloomberg’s Hurricane Sandy address. [YouTube]. Retrieved from https://www.google.com/search?q=snl+sign+language+skit&rlz= 1C5CHFA_enCA770CA770&oq=SNL+sign+language+skit&aqs=chrome.0.0i512l2j0i390l5.4865j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:6fd179e4,vid:zMfm6ZCMWzY
The Onion. (Original May 21, 1997, reposted June 18, 2019). Study reveals: babies are stupid. The Onion. Retrieved from http://vaviper.blogspot.com/2019/06/from-onion-study-reveals-babies-are.html
