- [7:37] – Dr. Boroditsky mentions that although we may not mention all the specifics about a particular scenario in when describing it in language, there are encoded assumptions we make about what we are hearing. She uses the example of stating that it rained today; in the English language we would have the understanding that the speaker is referencing the outdoors, and likely wouldn’t think the speaker believed that it rained inside the lecture theatre. This reminds me of a video by Josh Darnit (2017) wherein he asks his children to write out directions on how to construct a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. He follows the directions to a tee, and it’s revealed through the video that there are many implied assumptions we make when deciphering language (in this case, in written form). For instance, in one of the steps, he was instructed to wipe the peanut butter and jelly “all over” the slice of bread. Taking this information literally, he begins to spread the peanut butter and jelly on both faces of the bread as well as on the crust sides of the bread, while his child looks on with mixed feelings. This drives home the point that language and text is extremely nuanced, as well as how we interpret it. It’s key to consider our audience and the intention of the communication. In my work, I often need to write step-by-step guides for instructors and staff. I find that there’s a particular balance that I need to strike when breaking down the steps in language and reference images. I need to consider the needs of a range of user, running the gamut between absolute beginners and experienced technology innovators, visual learners and those that thrive following succinct text instructions. Tack onto this that some of the readers may not have English as their first language, and it becomes a task that has the potential to be downright confusing. Dr. Boroditsky highlights the need to consider our audience, and apply knowledge about multiliteracies in order to most effectively communicate our message. Feel free to check out Josh Darnit’s video below. It’s quite entertaining!
- [16:01] Dr. Boroditsky describes how, based on cultural understandings about time and space, people of different language and culture spatially lay out sequences by noting the way their body is positioned in relation to east and west. In languages that exist within a culture that rely more heavily on wayfinding and elements of nature, this makes perfect sense. In modern English-speaking culture, we seem to have far less need to orient ourselves to nature’s signposts. Dr. Boroditsky makes the point that those who orient time from left to right could be interpreted as making time chase them around! I thought this was clever, and interesting to consider why and how we spatially construct time the way we do.
- [19:16] Dr. Boroditsky explains how different cultures categorize colours, stating that in some languages there are specific words particular shades whereas in other languages those distinctions would be harder to communicate. I found this really interesting. I wonder if the way people communicate colour could be impacted by their experience in mixing colour, as in fine art. If you were to ask an experienced artist the combinations of paint they used to achieve a particular colour, they’d likely be able to recount the names of the hues they used, the ratio of each, and how much tint or shade they mixed in to achieve the effect. Because artists have experiential knowledge of mixing the hues, they have more capacity to describe it. To add another element to this, using colour to describe emotion could be different from person to person, across languages and culture. For a person in western culture, a particular hue of red could symbolize danger or anger, but for a person of Chinese descent, the same hue could symbolize luck and prosperity. This also made me think about hex codes in digital art and design, which could be considered a technologically universal language to refer to seemingly infinite hues of colour.
- [23:56] The commentary that Dr. Boroditsky makes about grammatically gender nouns impacting how people interpret objects, events, and art piqued my interest. As gender fluidity becomes more mainstream, will the impact of gendered language become less pronounced? If a language or culture adheres to strict rules about grammatical gender, does this impact how speakers of that language comprehend the concept of non-binary gender? In recent years, we’ve seen gender non-binary/fluid folks create pronouns to refer to themselves in English, such as ze/zir, xe/xem. In other languages such as Romanian, Polish, and Ukrainian, there already happen to be more than two grammatical genders. Perhaps we will see (or maybe we have already seen) more languages adopting additional pronouns into their language.
- [41:57] The marketing use of language and word choice to shape how we think about products is ubiquitous, and Dr. Boroditsky’s illustration about the interpretive contrast between prunes and dried plums is an excellent example. A tangential thought related to this is the commonly accepted practice of using of brand names to refer to products. Using the word Kleenex instead of tissues or the word Band-aid instead of adhesive bandage are generally understood, at least in English. I would imagine this phenomenon is also observed in other languages and cultures. As words and their associations evolve over time, so do our interpretations of what they mean in different contexts.
- [45:53] Dr. Boroditsky discusses America attempting to appoint “freedom” as a substitute for “French” in well-known terms such as French fries and French toast due to political motives. Another example of using language to politically impact how audiences interpret information is around discussions of global warming. Often politically left-leaning groups refer to the global warming as a climate crisis or climate emergency, which can inspire people to feel more urgency to take action. Politically right-leaning groups seem to use terms like climate change, which creates less of an impetus to act. Word choice in political agendas directly impact the divisiveness we feel as humans living in this world, making it challenging to find any kind of common truth that unites us.
References:
Darnit, J. (2017, April 20). Exact instructions challenge PB&J classroom friendly | josh darnit. [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FN2RM-CHkuI
SAR School for Advanced Research. (2017, June 7). Lera Boroditsky, how the languages we speak shape the way we think [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iGuuHwbuQOg