Tuesday, September 20, 2016
Blog Sep. 21st
No, Anzald would not agree with the notion that the cultural diffusion that kills languages is a good thing. She deeply believes that when cultures mix the minority is singled out and forced to conform to the social norm, whatever that may be. Her experiences as a child, and being forced to reject her culture made her very protective of the loss of culture in society. I can't say I blame her she really took offense to the rejection of her native tongue asa child. She even specifically said that taking about her language or culture badly was the one of the easiest ways to anger her. Although if she wasn't so biased she would see that Mcwhorter is right or at the very least its not a "bad" thing. The more cultures that cross paths the more educated we become, not just of the people but a way of life. Its a way for us too enjoy somthing you might not even be exposed to otherwise, it also would help make people more culturally sensetive to avoid instances where someone could be ridiculed for their culture. Lastly even though the language itself might suffer the experiences people would gain from interacting with each other would be much more valuable in its own way than any particular way of speech that may be lost. Mcwhorter stated that the relatively unused languages eventually would die out just because of lack of use, so these benefits far outweigh the cultural loss that in some cases is inevitable.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Im not saying that it is good that when cultures merge they die in a way. They both lose a piece, but something is gained from it. I understand how she feels when she says minorities are singled out and forced to conform. But I can also say I dont care. Im African American..... and i honestly cant tell you anything about my previous anstorial culture only about my american one. Is the culture I speak of dead? No its just not here in the U.S. Even still i have to conform to the way things work here even if id rather go learn a new way my going to Africa and trying to find my "roots". When i come back other people arent going to know the things i know, why should they be forced to accept me and my differences ?
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with this. Anzaldua would not agree with John McWhorter because she thinks quiet the opposite from him. Her experiences and situations in her life drew her to her beliefs that she is cannot speak her language. Although, John McWhorter does bring up a very precise point about when language dies so does culture and it is technically true in some cases. McWhorter is not wrong at all, but Anzaldua woudln't agree with him because she grew up around another language and culture than english. In Addition, I also agree that as cultures cross paths people do become more educated and are able to communicate better with more people. Even though, it is tragic that languages are dying it could be extremely beneficial to the whole world. People who speak English and people who speak Eyak are completely different, although it could prosper and make the world a better place if there is a universal language which could be unstoppable at this point.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you. The perspective that Anzaldua brought to “How to Tame a Wile Tongue” was extremely biased. I’m not trying to say that’s a bad thing. Anzaldua had to go through experiences as a minority that affected her negatively and as a result she has a negative outlook on cultures dropping their native language. All these things have changed the way she is able to view the argument where on the other hand, McWhorter was able to approach the point from a completely logical viewpoint. Saying that to let a language die out isn’t necessarily the death of a culture but the coming together of people as a whole. Again I’d have to agree. Language doesn’t constitute culture. McWhorter’s example of telling a Native American that they aren’t Native Americans because they don’t know their ancestral tongue not sitting well with them was a great way to back up his claim. It is really up to the individuals to keep their culture alive through the generations and if they choose to not include the language that is only one minute part of the culture as a whole.
ReplyDeleteThank you Tre for the post and I agree with this post. Anzaldua would not agree with this notion because as you stated in your post, “the minority is singled out and forced to conform to the social norm” as in the minority has to “conform” or change their way to the ways of what is consider “normal” to most people. Anzaldua would disagree with John McWhorter’s statement “when language dies, it’s a signal of people coming together”. The death of language could possibly bring people together, but it also suppresses a group of people by making a part of a culture that makes it unique extinct. In my opinion, with the absence, or death, of language only brings people together because that generation lost something in common, but as for generations to come after this situation, they wouldn’t see the purpose in coming together with those same people because they are all “unified” in language with others. Yes, cultures with cross path are more educated and diverse, they simplicity that a language will become will significantly differ from the original complexity of its origin.
ReplyDelete