Eid Reads

Yorkshire named top twang as Brummie brogue comes bottom’ by David Batty

David Batty wrote this article for the guardian, he addresses the issue of language stereotypes: one’s accent impacts the public’s perception of them. He unraveled the study of dialects and perceived intelligence. Batty found that many associated those with a Birmingham accent with stupidity, meanwhile those with a Yorkshire accent were perceived to be intelligent. In a test, three females of similar physical appearances were judged by 48 volunteers on their intelligence, the only difference between them was their accent: one had a Birmingham accent whereas the other had a Yorkshire accent, as for the third female she remained silent. The intelligence ratings: 6.71 for Yorkshire, 6.67 for silence, 5.6 for Birmingham. Dr. Lance Workman, the conductor of the research at Bath Spa University, says that his research investigated regional stereotypes. He also explained why Birmingham had such low intelligence ratings: it is due to peoples association of Birmingham with crime, and the direct correlation between crime and lack of intelligence. Those with a Yorkshire accent are perceived to be winsome, trustworthy and intelligent beings.

The context of this article is ‘How language can transmute one’s identity’, a topic we have thoroughly analyzed and discussed in our language and literature class. We have studied how language can shape the way you think. Similarly, this article has analyzed how language (dialect to be exact) can impact ones intelligence “Those with a Yorkshire twang were considered clever” However; Dr. Lance Workman seemed to disagree “Can I just say that whenever I’ve been to Birmingham I’ve found people to be very bright and friendly.” In class we have analyzed how language and racial stereotypes associated with that language impact relational identities and interactional identities. “Yorkshire residents were now perceived as wise, trustworthy, honest and straightforward.” Meanwhile “people associate Birmingham with criminal activity, and they associate criminal activity with low intelligence.” In this specific situation, there has been a public image created for those who speak a certain dialect, if you spoke the Yorkshire accent you were clever and trustworthy, however if you spoke the Birmingham accent you were unintelligent and possibly a criminal. This impinges upon social relations: communicating with others, and presenting one’s self appropriately to the public.

You Say Up, I Say Yesterday’ by Joan O’C. Hamilton

Hamilton discusses Lea Boroditsky, a cognitive scientist’s research that has taken the linguistic world by storm. The Stanford researcher believes that language shapes the way we think; she has spent a significant amount of her time proving her theory. Boroditsky tested her theory in many different situations in which her hypothesis has been proven positive. Russian and English speaking MIT students were put to a colour distinguishing test to see whether the Russian language’s large variety of words that attain to all of your colour and colour shade needs impacted a students ability to distinguish between different colour shades. Spanish speakers and English speakers were asked to observe contrasting events and recall them, this test was to see if Spanish speakers memory was impacted due to the Spanish verb to indicate actions based on intention.  All these tests proved Boroditsky’s hypothesis and her veracity; language does indeed impact the way we think! However, many scientists believe languages do not impact the way we think, they merely impact the way we present what we think. Lilia Gleitman, professor emerita of psychology and linguistics at the University of Pennsylvania, has abjured the neo-Whorfian research. She defiled Boroditsky’s research and says it is flawed because it is very much reliant on the context of the experiments. Therefore due to the vicissitudes of the experiment, it cannot be applied to real life situations. Was Gleitman’s surmise inaccurate, I am unsure, however Boroditsky restively strives to prove her theories to be true. Boroditsky’s proclivity for how language shapes the mind, the psychological concept of “framing” and how it is impacted by language, how cultures perceive and communicate ideas about time, and the accuracy of translations (especially in court rooms) are what drives her research.

The context of this article is ‘How can language shape our mind’. This is a very familiar topic to language and literature students. We have studied how different expressions vary in different languages “In Japanese or Spanish, …intent matters” (p.463). Hamilton however takes it a step further and asks “What might linguistic differences tell us about cognition, perception and memory- and with what implications for such perennial debts as the influence of nature versus nurture?” (p.463). Boroditsky is answering questions viewed as most captivating by poets, philosophers, linguists and many others. Due to her research she is now known as a neo-Whorfian. However many people decry the neo-Whorfian research “Those scientists believe that languages express thinking and perception in different ways but do not shape the thinking and perception.” (p.464) However Boroditsky has found that the way people of different languages and cultures perceive the world around them is indeed diversified and the linguistic differences must have had a major role in the making of these manifold ways of thinking.

 ‘Bilingual Mind: Understanding how the Brain Speaks Two Languages’ by Jeffery Kluger

This article discusses how bilingualism can affect your brain. Kluger says that being bilingual can affect learning, behavior and the structure of the brain. He says that humans were born linguists and the human brain has the capacity to learn many languages. Children whom grow up learning two languages generally don’t feel the heavy weight that comes along with bilingualism. Children would find it easier to learn a new language in comparison to an adult. Bilingualism can benefit one’s mind greatly. In one of Sean Lynch’s experiments he found that bilingual students showed great proficiency in interpretation skills in comparison to monolingual students. However, a detriment of bilingualism would be that bilingual kids tend to have a small vocabulary and smaller production vocabularies. These short-term disadvantages are not incredibly significant because children often catch up to their peer’s language levels. These brusque short-term disadvantages are also insignificant because they are incomparable to the long-term benefits. Bilingualism can delay age related dementia 4.1 years later than monolinguals and it delays Alzheimer’s disease by 5.1 years. “Bilinguals were faster as well as more metabolically economical in executing the cognitive mission, using less energy in the frontal cortex than the monolinguals.”

The context of this article is ‘How bilingualism can impact one’s mind’. This is a topic that has been heavily discussed and debated in our language and literature class. We studied how bilingualism can impact our identity “Humans are crude linguists from the moment of birth” (p.125), how we are often raised with two languages that become imbedded into our being. We studied how two languages can impact the way our mind works “Influences learning, behavior and the very structure of the brain itself.” (p.125). We also studied how bilingualism could have short-term disadvantages on an individual “smaller comprehensive vocabularies… smaller production vocabularies- or words they could pronounce” (p. 127) However the long term advantages were more dominant  “In one study, bilinguals experienced the onset of age-related dementia 4.1 years later than monolinguals, and full blown Alzheimer’s 5.1 years later.” (p.127). In conclusion bilingualism is a boon to the mind of bilingual speakers.