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.