by Carolina Lawless
Language is at the base of most of our daily interactions, but we rarely consider the depth of its effects on both the speaker and the listener. Granted, we do accept that words hold some power – “the pen is mightier than the sword”- but this strength is often associated with the oratory skills of the person speaking, rather than the words themselves.
Philosopher John Locke, for example, posited that “words should be taken for what they are, the signs of our ideas only, and not for things themselves”, meaning that they are simply the means we externalize our thoughts. Consequently, the effectiveness of speech depends solely on the effectiveness of the speaker’s ideas, as words convey meaning but have no meaning themselves. A similar view on language can be seen in one of William Shakespeare’s most popular monologues, from the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet. In the famous balcony scene, Juliet proclaims: “What’s in a name? That which we call a rose/ By any other name would smell as sweet”, in a way completely disregarding words altogether. In essence, it would seem as though the way we refer to an object does not affect its identity.
This may be true for nouns referring to simple objects such as a rose, but the impact of language varies if considered in relation to more complex themes. How we express our feelings goes deeper than the feelings themselves, so it is important to be aware of the fundamental importance of the words we use. The most effective way to analyze this particular aspect of speech is to consider it in relation to other languages, particularly in cases of people who speak more than one.
Bilingual people have an advantage in this regard, as they can feel the direct effects of different languages in their daily lives. Some have noticed a rather significant shift in their emotional and psychological state depending on the language they are currently speaking, amongst those at their disposal. Could this be due to each language intrinsic properties, or is it based on associations made by bilinguals between personal experience and language? Both theories are equally fascinating.
The latter suggests that, since bilingual speakers learn different languages in different contexts, it is each person’s personal background that influences their relationship with the language. This could be due to factors such as family context, personal trauma, educational experience and whatnot. Therefore a bilingual person will feel differently about each language, depending on their experience with it. Nevertheless, some particular situations seem to be common to most – if not all – bilinguals. For example, many have stated that they find easier to lie when speaking their second language, as the very words they pronounce feel more distant somehow, causing less emotional involvement in their attempt at deception.
However, the difference between various languages may not be as personal and subjective as we might think. It is true that different languages encompass inherently distinct properties and characteristics, spanning from grammatical structures to vocabulary breadth, all of which may carry as much meaning as the actual definition of the words that make up the language itself.
“A terrible fear is upon me”. This sentence may appear strange to most English speakers, who would argue that the correct way to express feelings of fear – for example – is actually ”I’m scared”. While formally correct, these people fail to take into account the profound difference between the two statements. The underlying difference goes deeper than syntactical correctness. Languages that adopt the former structure – such as Italian or Irish – imply a different nuance connected with the statement, acknowledging the feeling’s presence and its transient nature. The English language, on the other hand, has taken on the structure of “I’m scared”, which implies fear as an overwhelming force, potentially overriding one’s identity. In this case, the individual becomes the fear rather than simply feeling it.
Sometimes the philosophical aspect of a language can be tied to the culture of its country as a whole, not just the personality of individual speakers. Language can be considered a gateway to better understand the culture and worldview of a country. Certain languages contain words that convey specific subtleties which may seem absurd or unnecessary to those who don’t have full knowledge of that culture. For instance, a language with over 30 words to say “field” may seem absurd, and yet the Irish native language makes use of a very specific and poetic vernacular to refer to its landscape. What does this tell us about the Irish? Manchán Magan, a prominent Irish author, investigates the complex interplay between language, landscape and culture, in his book Thirty-Two Words for Field: Lost Words of the Irish Landscape, in which he hypothesizes that the Irish vocabulary was fundamentally tied to the folklore and identity of the island.
In light of these considerations, it becomes clear that the view on language adopted by Shakespeare and Locke fails to take into account that words do impact identity, whether it be of the speaker, the listener, or the object itself. Would a rose still be as sweet if it had another name? What if there was a name for every type of rose, for every color or smell that characterizes it, one for every meaning a rose can convey. Is “rose” really sufficient to express all that a rose can symbolize?
MINGOMagazine 