Published:
Op-Ed Contributor
Media Is The Masses: Conceptions of linguistics
By Sean Stubblefield
Language can be interpreted as a type of media. Perceptions are influenced by conceptions. We see what we expect to see according to how we understand things.
And our conceptions of reality are often defined by language. The more extensive, evolving and flexible a language is, the more descriptive and efficient it can be.
And those descriptions are based on the terms present and permissible within and through a lingual framework.
The diversity and sophistication of language determines its degree of precision.
What we can conceive greatly depends on our ability and capacity to define or identify.
There is a significant distinction between recognizing "chair" and discerning what kind of chair, or what makes it a chair.
The frameworks of the French, Japanese and Italian languages construct different conceptual worlds than English in the way words are used and understood.
Consider the simplistic language forms of Spanish, and Ebonics used by ghetto and gangsta blacks. Now notice the correlation with the kind of communities they create.
The neighborhoods they inhabit inevitably become degraded and destitute. I think that's more than coincidence. Their linguistics are not only limited but limiting. This is the mental equivalent of lacking an opposable thumb. They are incapable of constructing complex ideas, as long as they remain in the confines of that language.
A simple language leads to simple thinking. Literate people are inherently more educated and refined. The more extensive your vocabulary, the more extensive your potential for conceptualization. Not necessarily the quantity of words, but at least the quality.
Reality as we know it, the world we see, is confined to linguistics. And even when we don't know the name of some thing, we can still know what it is; we can recognize and distinguish it as a concept or image in the mind as being a specific thing, or class of thing.
A dog will see a chair, but have no concept of chair, no word for chair. The dog may even comprehend a chair's function as well as its form, but does not have a word for it-- only a mental image recognition.
The language code nomenclature of "texting" or internet/email short hand lingo tends to circumvent and diminish the ability to spell correctly.
Certain environments have particular social/psychological "languages"... protocols and modes of thought and behavior deemed appropriate/acceptable for social discourse in that setting. Clothing, also, acts as a form of language, influencing our conceptions and expectations of/for people wearing particular clothes or types of apparel. We make assumptions about who people are or are "supposed to be" according to the context of what they wear and where they are.
If your role is "this", then you must wear "that".
If you are wearing "that", then you must behave like "this".
If you are in this place, you must conform to (or apparently already abide by) these rules, beliefs and attitudes.
We create our terms of reality with the terms of our language.
Send Comments to: exastra@hotmail.com
Currently based in Houston Texas, Sean Stubblefield graduated Sam Houston State University with a Bachelor of Fine Arts in Television Production. A philosopher poet, Stubblefield has been writing non-fiction for 15 years, and has penned eight books to date. His first book, Paradox: A Journey Inside Out is available today.
For More Information: www.myspace.com/exastral.
Tags: Media Is The Masses,Sean Stubblefield,Conceptions of linguistics,French, Japanese, Italian languages
* The views of Opinion writers do not necessarily reflect the views of NewsBlaze
Search News
Daily News
