essay on the power of language

Along with Stanford news and stories, show me:

Student information
Faculty/Staff information

We want to provide announcements, events, leadership messages and resources that are relevant to you. Your selection is stored in a browser cookie which you can remove at any time using “Clear all personalization” below.

Speaking, writing and reading are integral to everyday life, where language is the primary tool for expression and communication. Studying how people use language – what words and phrases they unconsciously choose and combine – can help us better understand ourselves and why we behave the way we do.

Linguistics scholars seek to determine what is unique and universal about the language we use, how it is acquired and the ways it changes over time. They consider language as a cultural, social and psychological phenomenon.

“Understanding why and how languages differ tells about the range of what is human,” said Dan Jurafsky , the Jackson Eli Reynolds Professor in Humanities and chair of the Department of Linguistics in the School of Humanities and Sciences at Stanford . “Discovering what’s universal about languages can help us understand the core of our humanity.”

The stories below represent some of the ways linguists have investigated many aspects of language, including its semantics and syntax, phonetics and phonology, and its social, psychological and computational aspects.

Understanding stereotypes

Stanford linguists and psychologists study how language is interpreted by people. Even the slightest differences in language use can correspond with biased beliefs of the speakers, according to research.

One study showed that a relatively harmless sentence, such as “girls are as good as boys at math,” can subtly perpetuate sexist stereotypes. Because of the statement’s grammatical structure, it implies that being good at math is more common or natural for boys than girls, the researchers said.

Language can play a big role in how we and others perceive the world, and linguists work to discover what words and phrases can influence us, unknowingly.

How well-meaning statements can spread stereotypes unintentionally

New Stanford research shows that sentences that frame one gender as the standard for the other can unintentionally perpetuate biases.

Algorithms reveal changes in stereotypes

New Stanford research shows that, over the past century, linguistic changes in gender and ethnic stereotypes correlated with major social movements and demographic changes in the U.S. Census data.

Exploring what an interruption is in conversation

Stanford doctoral candidate Katherine Hilton found that people perceive interruptions in conversation differently, and those perceptions differ depending on the listener’s own conversational style as well as gender.

Cops speak less respectfully to black community members

Professors Jennifer Eberhardt and Dan Jurafsky, along with other Stanford researchers, detected racial disparities in police officers’ speech after analyzing more than 100 hours of body camera footage from Oakland Police.

How other languages inform our own

People speak roughly 7,000 languages worldwide. Although there is a lot in common among languages, each one is unique, both in its structure and in the way it reflects the culture of the people who speak it.

Jurafsky said it’s important to study languages other than our own and how they develop over time because it can help scholars understand what lies at the foundation of humans’ unique way of communicating with one another.

“All this research can help us discover what it means to be human,” Jurafsky said.

Stanford PhD student documents indigenous language of Papua New Guinea

Fifth-year PhD student Kate Lindsey recently returned to the United States after a year of documenting an obscure language indigenous to the South Pacific nation.

Students explore Esperanto across Europe

In a research project spanning eight countries, two Stanford students search for Esperanto, a constructed language, against the backdrop of European populism.

Chris Manning: How computers are learning to understand language

A computer scientist discusses the evolution of computational linguistics and where it’s headed next.

Stanford research explores novel perspectives on the evolution of Spanish

Using digital tools and literature to explore the evolution of the Spanish language, Stanford researcher Cuauhtémoc García-García reveals a new historical perspective on linguistic changes in Latin America and Spain.

Language as a lens into behavior

Linguists analyze how certain speech patterns correspond to particular behaviors, including how language can impact people’s buying decisions or influence their social media use.

For example, in one research paper, a group of Stanford researchers examined the differences in how Republicans and Democrats express themselves online to better understand how a polarization of beliefs can occur on social media.

“We live in a very polarized time,” Jurafsky said. “Understanding what different groups of people say and why is the first step in determining how we can help bring people together.”

Analyzing the tweets of Republicans and Democrats

New research by Dora Demszky and colleagues examined how Republicans and Democrats express themselves online in an attempt to understand how polarization of beliefs occurs on social media.

Examining bilingual behavior of children at Texas preschool

A Stanford senior studied a group of bilingual children at a Spanish immersion preschool in Texas to understand how they distinguished between their two languages.

Predicting sales of online products from advertising language

Stanford linguist Dan Jurafsky and colleagues have found that products in Japan sell better if their advertising includes polite language and words that invoke cultural traditions or authority.

Language can help the elderly cope with the challenges of aging, says Stanford professor

By examining conversations of elderly Japanese women, linguist Yoshiko Matsumoto uncovers language techniques that help people move past traumatic events and regain a sense of normalcy.

The power of language: we translate our thoughts into words, but words also affect the way we think

Professor of Cognitive Neuroscience, Bangor University

Disclosure statement

Guillaume Thierry has received funding from the European Research Council, the Economic and Social Research Council, the British Academy, the Arts and Humanities Research Council, the Biotechnology and Biological Research Council, and the Arts Council of Wales.

Bangor University provides funding as a member of The Conversation UK.

View all partners

Bahasa Indonesia

Have you ever worried in your student years or later in life that time may be starting to run out to achieve your goals? If so, would it be easier conveying this feeling to others if there was a word meaning just that? In German, there is. That feeling of panic associated with one’s opportunities appearing to run out is called Torschlusspanik .

German has a rich collection of such terms, made up of often two, three or more words connected to form a superword or compound word. Compound words are particularly powerful because they are (much) more than the sum of their parts. Torschlusspanik, for instance, is literally made of “gate”-“closing”-“panic”.

If you get to the train station a little late and see your train’s doors still open, you may have experienced a concrete form of Torschlusspanik, prompted by the characteristic beeps as the train doors are about to close. But this compound word of German is associated with more than the literal meaning. It evokes something more abstract, referring to the feeling that life is progressively shutting the door of opportunities as time goes by.

English too has many compound words. Some combine rather concrete words like “seahorse”, “butterfly”, or “turtleneck”. Others are more abstract, such as “backwards” or “whatsoever”. And of course in English too, compounds are superwords, as in German or French, since their meaning is often distinct from the meaning of its parts. A seahorse is not a horse, a butterfly is not a fly, turtles don’t wear turtlenecks, etc.

One remarkable feature of compound words is that they don’t translate well at all from one language to another, at least when it comes to translating their constituent parts literally. Who would have thought that a “carry-sheets” is a wallet – porte-feuille –, or that a “support-throat” is a bra – soutien-gorge – in French?

This begs the question of what happens when words don’t readily translate from one language to another. For instance, what happens when a native speaker of German tries to convey in English that they just had a spurt of Torschlusspanik? Naturally, they will resort to paraphrasing, that is, they will make up a narrative with examples to make their interlocutor understand what they are trying to say.

But then, this begs another, bigger question: Do people who have words that simply do not translate in another language have access to different concepts? Take the case of hiraeth for instance, a beautiful word of Welsh famous for being essentially untranslatable. Hiraeth is meant to convey the feeling associated with the bittersweet memory of missing something or someone, while being grateful of their existence.

Hiraeth is not nostalgia, it is not anguish, or frustration, or melancholy, or regret. And no, it is not homesickness, as Google translate may lead you to believe, since hiraeth also conveys the feeling one experiences when they ask someone to marry them and they are turned down, hardly a case of homesickness.

Different words, different minds?

The existence of a word in Welsh to convey this particular feeling poses a fundamental question on language–thought relationships. Asked in ancient Greece by philosophers such as Herodotus (450 BC), this question has resurfaced in the middle of the last century, under the impetus of Edward Sapir and his student Benjamin Lee Whorf , and has become known as the linguistic relativity hypothesis.

Linguistic relativity is the idea that language, which most people agree originates in and expresses human thought, can feedback to thinking, influencing thought in return. So, could different words or different grammatical constructs “shape” thinking differently in speakers of different languages? Being quite intuitive, this idea has enjoyed quite of bit of success in popular culture, lately appearing in a rather provocative form in the science fiction movie Arrival.

Although the idea is intuitive for some, exaggerated claims have been made about the extent of vocabulary diversity in some languages. Exaggerations have enticed illustrious linguists to write satirical essays such as “ the great Eskimo vocabulary hoax ”, where Geoff Pullum denounces the fantasy about the number of words used by Eskimos to refer to snow. However, whatever the actual number of words for snow in Eskimo, Pullum’s pamphlet fails to address an important question: what do we actually know about Eskimos’ perception of snow?

No matter how vitriolic critics of the linguistic relativity hypothesis may be, experimental research seeking scientific evidence for the existence of differences between speakers of different languages has started accumulating at a steady pace. For instance, Panos Athanasopoulos at Lancaster University, has made striking observations that having particular words to distinguish colour categories goes hand-in-hand with appreciating colour contrasts . So, he points out, native speakers of Greek, who have distinct basic colour terms for light and dark blue ( ghalazio and ble respectively) tend to consider corresponding shades of blue as more dissimilar than native speaker of English, who use the same basic term “blue” to describe them.

But scholars including Steven Pinker at Harvard are unimpressed, arguing that such effects are trivial and uninteresting, because individuals engaged in experiments are likely to use language in their head when making judgements about colours – so their behaviour is superficially influenced by language, while everyone sees the world in the same way.

To progress in this debate , I believe we need to get closer to the human brain, by measuring perception more directly, preferably within the small fraction of time preceding mental access to language. This is now possible, thanks to neuroscientific methods and – incredibly – early results lean in favour of Sapir and Whorf’s intuition.

So, yes, like it or not, it may well be that having different words means having differently structured minds. But then, given that every mind on earth is unique and distinct, this is not really a game changer.

Linguistics
Neurolinguistics

University Relations Manager

2024 Vice-Chancellor's Research Fellowships

Head of Research Computing & Data Solutions

Community member RANZCO Education Committee (Volunteer)

Director of STEM

Tools and Resources
Customer Services
Communication and Culture
Communication and Social Change
Communication and Technology
Communication Theory
Critical/Cultural Studies
Gender (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Studies)
Health and Risk Communication
Intergroup Communication
International/Global Communication
Interpersonal Communication
Journalism Studies
Language and Social Interaction
Mass Communication
Media and Communication Policy
Organizational Communication
Political Communication
Rhetorical Theory
Share This Facebook LinkedIn Twitter

Article contents

Language and power.

Sik Hung Ng Sik Hung Ng Department of Psychology, Renmin University of China
, and Fei Deng Fei Deng School of Foreign Studies, South China Agricultural University
https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.013.436
Published online: 22 August 2017

Five dynamic language–power relationships in communication have emerged from critical language studies, sociolinguistics, conversation analysis, and the social psychology of language and communication. Two of them stem from preexisting powers behind language that it reveals and reflects, thereby transferring the extralinguistic powers to the communication context. Such powers exist at both the micro and macro levels. At the micro level, the power behind language is a speaker’s possession of a weapon, money, high social status, or other attractive personal qualities—by revealing them in convincing language, the speaker influences the hearer. At the macro level, the power behind language is the collective power (ethnolinguistic vitality) of the communities that speak the language. The dominance of English as a global language and international lingua franca, for example, has less to do with its linguistic quality and more to do with the ethnolinguistic vitality of English-speakers worldwide that it reflects. The other three language–power relationships refer to the powers of language that are based on a language’s communicative versatility and its broad range of cognitive, communicative, social, and identity functions in meaning-making, social interaction, and language policies. Such language powers include, first, the power of language to maintain existing dominance in legal, sexist, racist, and ageist discourses that favor particular groups of language users over others. Another language power is its immense impact on national unity and discord. The third language power is its ability to create influence through single words (e.g., metaphors), oratories, conversations and narratives in political campaigns, emergence of leaders, terrorist narratives, and so forth.

power behind language
power of language
intergroup communication
World Englishes
oratorical power
conversational power
leader emergence
al-Qaeda narrative
social identity approach

Introduction

Language is for communication and power.

Language is a natural human system of conventionalized symbols that have understood meanings. Through it humans express and communicate their private thoughts and feelings as well as enact various social functions. The social functions include co-constructing social reality between and among individuals, performing and coordinating social actions such as conversing, arguing, cheating, and telling people what they should or should not do. Language is also a public marker of ethnolinguistic, national, or religious identity, so strong that people are willing to go to war for its defense, just as they would defend other markers of social identity, such as their national flag. These cognitive, communicative, social, and identity functions make language a fundamental medium of human communication. Language is also a versatile communication medium, often and widely used in tandem with music, pictures, and actions to amplify its power. Silence, too, adds to the force of speech when it is used strategically to speak louder than words. The wide range of language functions and its versatility combine to make language powerful. Even so, this is only one part of what is in fact a dynamic relationship between language and power. The other part is that there is preexisting power behind language which it reveals and reflects, thereby transferring extralinguistic power to the communication context. It is thus important to delineate the language–power relationships and their implications for human communication.

This chapter provides a systematic account of the dynamic interrelationships between language and power, not comprehensively for lack of space, but sufficiently focused so as to align with the intergroup communication theme of the present volume. The term “intergroup communication” will be used herein to refer to an intergroup perspective on communication, which stresses intergroup processes underlying communication and is not restricted to any particular form of intergroup communication such as interethnic or intergender communication, important though they are. It echoes the pioneering attempts to develop an intergroup perspective on the social psychology of language and communication behavior made by pioneers drawn from communication, social psychology, and cognate fields (see Harwood et al., 2005 ). This intergroup perspective has fostered the development of intergroup communication as a discipline distinct from and complementing the discipline of interpersonal communication. One of its insights is that apparently interpersonal communication is in fact dynamically intergroup (Dragojevic & Giles, 2014 ). For this and other reasons, an intergroup perspective on language and communication behavior has proved surprisingly useful in revealing intergroup processes in health communication (Jones & Watson, 2012 ), media communication (Harwood & Roy, 2005 ), and communication in a variety of organizational contexts (Giles, 2012 ).

The major theoretical foundation that has underpinned the intergroup perspective is social identity theory (Tajfel, 1982 ), which continues to service the field as a metatheory (Abrams & Hogg, 2004 ) alongside relatively more specialized theories such as ethnolinguistic identity theory (Harwood et al., 1994 ), communication accommodation theory (Palomares et al., 2016 ), and self-categorization theory applied to intergroup communication (Reid et al., 2005 ). Against this backdrop, this chapter will be less concerned with any particular social category of intergroup communication or variant of social identity theory, and more with developing a conceptual framework of looking at the language–power relationships and their implications for understanding intergroup communication. Readers interested in an intra- or interpersonal perspective may refer to the volume edited by Holtgraves ( 2014a ).

Conceptual Approaches to Power

Bertrand Russell, logician cum philosopher and social activist, published a relatively little-known book on power when World War II was looming large in Europe (Russell, 2004 ). In it he asserted the fundamental importance of the concept of power in the social sciences and likened its importance to the concept of energy in the physical sciences. But unlike physical energy, which can be defined in a formula (e.g., E=MC 2 ), social power has defied any such definition. This state of affairs is not unexpected because the very nature of (social) power is elusive. Foucault ( 1979 , p. 92) has put it this way: “Power is everywhere, not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere.” This view is not beyond criticism but it does highlight the elusiveness of power. Power is also a value-laden concept meaning different things to different people. To functional theorists and power-wielders, power is “power to,” a responsibility to unite people and do good for all. To conflict theorists and those who are dominated, power is “power over,” which corrupts and is a source of social conflict rather than integration (Lenski, 1966 ; Sassenberg et al., 2014 ). These entrenched views surface in management–labor negotiations and political debates between government and opposition. Management and government would try to frame the negotiation in terms of “power to,” whereas labor and opposition would try to frame the same in “power over” in a clash of power discourses. The two discourses also interchange when the same speakers reverse their power relations: While in opposition, politicians adhere to “power over” rhetorics, once in government, they talk “power to.” And vice versa.

The elusive and value-laden nature of power has led to a plurality of theoretical and conceptual approaches. Five approaches that are particularly pertinent to the language–power relationships will be discussed, and briefly so because of space limitation. One approach views power in terms of structural dominance in society by groups who own and/or control the economy, the government, and other social institutions. Another approach views power as the production of intended effects by overcoming resistance that arises from objective conflict of interests or from psychological reactance to being coerced, manipulated, or unfairly treated. A complementary approach, represented by Kurt Lewin’s field theory, takes the view that power is not the actual production of effects but the potential for doing this. It looks behind power to find out the sources or bases of this potential, which may stem from the power-wielders’ access to the means of punishment, reward, and information, as well as from their perceived expertise and legitimacy (Raven, 2008 ). A fourth approach views power in terms of the balance of control/dependence in the ongoing social exchange between two actors that takes place either in the absence or presence of third parties. It provides a structural account of power-balancing mechanisms in social networking (Emerson, 1962 ), and forms the basis for combining with symbolic interaction theory, which brings in subjective factors such as shared social cognition and affects for the analysis of power in interpersonal and intergroup negotiation (Stolte, 1987 ). The fifth, social identity approach digs behind the social exchange account, which has started from control/dependence as a given but has left it unexplained, to propose a three-process model of power emergence (Turner, 2005 ). According to this model, it is psychological group formation and associated group-based social identity that produce influence; influence then cumulates to form the basis of power, which in turn leads to the control of resources.

Common to the five approaches above is the recognition that power is dynamic in its usage and can transform from one form of power to another. Lukes ( 2005 ) has attempted to articulate three different forms or faces of power called “dimensions.” The first, behavioral dimension of power refers to decision-making power that is manifest in the open contest for dominance in situations of objective conflict of interests. Non-decision-making power, the second dimension, is power behind the scene. It involves the mobilization of organizational bias (e.g., agenda fixing) to keep conflict of interests from surfacing to become public issues and to deprive oppositions of a communication platform to raise their voices, thereby limiting the scope of decision-making to only “safe” issues that would not challenge the interests of the power-wielder. The third dimension is ideological and works by socializing people’s needs and values so that they want the wants and do the things wanted by the power-wielders, willingly as their own. Conflict of interests, opposition, and resistance would be absent from this form of power, not because they have been maneuvered out of the contest as in the case of non-decision-making power, but because the people who are subject to power are no longer aware of any conflict of interest in the power relationship, which may otherwise ferment opposition and resistance. Power in this form can be exercised without the application of coercion or reward, and without arousing perceived manipulation or conflict of interests.

Language–Power Relationships

As indicated in the chapter title, discussion will focus on the language–power relationships, and not on language alone or power alone, in intergroup communication. It draws from all the five approaches to power and can be grouped for discussion under the power behind language and the power of language. In the former, language is viewed as having no power of its own and yet can produce influence and control by revealing the power behind the speaker. Language also reflects the collective/historical power of the language community that uses it. In the case of modern English, its preeminent status as a global language and international lingua franca has shaped the communication between native and nonnative English speakers because of the power of the English-speaking world that it reflects, rather than because of its linguistic superiority. In both cases, language provides a widely used conventional means to transfer extralinguistic power to the communication context. Research on the power of language takes the view that language has power of its own. This power allows a language to maintain the power behind it, unite or divide a nation, and create influence.

In Figure 1 we have grouped the five language–power relationships into five boxes. Note that the boundary between any two boxes is not meant to be rigid but permeable. For example, by revealing the power behind a message (box 1), a message can create influence (box 5). As another example, language does not passively reflect the power of the language community that uses it (box 2), but also, through its spread to other language communities, generates power to maintain its preeminence among languages (box 3). This expansive process of language power can be seen in the rise of English to global language status. A similar expansive process also applies to a particular language style that first reflects the power of the language subcommunity who uses the style, and then, through its common acceptance and usage by other subcommunities in the country, maintains the power of the subcommunity concerned. A prime example of this type of expansive process is linguistic sexism, which reflects preexisting male dominance in society and then, through its common usage by both sexes, contributes to the maintenance of male dominance. Other examples are linguistic racism and the language style of the legal profession, each of which, like linguistic sexism and the preeminence of the English language worldwide, has considerable impact on individuals and society at large.

Space precludes a full discussion of all five language–power relationships. Instead, some of them will warrant only a brief mention, whereas others will be presented in greater detail. The complexity of the language–power relations and their cross-disciplinary ramifications will be evident in the multiple sets of interrelated literatures that we cite from. These include the social psychology of language and communication, critical language studies (Fairclough, 1989 ), sociolinguistics (Kachru, 1992 ), and conversation analysis (Sacks et al., 1974 ).

Figure 1. Power behind language and power of language.

Power Behind Language

Language reveals power.

When negotiating with police, a gang may issue the threatening message, “Meet our demands, or we will shoot the hostages!” The threatening message may succeed in coercing the police to submit; its power, however, is more apparent than real because it is based on the guns gangsters posses. The message merely reveals the power of a weapon in their possession. Apart from revealing power, the gangsters may also cheat. As long as the message comes across as credible and convincing enough to arouse overwhelming fear, it would allow them to get away with their demands without actually possessing any weapon. In this case, language is used to produce an intended effect despite resistance by deceptively revealing a nonexisting power base and planting it in the mind of the message recipient. The literature on linguistic deception illustrates the widespread deceptive use of language-reveals-power to produce intended effects despite resistance (Robinson, 1996 ).

Language Reflects Power

Ethnolinguistic vitality.

The language that a person uses reflects the language community’s power. A useful way to think about a language community’s linguistic power is through the ethnolinguistic vitality model (Bourhis et al., 1981 ; Harwood et al., 1994 ). Language communities in a country vary in absolute size overall and, just as important, a relative numeric concentration in particular regions. Francophone Canadians, though fewer than Anglophone Canadians overall, are concentrated in Quebec to give them the power of numbers there. Similarly, ethnic minorities in mainland China have considerable power of numbers in those autonomous regions where they are concentrated, such as Inner Mongolia, Tibet, and Xinjiang. Collectively, these factors form the demographic base of the language community’s ethnolinguistic vitality, an index of the community’s relative linguistic dominance. Another base of ethnolinguistic vitality is institutional representations of the language community in government, legislatures, education, religion, the media, and so forth, which afford its members institutional leadership, influence, and control. Such institutional representation is often reinforced by a language policy that installs the language as the nation’s sole official language. The third base of ethnolinguistic vitality comprises sociohistorical and cultural status of the language community inside the nation and internationally. In short, the dominant language of a nation is one that comes from and reflects the high ethnolinguistic vitality of its language community.

An important finding of ethnolinguistic vitality research is that it is perceived vitality, and not so much its objective demographic-institutional-cultural strengths, that influences language behavior in interpersonal and intergroup contexts. Interestingly, the visibility and salience of languages shown on public and commercial signs, referred to as the “linguistic landscape,” serve important informational and symbolic functions as a marker of their relative vitality, which in turn affects the use of in-group language in institutional settings (Cenoz & Gorter, 2006 ; Landry & Bourhis, 1997 ).

World Englishes and Lingua Franca English

Another field of research on the power behind and reflected in language is “World Englishes.” At the height of the British Empire English spread on the back of the Industrial Revolution and through large-scale migrations of Britons to the “New World,” which has since become the core of an “inner circle” of traditional native English-speaking nations now led by the United States (Kachru, 1992 ). The emergent wealth and power of these nations has maintained English despite the decline of the British Empire after World War II. In the post-War era, English has become internationalized with the support of an “outer circle” nations and, later, through its spread to “expanding circle” nations. Outer circle nations are made up mostly of former British colonies such as India, Pakistan, and Nigeria. In compliance with colonial language policies that institutionalized English as the new colonial national language, a sizeable proportion of the colonial populations has learned and continued using English over generations, thereby vastly increasing the number of English speakers over and above those in the inner circle nations. The expanding circle encompasses nations where English has played no historical government roles, but which are keen to appropriate English as the preeminent foreign language for local purposes such as national development, internationalization of higher education, and participation in globalization (e.g., China, Indonesia, South Korea, Japan, Egypt, Israel, and continental Europe).

English is becoming a global language with official or special status in at least 75 countries (British Council, n.d. ). It is also the language choice in international organizations and companies, as well as academia, and is commonly used in trade, international mass media, and entertainment, and over the Internet as the main source of information. English native speakers can now follow the worldwide English language track to find jobs overseas without having to learn the local language and may instead enjoy a competitive language advantage where the job requires English proficiency. This situation is a far cry from the colonial era when similar advantages had to come under political patronage. Alongside English native speakers who work overseas benefitting from the preeminence of English over other languages, a new phenomenon of outsourcing international call centers away from the United Kingdom and the United States has emerged (Friginal, 2007 ). Callers can find the information or help they need from people stationed in remote places such as India or the Philippines where English has penetrated.

As English spreads worldwide, it has also become the major international lingua franca, serving some 800 million multilinguals in Asia alone, and numerous others elsewhere (Bolton, 2008 ). The practical importance of this phenomenon and its impact on English vocabulary, grammar, and accent have led to the emergence of a new field of research called “English as a lingua franca” (Brosch, 2015 ). The twin developments of World Englishes and lingua franca English raise interesting and important research questions. A vast area of research lies in waiting.

Several lines of research suggest themselves from an intergroup communication perspective. How communicatively effective are English native speakers who are international civil servants in organizations such as the UN and WTO, where they habitually speak as if they were addressing their fellow natives without accommodating to the international audience? Another line of research is lingua franca English communication between two English nonnative speakers. Their common use of English signals a joint willingness of linguistic accommodation, motivated more by communication efficiency of getting messages across and less by concerns of their respective ethnolinguistic identities. An intergroup communication perspective, however, would sensitize researchers to social identity processes and nonaccommodation behaviors underneath lingua franca communication. For example, two nationals from two different countries, X and Y, communicating with each other in English are accommodating on the language level; at the same time they may, according to communication accommodation theory, use their respective X English and Y English for asserting their ethnolinguistic distinctiveness whilst maintaining a surface appearance of accommodation. There are other possibilities. According to a survey of attitudes toward English accents, attachment to “standard” native speaker models remains strong among nonnative English speakers in many countries (Jenkins, 2009 ). This suggests that our hypothetical X and Y may, in addition to asserting their respective Englishes, try to outperform one another in speaking with overcorrect standard English accents, not so much because they want to assert their respective ethnolinguistic identities, but because they want to project a common in-group identity for positive social comparison—“We are all English-speakers but I am a better one than you!”

Many countries in the expanding circle nations are keen to appropriate English for local purposes, encouraging their students and especially their educational elites to learn English as a foreign language. A prime example is the Learn-English Movement in China. It has affected generations of students and teachers over the past 30 years and consumed a vast amount of resources. The results are mixed. Even more disturbing, discontents and backlashes have emerged from anti-English Chinese motivated to protect the vitality and cultural values of the Chinese language (Sun et al., 2016 ). The power behind and reflected in modern English has widespread and far-reaching consequences in need of more systematic research.

Power of Language

Language maintains existing dominance.

Language maintains and reproduces existing dominance in three different ways represented respectively by the ascent of English, linguistic sexism, and legal language style. For reasons already noted, English has become a global language, an international lingua franca, and an indispensable medium for nonnative English speaking countries to participate in the globalized world. Phillipson ( 2009 ) referred to this phenomenon as “linguistic imperialism.” It is ironic that as the spread of English has increased the extent of multilingualism of non-English-speaking nations, English native speakers in the inner circle of nations have largely remained English-only. This puts pressure on the rest of the world to accommodate them in English, the widespread use of which maintains its preeminence among languages.

A language evolves and changes to adapt to socially accepted word meanings, grammatical rules, accents, and other manners of speaking. What is acceptable or unacceptable reflects common usage and hence the numerical influence of users, but also the elites’ particular language preferences and communication styles. Research on linguistic sexism has shown, for example, a man-made language such as English (there are many others) is imbued with sexist words and grammatical rules that reflect historical male dominance in society. Its uncritical usage routinely by both sexes in daily life has in turn naturalized male dominance and associated sexist inequalities (Spender, 1998 ). Similar other examples are racist (Reisigl & Wodak, 2005 ) and ageist (Ryan et al., 1995 ) language styles.

Professional languages are made by and for particular professions such as the legal profession (Danet, 1980 ; Mertz et al., 2016 ; O’Barr, 1982 ). The legal language is used not only among members of the profession, but also with the general public, who may know each and every word in a legal document but are still unable to decipher its meaning. Through its language, the legal profession maintains its professional dominance with the complicity of the general public, who submits to the use of the language and accedes to the profession’s authority in interpreting its meanings in matters relating to their legal rights and obligations. Communication between lawyers and their “clients” is not only problematic, but the public’s continual dependence on the legal language contributes to the maintenance of the dominance of the profession.

Language Unites and Divides a Nation

A nation of many peoples who, despite their diverse cultural and ethnic background, all speak in the same tongue and write in the same script would reap the benefit of the unifying power of a common language. The power of the language to unite peoples would be stronger if it has become part of their common national identity and contributed to its vitality and psychological distinctiveness. Such power has often been seized upon by national leaders and intellectuals to unify their countries and serve other nationalistic purposes (Patten, 2006 ). In China, for example, Emperor Qin Shi Huang standardized the Chinese script ( hanzi ) as an important part of the reforms to unify the country after he had defeated the other states and brought the Warring States Period ( 475–221 bc ) to an end. A similar reform of language standardization was set in motion soon after the overthrow of the Qing Dynasty ( ad 1644–1911 ), by simplifying some of the hanzi and promoting Putonghua as the national standard oral language. In the postcolonial part of the world, language is often used to service nationalism by restoring the official status of their indigenous language as the national language whilst retaining the colonial language or, in more radical cases of decolonization, relegating the latter to nonofficial status. Yet language is a two-edged sword: It can also divide a nation. The tension can be seen in competing claims to official-language status made by minority language communities, protest over maintenance of minority languages, language rights at schools and in courts of law, bilingual education, and outright language wars (Calvet, 1998 ; DeVotta, 2004 ).

Language Creates Influence

In this section we discuss the power of language to create influence through single words and more complex linguistic structures ranging from oratories and conversations to narratives/stories.

Power of Single Words

Learning a language empowers humans to master an elaborate system of conventions and the associations between words and their sounds on the one hand, and on the other hand, categories of objects and relations to which they refer. After mastering the referential meanings of words, a person can mentally access the objects and relations simply by hearing or reading the words. Apart from their referential meanings, words also have connotative meanings with their own social-cognitive consequences. Together, these social-cognitive functions underpin the power of single words that has been extensively studied in metaphors, which is a huge research area that crosses disciplinary boundaries and probes into the inner workings of the brain (Benedek et al., 2014 ; Landau et al., 2014 ; Marshal et al., 2007 ). The power of single words extends beyond metaphors. It can be seen in misleading words in leading questions (Loftus, 1975 ), concessive connectives that reverse expectations from real-world knowledge (Xiang & Kuperberg, 2014 ), verbs that attribute implicit causality to either verb subject or object (Hartshorne & Snedeker, 2013 ), “uncertainty terms” that hedge potentially face-threatening messages (Holtgraves, 2014b ), and abstract words that signal power (Wakslak et al., 2014 ).

The literature on the power of single words has rarely been applied to intergroup communication, with the exception of research arising from the linguistic category model (e.g., Semin & Fiedler, 1991 ). The model distinguishes among descriptive action verbs (e.g., “hits”), interpretative action verbs (e.g., “hurts”) and state verbs (e.g., “hates”), which increase in abstraction in that order. Sentences made up of abstract verbs convey more information about the protagonist, imply greater temporal and cross-situational stability, and are more difficult to disconfirm. The use of abstract language to represent a particular behavior will attribute the behavior to the protagonist rather than the situation and the resulting image of the protagonist will persist despite disconfirming information, whereas the use of concrete language will attribute the same behavior more to the situation and the resulting image of the protagonist will be easier to change. According to the linguistic intergroup bias model (Maass, 1999 ), abstract language will be used to represent positive in-group and negative out-group behaviors, whereas concrete language will be used to represent negative in-group and positive out-group behaviors. The combined effects of the differential use of abstract and concrete language would, first, lead to biased attribution (explanation) of behavior privileging the in-group over the out-group, and second, perpetuate the prejudiced intergroup stereotypes. More recent research has shown that linguistic intergroup bias varies with the power differential between groups—it is stronger in high and low power groups than in equal power groups (Rubini et al., 2007 ).

Oratorical Power

A charismatic speaker may, by the sheer force of oratory, buoy up people’s hopes, convert their hearts from hatred to forgiveness, or embolden them to take up arms for a cause. One may recall moving speeches (in English) such as Susan B. Anthony’s “On Women’s Right to Vote,” Winston Churchill’s “We Shall Fight on the Beaches,” Mahatma Gandhi’s “Quit India,” or Martin Luther King, Jr.’s “I Have a Dream.” The speech may be delivered face-to-face to an audience, or broadcast over the media. The discussion below focuses on face-to-face oratories in political meetings.

Oratorical power may be measured in terms of money donated or pledged to the speaker’s cause, or, in a religious sermon, the number of converts made. Not much research has been reported on these topics. Another measurement approach is to count the frequency of online audience responses that a speech has generated, usually but not exclusively in the form of applause. Audience applause can be measured fairly objectively in terms of frequency, length, or loudness, and collected nonobtrusively from a public recording of the meeting. Audience applause affords researchers the opportunity to explore communicative and social psychological processes that underpin some aspects of the power of rhetorical formats. Note, however, that not all incidences of audience applause are valid measures of the power of rhetoric. A valid incidence should be one that is invited by the speaker and synchronized with the flow of the speech, occurring at the appropriate time and place as indicated by the rhetorical format. Thus, an uninvited incidence of applause would not count, nor is one that is invited but has occurred “out of place” (too soon or too late). Furthermore, not all valid incidences are theoretically informative to the same degree. An isolated applause from just a handful of the audience, though valid and in the right place, has relatively little theoretical import for understanding the power of rhetoric compared to one that is made by many acting in unison as a group. When the latter occurs, it would be a clear indication of the power of rhetorically formulated speech. Such positive audience response constitutes the most direct and immediate means by which an audience can display its collective support for the speaker, something which they would not otherwise show to a speech of less power. To influence and orchestrate hundreds and thousands of people in the audience to precisely coordinate their response to applaud (and cheer) together as a group at the right time and place is no mean feat. Such a feat also influences the wider society through broadcast on television and other news and social media. The combined effect could be enormous there and then, and its downstream influence far-reaching, crossing country boarders and inspiring generations to come.

To accomplish the feat, an orator has to excite the audience to applaud, build up the excitement to a crescendo, and simultaneously cue the audience to synchronize their outburst of stored-up applause with the ongoing speech. Rhetorical formats that aid the orator to accomplish the dual functions include contrast, list, puzzle solution, headline-punchline, position-taking, and pursuit (Heritage & Greatbatch, 1986 ). To illustrate, we cite the contrast and list formats.

A contrast, or antithesis, is made up of binary schemata such as “too much” and “too little.” Heritage and Greatbatch ( 1986 , p. 123) reported the following example:

Governments will argue that resources are not available to help disabled people. The fact is that too much is spent on the munitions of war, and too little is spent on the munitions of peace [italics added]. As the audience is familiar with the binary schema of “too much” and “too little” they can habitually match the second half of the contrast against the first half. This decoding process reinforces message comprehension and helps them to correctly anticipate and applaud at the completion point of the contrast. In the example quoted above, the speaker micropaused for 0.2 seconds after the second word “spent,” at which point the audience began to applaud in anticipation of the completion point of the contrast, and applauded more excitedly upon hearing “. . . on the munitions of peace.” The applause continued and lasted for 9.2 long seconds.

A list is usually made up of a series of three parallel words, phrases or clauses. “Government of the people, by the people, for the people” is a fine example, as is Obama’s “It’s been a long time coming, but tonight, because of what we did on this day , in this election , at this defining moment , change has come to America!” (italics added) The three parts in the list echo one another, step up the argument and its corresponding excitement in the audience as they move from one part to the next. The third part projects a completion point to cue the audience to get themselves ready to display their support via applause, cheers, and so forth. In a real conversation this juncture is called a “transition-relevance place,” at which point a conversational partner (hearer) may take up a turn to speak. A skilful orator will micropause at that juncture to create a conversational space for the audience to take up their turn in applauding and cheering as a group.

As illustrated by the two examples above, speaker and audience collaborate to transform an otherwise monological speech into a quasiconversation, turning a passive audience into an active supportive “conversational” partner who, by their synchronized responses, reduces the psychological separation from the speaker and emboldens the latter’s self-confidence. Through such enjoyable and emotional participation collectively, an audience made up of formerly unconnected individuals with no strong common group identity may henceforth begin to feel “we are all one.” According to social identity theory and related theories (van Zomeren et al., 2008 ), the emergent group identity, politicized in the process, will in turn provide a social psychological base for collective social action. This process of identity making in the audience is further strengthened by the speaker’s frequent use of “we” as a first person, plural personal pronoun.

Conversational Power

A conversation is a speech exchange system in which the length and order of speaking turns have not been preassigned but require coordination on an utterance-by-utterance basis between two or more individuals. It differs from other speech exchange systems in which speaking turns have been preassigned and/or monitored by a third party, for example, job interviews and debate contests. Turn-taking, because of its centrality to conversations and the important theoretical issues that it raises for social coordination and implicit conversational conventions, has been the subject of extensive research and theorizing (Goodwin & Heritage, 1990 ; Grice, 1975 ; Sacks et al., 1974 ). Success at turn-taking is a key part of the conversational process leading to influence. A person who cannot do this is in no position to influence others in and through conversations, which are probably the most common and ubiquitous form of human social interaction. Below we discuss studies of conversational power based on conversational turns and applied to leader emergence in group and intergroup settings. These studies, as they unfold, link conversation analysis with social identity theory and expectation states theory (Berger et al., 1974 ).

A conversational turn in hand allows the speaker to influence others in two important ways. First, through current-speaker-selects-next the speaker can influence who will speak next and, indirectly, increases the probability that he or she will regain the turn after the next. A common method for selecting the next speaker is through tag questions. The current speaker (A) may direct a tag question such as “Ya know?” or “Don’t you agree?” to a particular hearer (B), which carries the illocutionary force of selecting the addressee to be the next speaker and, simultaneously, restraining others from self-selecting. The A 1 B 1 sequence of exchange has been found to have a high probability of extending into A 1 B 1 A 2 in the next round of exchange, followed by its continuation in the form of A 1 B 1 A 2 B 2 . For example, in a six-member group, the A 1 B 1 →A 1 B 1 A 2 sequence of exchange has more than 50% chance of extending to the A 1 B 1 A 2 B 2 sequence, which is well above chance level, considering that there are four other hearers who could intrude at either the A 2 or B 2 slot of turn (Stasser & Taylor, 1991 ). Thus speakership not only offers the current speaker the power to select the next speaker twice, but also to indirectly regain a turn.

Second, a turn in hand provides the speaker with an opportunity to exercise topic control. He or she can exercise non-decision-making power by changing an unfavorable or embarrassing topic to a safer one, thereby silencing or preventing it from reaching the “floor.” Conversely, he or she can exercise decision-making power by continuing or raising a topic that is favorable to self. Or the speaker can move on to talk about an innocuous topic to ease tension in the group.

Bales ( 1950 ) has studied leader emergence in groups made up of unacquainted individuals in situations where they have to bid or compete for speaking turns. Results show that individuals who talk the most have a much better chance of becoming leaders. Depending on the social orientations of their talk, they would be recognized as a task or relational leader. Subsequent research on leader emergence has shown that an even better behavioral predictor than volume of talk is the number of speaking turns. An obvious reason for this is that the volume of talk depends on the number of turns—it usually accumulates across turns, rather than being the result of a single extraordinary long turn of talk. Another reason is that more turns afford the speaker more opportunities to realize the powers of turns that have been explicated above. Group members who become leaders are the ones who can penetrate the complex, on-line conversational system to obtain a disproportionately large number of speaking turns by perfect timing at “transition-relevance places” to self-select as the next speaker or, paradoxical as it may seem, constructive interruptions (Ng et al., 1995 ).

More recent research has extended the experimental study of group leadership to intergroup contexts, where members belonging to two groups who hold opposing stances on a social or political issue interact within and also between groups. The results showed, first, that speaking turns remain important in leader emergence, but the intergroup context now generates social identity and self-categorization processes that selectively privilege particular forms of speech. What potential leaders say, and not only how many speaking turns they have gained, becomes crucial in conveying to group members that they are prototypical members of their group. Prototypical communication is enacted by adopting an accent, choosing code words, and speaking in a tone that characterize the in-group; above all, it is enacted through the content of utterances to represent or exemplify the in-group position. Such prototypical utterances that are directed successfully at the out-group correlate strongly with leader emergence (Reid & Ng, 2000 ). These out-group-directed prototypical utterances project an in-group identity that is psychologically distinctive from the out-group for in-group members to feel proud of and to rally together when debating with the out-group.

Building on these experimental results Reid and Ng ( 2003 ) developed a social identity theory of leadership to account for the emergence and maintenance of intergroup leadership, grounding it in case studies of the intergroup communication strategies that brought Ariel Sharon and John Howard to power in Israel and Australia, respectively. In a later development, the social identity account was fused with expectation states theory to explain how group processes collectively shape the behavior of in-group members to augment the prototypical communication behavior of the emergent leader (Reid & Ng, 2006 ). Specifically, when conversational influence gained through prototypical utterances culminates to form an incipient power hierarchy, group members develop expectations of who is and will be leading the group. Acting on these tacit expectations they collectively coordinate the behavior of each other to conform with the expectations by granting incipient leaders more speaking turns and supporting them with positive audience responses. In this way, group members collectively amplify the influence of incipient leaders and jointly propel them to leadership roles (see also Correll & Ridgeway, 2006 ). In short, the emergence of intergroup leaders is a joint process of what they do individually and what group members do collectively, enabled by speaking turns and mediated by social identity and expectation states processes. In a similar vein, Hogg ( 2014 ) has developed a social identity account of leadership in intergroup settings.

Narrative Power

Narratives and stories are closely related and are sometimes used interchangeably. However, it is useful to distinguish a narrative from a story and from other related terms such as discourse and frames. A story is a sequence of related events in the past recounted for rhetorical or ideological purposes, whereas a narrative is a coherent system of interrelated and sequentially organized stories formed by incorporating new stories and relating them to others so as to provide an ongoing basis for interpreting events, envisioning an ideal future, and motivating and justifying collective actions (Halverson et al., 2011 ). The temporal dimension and sense of movement in a narrative also distinguish it from discourse and frames. According to Miskimmon, O’Loughlin, and Roselle ( 2013 ), discourses are the raw material of communication that actors plot into a narrative, and frames are the acts of selecting and highlighting some events or issues to promote a particular interpretation, evaluation, and solution. Both discourse and frame lack the temporal and causal transformation of a narrative.

Pitching narratives at the suprastory level and stressing their temporal and transformational movements allows researchers to take a structurally more systemic and temporally more expansive view than traditional research on propaganda wars between nations, religions, or political systems (Halverson et al., 2011 ; Miskimmon et al., 2013 ). Schmid ( 2014 ) has provided an analysis of al-Qaeda’s “compelling narrative that authorizes its strategy, justifies its violent tactics, propagates its ideology and wins new recruits.” According to this analysis, the chief message of the narrative is “the West is at war with Islam,” a strategic communication that is fundamentally intergroup in both structure and content. The intergroup structure of al-Qaeda narrative includes the rhetorical constructions that there are a group grievance inflicted on Muslims by a Zionist–Christian alliance, a vision of the good society (under the Caliphate and sharia), and a path from grievance to the realization of the vision led by al-Qaeda in a violent jihad to eradicate Western influence in the Muslim world. The al-Qaeda narrative draws support not only from traditional Arab and Muslim cultural narratives interpreted to justify its unorthodox means (such as attacks against women and children), but also from pre-existing anti-Semitism and anti-Americanism propagated by some Arab governments, Soviet Cold War propaganda, anti-Western sermons by Muslim clerics, and the Israeli government’s treatment of Palestinians. It is deeply embedded in culture and history, and has reached out to numerous Muslims who have emigrated to the West.

The intergroup content of al-Qaeda narrative was shown in a computer-aided content analysis of 18 representative transcripts of propaganda speeches released between 2006–2011 by al-Qaeda leaders, totaling over 66,000 words (Cohen et al., 2016 ). As part of the study, an “Ideology Extraction using Linguistic Extremization” (IELEX) categorization scheme was developed for mapping the content of the corpus, which revealed 19 IELEX rhetorical categories referring to either the out-group/enemy or the in-group/enemy victims. The out-group/enemy was represented by four categories such as “The enemy is extremely negative (bloodthirsty, vengeful, brainwashed, etc.)”; whereas the in-group/enemy victims were represented by more categories such as “we are entirely innocent/good/virtuous.” The content of polarized intergroup stereotypes, demonizing “them” and glorifying “us,” echoes other similar findings (Smith et al., 2008 ), as well as the general finding of intergroup stereotyping in social psychology (Yzerbyt, 2016 ).

The success of the al-Qaeda narrative has alarmed various international agencies, individual governments, think tanks, and religious groups to spend huge sums of money on developing counternarratives that are, according to Schmid ( 2014 ), largely feeble. The so-called “global war on terror” has failed in its effort to construct effective counternarratives although al-Qaeda’s finance, personnel, and infrastructure have been much weakened. Ironically, it has developed into a narrative of its own, not so much for countering external extremism, but for promoting and justifying internal nationalistic extremist policies and influencing national elections. This reactive coradicalization phenomenon is spreading (Mink, 2015 ; Pratt, 2015 ; Reicher & Haslam, 2016 ).

Discussion and Future Directions

This chapter provides a systematic framework for understanding five language–power relationships, namely, language reveals power, reflects power, maintains existing dominance, unites and divides a nation, and creates influence. The first two relationships are derived from the power behind language and the last three from the power of language. Collectively they provide a relatively comprehensible framework for understanding the relationships between language and power, and not simply for understanding language alone or power alone separated from one another. The language–power relationships are dynamically interrelated, one influencing the other, and each can draw from an array of the cognitive, communicative, social, and identity functions of language. The framework is applicable to both interpersonal and intergroup contexts of communication, although for present purposes the latter has been highlighted. Among the substantive issues discussed in this chapter, English as a global language, oratorical and narrative power, and intergroup leadership stand out as particularly important for political and theoretical reasons.

In closing, we note some of the gaps that need to be filled and directions for further research. When discussing the powers of language to maintain and reflect existing dominance, we have omitted the countervailing power of language to resist or subvert existing dominance and, importantly, to create social change for the collective good. Furthermore, in this age of globalization and its discontents, English as a global language will increasingly be resented for its excessive unaccommodating power despite tangible lingua franca English benefits, and challenged by the expanding ethnolinguistic vitality of peoples who speak Arabic, Chinese, or Spanish. Internet communication is no longer predominantly in English, but is rapidly diversifying to become the modern Tower of Babel. And yet we have barely scratched the surface of these issues. Other glaring gaps include the omission of media discourse and recent developments in Corpus-based Critical Discourse Analysis (Loring, 2016 ), as well as the lack of reference to languages other than English that may cast one or more of the language–power relationships in a different light.

One of the main themes of this chapter—that the diverse language–power relationships are dynamically interrelated—clearly points to the need for greater theoretical fertilization across cognate disciplines. Our discussion of the three powers of language (boxes 3–5 in Figure 1 ) clearly points in this direction, most notably in the case of the powers of language to create influence through single words, oratories, conversations, and narratives, but much more needs to be done. The social identity approach will continue to serve as a meta theory of intergroup communication. To the extent that intergroup communication takes place in an existing power relation and that the changes that it seeks are not simply a more positive or psychologically distinctive social identity but greater group power and a more powerful social identity, the social identity approach has to incorporate power in its application to intergroup communication.

The power of language: How words shape people, culture

Speaking, writing and reading is integral to everyday life, where language is the primary tool for expression and communication. Studying how people use language - what words and phrases they unconsciously choose and combine - can help us better understand ourselves and why we behave the way we do.

"Understanding why and how languages differ tells about the range of what is human," said Dan Jurafsky , the Jackson Eli Reynolds Professor in Humanities and chair of the Department of Linguistics in the School of Humanities and Sciences at Stanford. "Discovering what’s universal about languages can help us understand the core of our humanity."

One study showed that a relatively harmless sentence, such as "girls are as good as boys at math," can subtly perpetuate sexist stereotypes. Because of the statement’s grammatical structure, it implies that being good at math is more common or natural for boys than girls, the researchers said.

Language can play a big role in how we and others perceive the world, and linguists work to discover what words and phrases can influence us, unknowingly.

"All this research can help us discover what it means to be human," Jurafsky said.

Linguists analyze how certain speech patterns correspond to particular behaviors, including how language can impact people’s buying decisions or influence their social media use.

"We live in a very polarized time," Jurafsky said. "Understanding what different groups of people say and why is the first step in determining how we can help bring people together."

Stanford University
Science Wire
News from the Lab - news . myScience

Jobmail & Alerts

Book reveals secrets of 'fascinating' termites

TED is supported by ads and partners 00:00

The Power of Language

global issues

Chapter IV from Nature , published in Nature; Addresses and Lectures

Language is a third use which Nature subserves to man. Nature is the vehicle, and threefold degree.

1. Words are signs of natural facts.

2. Particular natural facts are symbols of particular spiritual facts.

3. Nature is the symbol of spirit.

When the eyes say one thing, and the tongue another, a practiced man relies on the language of the first.

The use of natural history is to give us aid in supernatural history: the use of the outer creation, to give us language for the beings and changes of the inward creation. Every word which is used to express a moral or intellectual fact, if traced to its root, is found to be borrowed from some material appearance. Right means straight ; wrong means twisted . Spirit primarily means wind ; transgression , the crossing of a line ; supercilious , the raising of the eyebrow . We say the heart to express emotion, the head to denote thought; and thought and emotion are words borrowed from sensible things, and now appropriated to spiritual nature. Most of the process by which this transformation is made, is hidden from us in the remote time when language was framed; but the same tendency may be daily observed in children. Children and savages use only nouns or names of things, which they convert into verbs, and apply to analogous mental acts.

2. But this origin of all words that convey a spiritual import, — so conspicuous a fact in the history of language, — is our least debt to nature.

It is not words only that are emblematic; it is things which are emblematic. Every natural fact is a symbol of some spiritual fact. Every appearance in nature corresponds to some state of the mind, and that state of the mind can only be described by presenting that natural appearance as its picture. An enraged man is a lion, a cunning man is a fox, a firm man is a rock, a learned man is a torch. A lamb is innocence; a snake is subtle spite; flowers express to us the delicate affections. Light and darkness are our familiar expression for knowledge and ignorance; and heat for love. Visible distance behind and before us, is respectively our image of memory and hope.

Who looks upon a river in a meditative hour, and is not reminded of the flux of all things? Throw a stone into the stream, and the circles that propagate themselves are the beautiful type of all influence. Man is conscious of a universal soul within or behind his individual life, wherein, as in a firmament, the natures of Justice, Truth, Love, Freedom, arise and shine. This universal soul, he calls Reason: it is not mine, or thine, or his, but we are its; we are its property and men. And the blue sky in which the private earth is buried, the sky with its eternal calm, and full of everlasting orbs, is the type of Reason. That which, intellectually considered, we call Reason, considered in relation to nature, we call Spirit. Spirit is the Creator. Spirit hath life in itself. And man in all ages and countries, embodies it in his language, as the FATHER.

It is easily seen that there is nothing lucky or capricious in these analogies, but that they are constant, and pervade nature. These are not the dreams of a few poets, here and there, but man is an analogist, and studies relations in all objects. He is placed in the centre of beings, and a ray of relation passes from every other being to him. And neither can man be understood without these objects, nor these objects without man. All the facts in natural history taken by themselves, have no value, but are barren, like a single sex. But marry it to human history, and it is full of life. Whole Floras, all Linnaeus' and Buffon's volumes, are dry catalogues of facts; but the most trivial of these facts, the habit of a plant, the organs, or work, or noise of an insect, applied to the illustration of a fact in intellectual philosophy, or, in any way associated to human nature, affects us in the most lively and agreeable manner. The seed of a plant, — to what affecting analogies in the nature of man, is that little fruit made use of, in all discourse, up to the voice of Paul, who calls the human corpse a seed, — "It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body." The motion of the earth round its axis, and round the sun, makes the day, and the year. These are certain amounts of brute light and heat. But is there no intent of an analogy between man's life and the seasons? And do the seasons gain no grandeur or pathos from that analogy? The instincts of the ant are very unimportant, considered as the ant's; but the moment a ray of relation is seen to extend from it to man, and the little drudge is seen to be a monitor, a little body with a mighty heart, then all its habits, even that said to be recently observed, that it never sleeps, become sublime.

Because of this radical correspondence between visible things and human thoughts, savages, who have only what is necessary, converse in figures. As we go back in history, language becomes more picturesque, until its infancy, when it is all poetry; or all spiritual facts are represented by natural symbols. The same symbols are found to make the original elements of all languages. It has moreover been observed, that the idioms of all languages approach each other in passages of the greatest eloquence and power. And as this is the first language, so is it the last. This immediate dependence of language upon nature, this conversion of an outward phenomenon into a type of somewhat in human life, never loses its power to affect us. It is this which gives that piquancy to the conversation of a strong-natured farmer or back-woodsman, which all men relish.

Thought is the blossom, language is the bud, action the fruit behind it

A man's power to connect his thought with its proper symbol, and so to utter it, depends on the simplicity of his character, that is, upon his love of truth, and his desire to communicate it without loss. The corruption of man is followed by the corruption of language. When simplicity of character and the sovereignty of ideas is broken up by the prevalence of secondary desires, the desire of riches, of pleasure, of power, and of praise, — and duplicity and falsehood take place of simplicity and truth, the power over nature as an interpreter of the will, is in a degree lost; new imagery ceases to be created, and old words are perverted to stand for things which are not; a paper currency is employed, when there is no bullion in the vaults. In due time, the fraud is manifest, and words lose all power to stimulate the understanding or the affections. Hundreds of writers may be found in every long-civilized nation, who for a short time believe, and make others believe, that they see and utter truths, who do not of themselves clothe one thought in its natural garment, but who feed unconsciously on the language created by the primary writers of the country, those, namely, who hold primarily on nature.

But wise men pierce this rotten diction and fasten words again to visible things; so that picturesque language is at once a commanding certificate that he who employs it, is a man in alliance with truth and God. The moment our discourse rises above the ground line of familiar facts, and is inflamed with passion or exalted by thought, it clothes itself in images. A man conversing in earnest, if he watch his intellectual processes, will find that a material image, more or less luminous, arises in his mind, cotemporaneous with every thought, which furnishes the vestment of the thought. Hence, good writing and brilliant discourse are perpetual allegories. This imagery is spontaneous. It is the blending of experience with the present action of the mind. It is proper creation. It is the working of the Original Cause through the instruments he has already made.

These facts may suggest the advantage which the country-life possesses for a powerful mind, over the artificial and curtailed life of cities. We know more from nature than we can at will communicate. Its light flows into the mind evermore, and we forget its presence. The poet, the orator, bred in the woods, whose senses have been nourished by their fair and appeasing changes, year after year, without design and without heed, — shall not lose their lesson altogether, in the roar of cities or the broil of politics. Long hereafter, amidst agitation and terror in national councils, — in the hour of revolution, — these solemn images shall reappear in their morning lustre, as fit symbols and words of the thoughts which the passing events shall awaken. At the call of a noble sentiment, again the woods wave, the pines murmur, the river rolls and shines, and the cattle low upon the mountains, as he saw and heard them in his infancy. And with these forms, the spells of persuasion, the keys of power are put into his hands.

3. We are thus assisted by natural objects in the expression of particular meanings.

But how great a language to convey such pepper-corn informations! Did it need such noble races of creatures, this profusion of forms, this host of orbs in heaven, to furnish man with the dictionary and grammar of his municipal speech? Whilst we use this grand cipher to expedite the affairs of our pot and kettle, we feel that we have not yet put it to its use, neither are able. We are like travellers using the cinders of a volcano to roast their eggs. Whilst we see that it always stands ready to clothe what we would say, we cannot avoid the question, whether the characters are not significant of themselves. Have mountains, and waves, and skies, no significance but what we consciously give them, when we employ them as emblems of our thoughts? The world is emblematic. Parts of speech are metaphors, because the whole of nature is a metaphor of the human mind. The laws of moral nature answer to those of matter as face to face in a glass. "The visible world and the relation of its parts, is the dial plate of the invisible." The axioms of physics translate the laws of ethics. Thus, "the whole is greater than its part;" "reaction is equal to action;" "the smallest weight may be made to lift the greatest, the difference of weight being compensated by time;" and many the like propositions, which have an ethical as well as physical sense. These propositions have a much more extensive and universal sense when applied to human life, than when confined to technical use.

Language is a city to the building of which every human being brought a stone.

In like manner, the memorable words of history, and the proverbs of nations, consist usually of a natural fact, selected as a picture or parable of a moral truth. Thus; A rolling stone gathers no moss; A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush; A cripple in the right way, will beat a racer in the wrong; Make hay while the sun shines; 'T is hard to carry a full cup even; Vinegar is the son of wine; The last ounce broke the camel's back; Long-lived trees make roots first; — and the like. In their primary sense these are trivial facts, but we repeat them for the value of their analogical import. What is true of proverbs, is true of all fables, parables, and allegories.

This relation between the mind and matter is not fancied by some poet, but stands in the will of God, and so is free to be known by all men. It appears to men, or it does not appear. When in fortunate hours we ponder this miracle, the wise man doubts, if, at all other times, he is not blind and deaf;

——— "Can these things be, And overcome us like a summer's cloud, Without our special wonder?"

for the universe becomes transparent, and the light of higher laws than its own, shines through it. It is the standing problem which has exercised the wonder and the study of every fine genius since the world began; from the era of the Egyptians and the Brahmins, to that of Pythagoras, of Plato, of Bacon, of Leibnitz, of Swedenborg . There sits the Sphinx at the road-side, and from age to age, as each prophet comes by, he tries his fortune at reading her riddle. There seems to be a necessity in spirit to manifest itself in material forms; and day and night, river and storm, beast and bird, acid and alkali, preexist in necessary Ideas in the mind of God, and are what they are by virtue of preceding affections, in the world of spirit. A Fact is the end or last issue of spirit. The visible creation is the terminus or the circumference of the invisible world. "Material objects," said a French philosopher, "are necessarily kinds of scoriae of the substantial thoughts of the Creator, which must always preserve an exact relation to their first origin; in other words, visible nature must have a spiritual and moral side."

This doctrine is abstruse, and though the images of "garment," "scoriae," "mirror," &c., may stimulate the fancy, we must summon the aid of subtler and more vital expositors to make it plain. "Every scripture is to be interpreted by the same spirit which gave it forth," — is the fundamental law of criticism. A life in harmony with nature, the love of truth and of virtue, will purge the eyes to understand her text. By degrees we may come to know the primitive sense of the permanent objects of nature, so that the world shall be to us an open book, and every form significant of its hidden life and final cause.

A new interest surprises us, whilst, under the view now suggested, we contemplate the fearful extent and multitude of objects; since "every object rightly seen, unlocks a new faculty of the soul." That which was unconscious truth, becomes, when interpreted and defined in an object, a part of the domain of knowledge, — a new weapon in the magazine of power.

Ralph Waldo Emerson left the ministry to pursue a career in writing and public speaking. Emerson became one of America's best known and best-loved 19th-century figures. More About Emerson

Quick Links

Self-reliance.

Address at Divinity College
English Traits
Representative Men
The American Scholar
The Conduct of Life
Essays: First Series
Essays: Second Series
Nature: Addresses/Lectures
Lectures / Biographies
Letters and Social Aims

Early Emerson Poems

Uncollected Prose
Government of Children

Emerson Quotes

"Every man has his own courage, and is betrayed because he seeks in himself the courage of other persons." – Ralph Waldo Emerson

“Do not go where the path may lead, go instead where there is no path and leave a trail.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

“The purpose of life is not to be happy. It is to be useful, to be honorable, to be compassionate, to have it make some difference that you have lived and lived well.” – Ralph Waldo Emerson

Emerson's Essays

Research the collective works of Ralph Waldo Emerson. Read More Essay

Emerson's most famous work that can truly change your life. Check it out

America's best known and best-loved poems. More Poems

The Power of Language: How It Creates Your Reality and How to Use It Wisely

Post author: Valerie Soleil, B.A., LL.B.
Post published: November 24, 2018
Reading time: 7 mins read
Post category: Personal Development / Self-Improvement / Success Skills

Words do matter. The power of language most of us are unaware of literally shapes our reality. Now, the trick is to learn how to use it to your advantage.

Before we discuss the power of language, let me cite an insightful quote.

Betty Eadie, the author of the international bestsellers, once wrote, “ If we understood the power of our thoughts, we would guard them more closely. If we understood the awesome power of our words, we would prefer silence to almost anything negative. In our thoughts and words, we create our own weaknesses and our own strengths. ”

This quote sends the fundamental truth about how powerful the language is . Language changes lives by changing minds, shaping thought, and making worlds of difference merely by what is said or not said. It embodies the rules of a culture and the aspirations of those who live in it.

The language we speak, hear and read, and with which our minds reflect our place in the world, shapes our reality.

What Is the Power of Language?

Language is important both because of what it communicates and how it does it. The impact and power of language are really paradoxical in how language can influence our behavior. This power is so strong that it can be demonstrated how language can actually influence the way we think.

“ But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought ”. George Orwell

When language is used wisely, it can evoke very deep feelings in others, motivate others to action and construe the nature of our relationships. Language is a very powerful tool for change, both positive and negative.

“ Language creates reality. Words have power. Speak always to create joy ”. Deepak Chopra

The power of language to influence thought makes vocabulary building a critical part of education. To broaden language is to broaden the ability to think . We can see this in children, whose thinking develops hand in hand with the language.

It helps a great deal to increase our ‘word power’ by introducing new words into our vocabulary in order to teach new ideas and new ways of thinking.

How to Use the Power of Language: Turning Words into Shapes

Psychologists have found that our subconscious mind interprets what it hears very literally. The words that come out of our mouth, therefore, create the reality we reside – for better or worse.

Unfortunately, it’s often the latter as we unconsciously destroy our success simply by using negative language that undermines our opinions, exaggerates our problems and kills our confidence.

What you think directly influences how you feel and how you behave. So if you think you’re a failure, you’ll feel like a failure. Then, you’ll act like a failure, which strengthens your belief that you must be a failure.

“ I am – two of the most powerful words. For what you put after them shapes your reality ”. Joel Osteen

Creating a more positive outlook can lead to better outcomes. That’s not to say positive thoughts have magical powers. But optimistic thoughts lead to productive behavior, which increases your chances of a successful outcome.

To build self-confidence , you have to change the way you speak . Use these recommendations in your life:

Try to use positive language.
Get rid of labels.
Take measures to action.
Have your opinion and don’t apologize for it.
Diversify your words .

The Power of Words

“ Words have a magical power. They can either bring the greatest happiness or the deepest despair ”. Sigmund Freud

So, words really do matter. The words you use hold a huge power . The power to fuel your confidence and ambition and the power to make you feel worried and imperfect. The power to make a strong first impression and the power to be quickly forgotten. Finally, the power to create opportunities and the power to shut them down.

Your language affects how others perceive and relate to you . If you often feel overlooked or underestimated , consider how your speech patterns are contributing to how others engage with you. Listen to any successful person, and you will notice they use language that is positive, explicit, action-focused and steadily puts the pledge of trust in their relationships.

The words have the power to build people up, confine people to where they are, and break people down. Choose your words carefully before you utter them to others, but most importantly, the words you utter to yourself must be positive . Instill belief and hope within yourself.

Using the Power of Language Wisely: Bottom Line

Language is central to our experience of being human, and the languages we speak deeply shape the way we think, the way we see the world, the way we live our lives .

“ Your word is the power that you have to create; it is a gift ”. Don Miguel Ruiz

The power of the language we use shapes the worlds we create. It shapes the lives we live and the actions we take. It shapes the way we organize ourselves against the challenges we face.

The words you speak hold power. The power to create new possibilities or to close them down. They hold the power to build relationships or to damage them. The power to lift people up or to pull them down. Finally, the power to fuel your courage or magnify your fear .

The language you use to describe your state-of-mind at any moment in time actively shapes your fate. It is therefore absolutely paramount that you get into the habit of transforming your vocabulary in a more positive and helpful way that has something in common with the type of life you would like to live.

References :

http://www.goethe.de
http://communication.oxfordre.com

Like what you are reading? Subscribe to our newsletter to make sure you don’t miss new thought-provoking articles!

Share this story share this content.

Opens in a new window Facebook
Opens in a new window X
Opens in a new window LinkedIn
Opens in a new window Reddit
Opens in a new window Tumblr

This Post Has One Comment

Norman Vincent Peale wrote a book years ago called “The Power of Positive Thinking”. The advice he gave has not changed much since then and probably never will. That’s a good thing. It’s not only that we are what we eat but also we are what we think, say ans do. The Upanishads, written thousands of years before Christianity was even a word, says: ” We all have deep driving desires. As our desires are so is our need. As our need is so is our deed and as our deed is so is our destiny”. Think before you speak.

Essay on Language

Introduction to Language

Language, the cornerstone of human civilization, is the conduit through which thoughts, emotions, and ideas are conveyed and understood. Defined as a communication system consisting of sounds, words, and gestures with agreed-upon meanings, language embodies the essence of human interaction and expression. Its importance transcends mere words; it encapsulates cultural heritage, societal norms, and individual identity. This essay sets out to study the incredible power and development of language. Language weaves the complex tapestry of the human experience, changing our reality in subtle and de-subtly deep lyrical roots to its modern expressions.

Historical Perspective

The historical perspective of language provides a fascinating insight into its origins, development, and pivotal role in shaping human civilization.

Watch our Demo Courses and Videos

Valuation, Hadoop, Excel, Mobile Apps, Web Development & many more.

Origins of Language: The quest to understand the origins of language remains a subject of intense debate among linguists, anthropologists, and evolutionary biologists. Theories such as the Bow-wow theory (imitation of natural sounds), the Pooh-Pooh theory (emotional outbursts), and the Ding-dong theory (natural vocalizations) offer speculative explanations. Evolutionary studies, particularly those examining the development of the human brain and vocal apparatus, provide valuable insights into the emergence of language among early hominids.
Development of Written Language: Early forms of written communication , such as cave paintings, petroglyphs, and pictograms, served as rudimentary means of recording information and transmitting knowledge. Introducing writing systems like cuneiform, hieroglyphics, and the alphabet laid the foundation for advancing human civilization, completely changing how people preserved and shared knowledge.
Language’s Role in Human Evolution: Researchers believe that language conferred evolutionary advantages, facilitating cooperation, social cohesion, and the transmission of cultural knowledge. The ability to communicate complex ideas and coordinate group activities enhanced early humans’ ability to survive and thrive in challenging environments.
Influence of Migration and Contact: Human migration and contact between different linguistic groups have profoundly influenced the evolution of language. Contact between speakers of various languages led to linguistic borrowing, language mixing, and the emergence of pidgin and Creole languages. The spread of empires, trade networks, and cultural exchanges facilitated the diffusion of languages across vast geographic regions, giving rise to language families and linguistic diversity.
Language Standardization and Codification: The standardization and codification of language emerged as societies became more complex and interconnected. Language standardization involves the establishment of norms, rules, and conventions governing grammar, spelling, pronunciation, and vocabulary. The development of dictionaries, grammar guides, and linguistic academies played a crucial role in promoting linguistic uniformity and preserving the integrity of languages in written and formal contexts.
Technological Advancements and Language Evolution: Technological advancements, such as the printing press, telecommunication networks, and the internet, have revolutionized language use, dissemination, and preservation. Introducing social media, machine translation technology, and digital communication platforms have overcome language barriers, enabling global communication.

Functions of Language

The functions of language encompass a wide array of roles and purposes that language serves in human communication and interaction. Here are some essential functions of language:

Communication : At its core, language serves as a tool for communication, allowing individuals to convey thoughts, ideas, emotions, and intentions to others. People share information, exchange opinions, and interact socially through spoken, written, or signed language.
Expression of Thoughts and Emotions : Language allows individuals to express their thoughts, feelings, desires, and experiences. Whether through spoken words, written text, facial expressions, or body language, language enables individuals to articulate their inner world and connect with others on an emotional level.
Cultural Transmission : Language plays a crucial role in transmitting culture from one generation to another. Through language, cultural values, traditions, beliefs, stories, myths, and rituals are passed down orally or through written texts, preserving and perpetuating the collective heritage of a community or society.
Social Interaction and Relationship Building : Language is central to social interaction and relationship building. It enables individuals to establish connections, form bonds, and develop interpersonal relationships. Language facilitates collaboration, cooperation, negotiation, and conflict resolution in various social contexts.
Cognitive Development : Language is fundamental to cognitive development and intellectual growth. Through language acquisition and usage, individuals develop cognitive abilities such as memory, attention, problem-solving, and critical thinking. Language also shapes how people perceive the world, organize their thoughts, and make sense of their experiences.
Instrumental Function : Language is instrumental in enabling individuals to accomplish specific goals or tasks. Language allows people to communicate their intentions and achieve desired outcomes in various practical situations, whether it involves giving instructions, asking questions, making requests, or providing information.
Identity and Self-Expression : Language contributes to constructing individual and group identities. It reflects linguistic diversity, regional variations, social identities, and cultural affiliations. Language choices, accents, dialects, and language styles often mark personal identity and social belonging, shaping how individuals perceive themselves and others.
Artistic and Literary Expression : Language is a medium for artistic and literary expression. Through poetry, literature, music, theater, and other forms of creative writing and performance, language becomes a vehicle for aesthetic appreciation, emotional expression, and imaginative exploration of human experiences.
Preservation of Knowledge and History : Language is instrumental in preserving knowledge, history, and collective memory. Written texts, oral traditions, historical documents, and archival records document human achievements, discoveries, events, and cultural milestones, ensuring they are remembered and passed on to future generations.

Evolution of Language

The evolution of language is an intricate journey that traces back to the dawn of humanity , from primitive vocalizations to the intricate linguistic systems we utilize today. The transition from mere grunts and gestures to complex languages like English, Mandarin, or Spanish is a testament to the remarkable capacity of the human mind and the transformative power of communication. Here’s a glimpse into the evolutionary milestones of language:

Pre-Linguistic Communication: Early humans likely communicated through gestures, facial expressions, and primal vocalizations, creating rudimentary non-verbal communication. Grunts, cries, and simple sounds served as essential signals for survival needs, expressing pain, pleasure, hunger, or danger.
Proto-Language and Proto-Words: The development of proto-language involves using more structured vocalizations and gestures to convey specific meanings. Proto-words, resembling single-syllable vocalizations, emerged to represent concrete objects, actions, or concepts, laying the foundation for a more organized communication system.
Vocal Imitation and Mimicry: As early humans evolved, the capacity for vocal imitation and mimicry expanded, allowing for more nuanced communication. Mimicking environmental sounds and animal calls helped describe specific situations, enhancing the richness and expressiveness of communication.
Emergence of Grammar and Syntax: A structured communication system became essential in developing more complex societies. The emergence of grammar and syntax allowed for the construction of more elaborate and precise messages, enabling individuals to convey relationships between ideas and express complex thoughts.
Creation of Words and Vocabulary: As societies became more sophisticated, a larger vocabulary arose to accommodate the expanding range of human experiences and knowledge. Words began to represent not only concrete objects and actions but also abstract concepts, emotions, and relationships, contributing to the richness of language.
Cultural Influence and Language Diversification: Cultural interactions, migrations, and trade led to the diversification of languages. Different communities developed unique linguistic features, accents, and dialects, giving rise to the many languages spoken worldwide today.
Written Language and Standardization: The development of writing systems marked a pivotal moment in the evolution of language. Writing allowed for the preservation and dissemination of information over time and space, leading to the standardization of languages through grammar rules, dictionaries, and formalized structures.
Globalization and Language Exchange: Globalization and technological advancements have increased language contact and exchange in the modern era. The world’s interconnectedness has led to the adopting of loanwords, shared expressions, and the blending of linguistic elements, creating a dynamic and interconnected linguistic landscape.
The Evolution of Greetings and Politeness: The evolution of language is not just about vocabulary and syntax but also about social dynamics and etiquette. Simple greetings like “hello” or “goodbye” reflect evolved social norms and conventions. Politeness strategies, such as honorifics, deferential language, and courteous expressions, are crucial in maintaining social harmony and respect in diverse linguistic communities.

Forms and Structures

Forms and structures in language refer to the systematic organization and components that make up a language system. They encompass various linguistic elements and rules governing how words, phrases, and sentences are structured and combined to convey meaning. Here are the key components of forms and structures in language:

Phonetics and Phonology: Phonetics studies the physical characteristics of speech sounds, including their production, transmission, and perception. Phonology focuses on sounds’ abstract, cognitive aspects within a particular language system, examining patterns, rules, and relationships governing speech sounds. Phonological systems, which differ between languages and dialects, are groups of phonemes, the smallest units of sound that determine meaning in a language.
Morphology: Morphology studies the structure and formation of words, including morphemes, the smallest units of meaning in language. Bound morphemes, which need to be joined to other morphemes to communicate meaning (e.g., “-s” for plural), and free morphemes, can function as words on their own (like “dog”). Morphological processes, such as affixation, compounding, derivation, and inflection, govern how morphemes are combined to create words and convey grammatical information.
Syntax: The concepts and rules guiding the construction of meaningful phrases, clauses, and sentences are known as syntax. Sentence structure involves word order, sentence types (e.g., declarative, interrogative, imperative), and grammatical relationships among words (e.g., subject-verb-object). Syntax also encompasses syntactic categories, such as nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, and conjunctions, and their syntactic roles in sentence formation.
Semantics: The study of meaning in language, including how words, phrases, and sentences connect to the outside world, is known as semantics. Semantic analysis examines word meanings, lexical ambiguity, word sense disambiguation, and semantic relationships (e.g., synonymy, antonymy, hyponymy). Pragmatics, a subfield of semantics, focuses on the use of language in context, including implicature, presupposition, speech acts, and conversational implicature.
Discourse Structure: Discourse structure refers to the organization and coherence of extended stretches of language beyond the sentence level. Discourse markers, cohesive devices, and discourse strategies help structure and link individual sentences into coherent paragraphs, conversations, narratives, and discourses. Discourse analysis studies how people communicate in different discourse contexts using language to express attitudes, negotiate meaning, communicate information, and accomplish communicative goals.

Language Acquisition

The process by which people pick up and use language is known as language acquisition. It is a remarkable and complex feat that occurs naturally in humans during early childhood. The study of language acquisition involves examining how individuals progress from being non-verbal infants to proficient language users.

1. Pre-linguistic Stage

During the pre-linguistic stage, infants engage in various vocalizations and perceptual activities that lay the foundation for language development:

Cooing and Babbling (0-6 months): Infants begin by producing non-specific vowel sounds (cooing) and later progress to producing repetitive sequences of consonant-vowel combinations (babbling). This experimentation with sounds is crucial for developing control over the vocal apparatus and laying the groundwork for speech.
Categorical Perception: Infants start categorizing and discriminating speech sounds relevant to their native language. They become attuned to the meaningful phonetic distinctions within their linguistic environment, setting the stage for language-specific speech perception.

2. Single Word or Holophrastic Stage (9-18 months):

The transition to the single-word stage marks the onset of meaningful language production:

First Words: Children produce their first recognizable words, typically referring to objects, people, actions, or familiar routines in their immediate environment.
Holophrases: These early words often function as holophrases, where a single word conveys a complex meaning or represents an entire idea. For example, “milk” may signify a request for milk, a desire for a bottle, or an observation of spilled milk.

3. Two-Word Stage (18-24 months)

The emergence of two-word combinations marks a significant milestone in syntactic development:

Emergence of Syntax: Children begin to combine words to form simple two-word utterances, such as “more juice,” “big dog,” or “mommy book.” These combinations reflect basic syntactic structures and demonstrate an understanding of word order and grammatical relationships.
Telegraphic Speech: Utterances in this stage often resemble telegraphic speech, where speakers include only essential content words while omitting function words and grammatical markers.

4. Early Multi-word and Sentential Stage (24+ months)

As language development progresses, children’s vocabulary expands, and they begin to construct more elaborate sentences:

Rapid Vocabulary Growth: Children experience a vocabulary explosion, acquiring new words rapidly and demonstrating an increasing ability to express complex ideas and concepts.
Grammatical Development: There is a gradual refinement of grammatical structures, including verb conjugation, plurals, pronouns, and prepositions. Children start to produce more grammatically complete and syntactically varied sentences.

5. Complex Sentences and Language Refinement (3-5 years)

During the preschool years, children continue to refine their language skills and develop more sophisticated linguistic abilities:

Development of Complex Syntax: Children begin to use more complex sentence structures, including compound and complex sentences. They demonstrate an understanding of grammatical relationships and syntactic rules.
Mastery of Basic Grammar: There is a gradual mastery of basic grammar, including the accurate use of verb tense, articles, pronouns, and word order. Children’s speech becomes increasingly grammatically correct and syntactically mature.

6. Mature Language Use (5+ years)

By the time children reach school age, they have typically achieved full linguistic competence:

Full Command of Language: Children demonstrate a sophisticated understanding and use of their native language across various contexts and communicative settings. They can comprehend and produce complex texts, engage in meaningful conversations, and express abstract ideas.
Metalinguistic Awareness: Children develop metalinguistic awareness, allowing them to consciously reflect on and manipulate language. They become aware of language as a system with its rules and conventions, enabling them to discuss language, analyze its structure, and solve linguistic problems.

Language and Society

Let’s break down the relationship between language and society:

Language as a Marker of Identity : An essential component of individual and collective identity is language. Dialects, accents, and linguistic patterns often signify regional, cultural, ethnic, or social affiliations. The language(s) individuals speak can influence how they perceive themselves and are perceived by others, shaping their sense of belonging and cultural identity within society.
Language and Social Stratification : Societies often exhibit linguistic hierarchies and power dynamics, where specific languages or dialects are associated with prestige, power, and social status, while others are marginalized or stigmatized. Linguistic discrimination can reinforce existing social inequalities and contribute to the marginalization of linguistic minorities or speakers of non-standard varieties.
Language as a Medium of Social Interaction : Language plays a central role in facilitating social interaction, communication, and collaboration among members of society. It lets people communicate their ideas, feelings, attitudes, and intentions; it also helps them traverse a variety of social circumstances and scenarios and negotiate social relationships. Language norms and conventions govern how individuals interact and communicate within their social environments.
Language and Cultural Transmission : Language serves as a primary vehicle for the transmission and preservation of cultural heritage, traditions, values, beliefs, and knowledge within society. Through language, cultural narratives, myths, folklore, rituals, and oral histories are passed down from generation to generation, shaping collective identity and fostering a sense of continuity and belonging among community members.
Language and Power Dynamics : Language is intricately linked to societal power dynamics, influencing access to resources, opportunities, and social mobility. Dominant languages often serve as instruments of power and privilege, facilitating access to education, employment, government services, and political representation. Linguistic policies and practices can reflect and perpetuate existing power structures, marginalizing linguistic minorities and reinforcing social hierarchies.
Language and Social Cohesion : Language promotes social cohesion, solidarity, and community integration. Shared linguistic codes and communication norms facilitate mutual understanding, cooperation, and collaboration among diverse individuals and groups. Language also functions as a tool for building social networks, fostering interpersonal relationships, and strengthening social bonds across different cultural, ethnic, and linguistic boundaries.
Language and Social Change : Language is dynamic and constantly evolving in response to social, cultural, technological, and historical factors. Language usage, vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation changes reflect broader societal shifts, innovations, and transformations. Language can shape and reflect social change, serving as a barometer of evolving societal attitudes, values, and ideologies.

Language and Technology

Language and technology have become deeply intertwined in modern society, shaping the way we communicate, learn, and interact with the world. Here’s an exploration of the relationship between language and technology:

Machine Translation: Machine translation systems, such as Google Translate and Microsoft Translator, use algorithms to translate text and speech from one language to another automatically. These tools facilitate cross-cultural communication, enabling individuals to overcome language barriers and access information in multiple languages.
Natural Language Processing (NLP): Natural language processing is a branch of artificial intelligence that focuses on enabling computers to understand, interpret, and generate human language. NLP applications power virtual assistants like Siri, Alexa , and Google Assistant , which respond to voice commands and engage in natural language dialogue with users.
Language Learning Apps: Language learning apps and software, such as Duolingo, Rosetta Stone, and Babbel, provide interactive platforms for users to acquire new languages or improve their language skills. These apps offer a variety of exercises, quizzes, and interactive lessons tailored to individual learning styles and proficiency levels.
Voice Recognition Technology: Voice recognition technology enables devices and applications to understand and interpret spoken commands and input. Voice-activated assistants, speech-to-text dictation software, and voice-controlled interfaces streamline tasks and enhance accessibility for users with disabilities.
Language Preservation and Documentation: Digital technologies are crucial in preserving and documenting endangered languages and linguistic heritage. Online archives, multimedia databases, and language documentation tools enable linguists and communities to record, analyze, and safeguard linguistic diversity and cultural knowledge.
Social Media and Multilingual Communication: Social media platforms facilitate multilingual communication and cultural exchange among users from diverse linguistic backgrounds. Users can share content, engage in conversations, and connect with others in their native language or in languages they are learning, fostering global connections and cross-cultural understanding.
Language Processing in Search Engines: Search engines employ language processing techniques to understand user queries and deliver relevant search results. Semantic search algorithms analyze the meaning and context of words and phrases, improving search accuracy and user experience.
Language Localization in Software and Content: Software developers and content creators use language localization techniques to adapt digital products and content for different linguistic and cultural contexts. Localization involves translating user interfaces, software documentation, and multimedia content into multiple languages to make them accessible to global audiences.
Augmented Reality (AR) Language Learning: Augmented reality applications enhance language learning experiences by overlaying digital content onto the physical environment. AR language learning apps provide immersive and interactive lessons, allowing users to practice language skills in real-world contexts and scenarios.
Ethical Considerations: Using language technology raises ethical concerns about privacy, data security, bias, and cultural sensitivity. It is essential to address these ethical considerations and ensure that language technologies respect users’ rights, uphold linguistic diversity, and promote inclusive communication practices.

Challenges and Controversies

Challenges and controversies abound in the intersection of language and technology, reflecting the complex nature of linguistic diversity, cultural sensitivity, and ethical considerations. Here are some key challenges and controversies:

Bias in Language Technology: Language technology, including machine translation and natural language processing, may exhibit biases inherent in training data, algorithms, and model design. Biases based on race, gender, ethnicity, and other social factors can perpetuate stereotypes, reinforce inequalities, and marginalize underrepresented groups in linguistic and cultural contexts.
Privacy Concerns: Language technology often relies on vast amounts of linguistic data, raising concerns about privacy, data security, and user consent. Speech recognition systems, language processing algorithms, and translation services may collect and store sensitive information, posing user privacy and autonomy risks.
Digital Language Divide: The digital language divide refers to disparities in access to language technology and digital resources among linguistic communities worldwide. Minority, indigenous, and less-resourced languages may receive limited support in machine translation, speech recognition, and digital content localization, exacerbating linguistic inequalities and digital exclusion.
Cultural Appropriation and Misrepresentation: Language technology and digital media platforms may perpetuate cultural appropriation, misrepresentation, and commodification of linguistic and cultural heritage. Automated translation systems, content recommendation algorithms, and user-generated content platforms may inadvertently propagate stereotypes, inaccuracies, and cultural insensitivities in linguistic content and representations.
Threats to Linguistic Diversity: Globalization, urbanization, and language standardization efforts pose threats to linguistic diversity, endangering minority languages and indigenous languages around the world. Socio-economic factors, educational policies, and technological trends exacerbate language shift, language loss, and endangerment by prioritizing dominant languages and monocultural norms.
Disinformation and Hate Speech: Language technology platforms and social media networks are vulnerable to the spread of disinformation, hate speech, and harmful content in multiple languages. Automated content moderation, natural language processing tools, and community guidelines are critical in addressing online abuse, combating misinformation, and promoting constructive dialogue in diverse linguistic communities.
Linguistic Colonialism and Hegemony: Language technology development and digital content distribution may perpetuate linguistic colonialism and hegemony, privileging dominant languages and cultural norms over marginalized languages and worldviews. Digital divide, linguistic imperialism, and unequal access to language resources reinforce power imbalances and inhibit equitable participation in the global digital economy and knowledge society.

Language is humanity’s most powerful tool, transcending borders, cultures, and generations. It is the cornerstone of communication, enabling the exchange of ideas, emotions, and knowledge. Through language, we construct identities, share stories, and connect profoundly. Language shapes our perceptions, influences our interactions, and reflects the diversity of human experience. As we navigate the complexities of language, we celebrate its richness, preserve its heritage, and champion its role in fostering understanding and empathy. In a world where words hold the power to inspire, heal, and unite, language remains our most remarkable testament to the resilience and ingenuity of the human spirit.

By signing up, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy .

*Please provide your correct email id. Login details for this Free course will be emailed to you

Valuation, Hadoop, Excel, Web Development & many more.

Forgot Password?

This website or its third-party tools use cookies, which are necessary to its functioning and required to achieve the purposes illustrated in the cookie policy. By closing this banner, scrolling this page, clicking a link or continuing to browse otherwise, you agree to our Privacy Policy

Explore 1000+ varieties of Mock tests View more

Submit Next Question

Early-Bird Offer: ENROLL NOW

On Language and Power

First Online: 02 August 2023

Cite this chapter

Lieven De Cauter 38

Part of the book series: Law and Visual Jurisprudence ((LVJ,volume 9))

89 Accesses

6 Altmetric

In this concise synthetic little essay the author tries to overlook the problem of the link between language and power from antiquity to the present. From the Greek belief in rhetoric as the basis of power, via Foucault’s concept of ‘the order of discourse’ as the control of who can say what and the concept of hegemony of Gramsci, he casts his gaze on neoliberalism, alt right and woke as power battles based on language.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

Get 10 units per month
Download Article/Chapter or eBook
1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
Cancel anytime
Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info
Durable hardcover edition

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Erasmus University College, RITCS, Brussels, Belgium

Lieven De Cauter

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lieven De Cauter .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Leuven Centre for Public Law, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Frank Fleerackers

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

De Cauter, L. (2023). On Language and Power. In: Fleerackers, F. (eds) The Rearguard of Subjectivity. Law and Visual Jurisprudence, vol 9. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26855-7_5

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-26855-7_5

Published : 02 August 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-26854-0

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-26855-7

eBook Packages : Law and Criminology Law and Criminology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Essay Service Examples Science Language

The Power of Language Essay

Proper editing and formatting
Free revision, title page, and bibliography
Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Our writers will provide you with an essay sample written from scratch: any topic, any deadline, any instructions.

Cite this paper

Join our 150k of happy users

Get original paper written according to your instructions
Save time for what matters most

Fair Use Policy

EduBirdie considers academic integrity to be the essential part of the learning process and does not support any violation of the academic standards. Should you have any questions regarding our Fair Use Policy or become aware of any violations, please do not hesitate to contact us via [email protected].

We are here 24/7 to write your paper in as fast as 3 hours.

Provide your email, and we'll send you this sample!

By providing your email, you agree to our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy .

Say goodbye to copy-pasting!

Get custom-crafted papers for you.

Enter your email, and we'll promptly send you the full essay. No need to copy piece by piece. It's in your inbox!

Home — Essay Samples — Literature — Mother Tongue — A Mother’s Tongue by Amy Tan: The Power and Purpose of Language

A Mother's Tongue by Amy Tan: The Power and Purpose of Language

Categories: Mother Tongue

About this sample

Words: 638 |

Published: Jun 13, 2024

Words: 638 | Page: 1 | 4 min read

The influence of language on identity, the impact of language on familial relationships, societal acceptance and the importance of embracing linguistic heritage.

Cite this Essay

To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below:

Let us write you an essay from scratch

450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Prof Ernest (PhD)

Verified writer

Expert in: Literature

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

2 pages / 711 words

2 pages / 759 words

3 pages / 1264 words

2 pages / 944 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Mother Tongue

In the article “Mother Tongue,” the author Amy Tan expresses her opinion on both the english language for asian-american stereotypes and their culture based on their degree and language “classes” during school years. As a writer [...]

In Amy Tan's essay "Mother Tongue," she explores the perception and treatment of different languages in society, particularly the English language. Tan reflects on her experiences growing up as a child of Chinese immigrants in [...]

Language is not merely a tool for communication; it is a vessel that carries our thoughts, emotions, and cultural identities. In Amy Tan's essay "Mother Tongue," she explores the profound impact of language on our lives and the [...]

Julia Alvarez's short story "Names/Nombres" explores the author's struggle to navigate her cultural identity as a bilingual immigrant in the United States. The story follows Alvarez's journey of adapting to a new language and [...]

Not all people who speak the English language speak it the same way. It is very uncommon to find two people that speak the exact same English because there are so many different forms of the language. This is the argument that [...]

In the essay “Mother Tongue”, Amy Tan believes that everyone speaks different languages in certain settings and are labeled by the way they speak. The author interested by how language is utilized in our daily life” and uses [...]

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

Instructions Followed To The Letter
Deadlines Met At Every Stage
Unique And Plagiarism Free

Israel-Hamas War

Palestine and the Power of Language

A protester's painted hand during a march to demand a ceasefire in response to the ongoing Israel–Hamas conflict on Dec. 28, 2023 in Berlin, Germany.

I n today’s near-constant news cycle on Gaza, Palestinians seem to die at the hands of an invisible executioner. Palestinians are shot dead. Palestinians starve . Palestinian children are found dead . But where is there accountability? Palestinians die, they aren’t killed , as if their death is a fault of their own.

The obfuscation of responsibility is facilitated by a structure often overlooked since grade school: grammar. At this moment, grammar has the indelible power to become a tool of the oppressor, with the passive voice the most relied-upon weapon of all.

When I was young, teachers scolded me for using the passive voice—they wanted my writing to be precise and direct. Instead, my sentences always seemed to protect those who performed the actions. Back then, the fact that my sentence structure obscured accountability didn’t bother me. But I know better now. As a Palestinian American, with refugee grandparents who survived the Nakba, I’m confronting the occupation back home from the safety of my apartment in America. Over the years, I’ve combed through headlines searching for the active voice in a sea of passivity. I need those who commit actions, those who hold agency, to be named. I need Israel and its occupational forces to be named.

The passive voice often focuses on the recipient of the event, not the doer. In the news today, I see only the passive voice: “ A group of Palestinian men waving a white flag are shot at ,” and I can’t help but hear the voices of my past English teachers ask, “But who ‘shot’ these men?” Accountability is not just vague; it’s altogether missing.

Mohammad Shouman carries the body of his daughter, Masa, who was killed in an Israeli bombardment of the Gaza Strip, during her funeral in Rafah, southern Gaza, on Jan. 17.

I learned most acutely about the power of language to silence and erase in graduate school while auditing an undergraduate course on Israel. In a class of 25 people, I was one of two Palestinians. The rest of the class consisted of students who either self-identified as proud Zionists or Zionists who felt confused.

The professor, a Jewish Israeli, reminded me of my grandfather with his bushy eyebrows and thick accent—a soothing familiarity at first.

But that familiarity didn’t last. By the end of the first month, the class was split on the definition of “ethnic cleansing”—not only how to define it but who, in terms of the subject doing the action, can be charged with this human rights violation.

The professor called our attention to his use of the term “ethnic cleansing” in his own writing. He wrote that around 750,000 Palestinians were displaced in 1948, an act that today would be considered ethnic cleansing. At first read, this statement seemed bold—he may not have named the Nakba , but his writing gestured toward violence. Even so, his examination felt sanitized. Palestinians “were displaced,” he wrote. But there was no mention of who did the displacing.

After reading part of the article out loud, a girl who had been fidgeting in her seat said it couldn’t be.

“What couldn’t be?” my professor asked.

“Ethnic cleansing. Because it’s what happened in the Holocaust, so we can’t be charged with this,” she replied. Another student cut in. He qualified by referring to himself as a critic of Israel. “There’s a distinction between occupation and ethnic cleansing,” he announced. “It’s an issue of structural power and systematic violence—what happened in 1948 was not ethnic cleansing.”

“By whom?” I finally asked, interrupting the flow of conversation.

“By whom, what?” the professor said.

“Who displaced 750,000 Palestinians?” Silence.

Palestinians leave their Jerusalem neighborhood during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War.

A boy behind me got the last word. “ Intent is what makes it ethnic cleansing,” he said. “It doesn’t sound like this was intentional. It might look like it, but it’s different.” The professor nodded, mumbling, “intent” to himself.

In a 2023 interview with Palestinian scholar Rashid Khalidi published in The Intercept , Khalidi shared that although Israel’s recent military assault on Gaza may seem unprecedented it, unfortunately, aligns with Israel’s long-standing doctrine rooted in colonial, British counterinsurgency strategies. Khalidi said that this doctrine is characterized by an “absolute merciless attack on the enemy, delivering crushing blows.”

Read More: Hamas Built Tunnels Beneath My Family’s Home in Gaza. Now It Lies in Ruin

“This is how Britain ruled the world,” Khalidi went on to explain. “It was an empire of violence. And that strategy of overwhelming violence, when challenged, has been Israel’s strategy ever since.” This history of violence can easily be traced back to the foundation of the Zionist movement. The first Israeli prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, wrote to his son in 1937: “The Arabs will have to go, but one needs an opportune moment for making it happen, such as a war.”

I saw intent in these words, but others in my class did not. So I kept searching, looking through the archive to help me piece together what parts of history I was missing. I found Joseph Weitz, director of the Jewish National Fund’s Lands Department, who wrote that there was no solution other than to transfer all Arabs from Palestine—who were the overwhelming majority in the region—into neighboring countries so that no Palestinian villages would remain. But when I shared these findings in class, they were brushed aside. “This isn’t intent,” a student said. “You can’t prove intent with a few peoples’ letters and actions.”

By the second month of class, I spent most of my time picking at my cuticles, fiddling with them until they drew blood, as students argued over when the words “Palestine” and “Palestinian” came into existence. Finally, the professor changed the subject, unable to convince some in class that “Palestine” was a place before Israel’s existence. He went on to discuss how Zionism could be considered a colonial project. A student behind me interrupted the lecture and said, “It’s not like they were coming in like other imperial powers and raping and killing immediately.”

My hand with its bloody cuticles shot up, eager to call out the absurdity of the comment. But my professor had started calling on me less and less, avoiding eye contact when possible and acknowledging me only in nods. My consistent stream of comments and questions perhaps disturbed the delicate balance of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that he so cautiously wanted to maintain. He had become passive; I had been forced into passivity in turn.

Anti-war protesters raise painted hands behind U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing on President Biden's $106 billion national security supplemental funding request to support Israel and Ukraine, as well as bolster border security, on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., on Oct. 31, 2023.

“Who started it first?” another student asked in my row, ignoring my raised hand.

“Which time did ‘who start what?’” The professor asked.

“In 1947,” she said, “if Zionism really is a ‘colonial project,’ who started it first?”

“In 1947, the Arabs were upset by the U.N. partition lines. There were Palestinian uprisings,” he said.

“They retaliated,” I interjected, angry again at the empty spaces left in the professor’s response—as if Zionism and its goals had no role in why there were Palestinian uprisings. In a 2002 report completed by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR), researchers found that during the Second Intifada the word “retaliation” was used 79% of the time to describe Israeli violence against Palestinians in American news outlets. Meanwhile, Palestinian violence was characterized as “retaliation” only 9% of the time. Palestinians “attacked” or “threw rocks” or, at best, there were Palestinian “uprisings” that seemed to spring from the ground without any explanation of the pressure that premeditated why the surface cracked in the first place.

“Retaliation” suggests a need to defend oneself because safety is on the line. “Retaliation” empowers some in their violence while reprimanding others.

I wanted to say all this, but the professor put his palm in the air, a visible stop sign in my direction, and asked me to raise my hand if I wanted to engage. So I continued to raise my hand, which remained raised until the end of class. And I wondered, if there were a stone nearby, would I have thrown it?

Read More: The Power of Changing Your Mind

After class, the professor pulled me aside and told me, “As an auditor, it’s best you don’t participate. I sympathize with the Palestinians, but it’s necessary you don’t add to the discussion.” He followed up this conversation with an email, reaffirming his desire for me to remain silent. Perhaps he didn’t intend to silence me, one of two Palestinians in the course. Perhaps he intended only to follow university policy, a policy I later learned was up to the discretion of each professor. Perhaps intent didn’t apply here at all, just as it couldn’t be applied to those who ethnically cleansed Palestinians during the Nakba.

While writing tedious essays in high school, I didn’t care that I used the passive voice. I didn’t care because our writing assignments were often divorced from broader socio-political contexts. The violence of protecting those accountable versus those left bearing the burden of the violence didn’t yet touch me or my body. A privilege, I know. The calculated use of language against Palestinians didn’t yet anger me, either, even though blatant anti-Arab racism happened in front of me with growing frequency after 9/11. It felt as though this version of racism was acceptable, even expected.

I learned history as if its problems were a thing of the past. This was purposeful. History preserved in textbooks relies on meticulous and insidious language to shape narratives. In the same month I sat in class and listened to students negotiate accountability and qualify their feelings toward ethnic cleansing, a seven-year-old Palestinian boy, Rayan, died in the West Bank. Did he die or was he killed? It depends on which headline you read—some headlines stated that he was simply “mourned” by his community.

Israeli flags flutter in Gaza amid the ongoing conflict on Jan. 12.

As I searched for accountability for Rayan, I heard my teachers’ voices echo from the past: “Who did the action?” Paramedics say he had a heart attack though pediatric specialist, Dr. Mohamed Ismail, claimed Rayan had no previous medical conditions that would point to an early cardiac arrest. “The most probable scenario of what happened is that under stress, he had excess adrenaline secretion, which caused the increase of his heartbeat, ” Ismail said.

We do know this: right before he died, Israeli occupation forces chased the boys home, banged on their door, and threatened to come back at night and arrest the boys, ages 7, 8, and 10. When Rayan saw the soldiers at his door, he tried to run away but, instead, dropped dead. Times of Israel published the headline , “Palestinian boy, 7, dies in disputed circumstances amid IDF activity near Bethlehem.”

“What are the disputed circumstances?” I hear my English teachers press on in my mind.

There were rocks. No, stones. They say stones. They were being thrown.

“Who did the action? Who started it?”

One of Rayan’s older brothers threw a stone at a soldier.

In the active voice, “A seven-year-old Palestinian boy’s heart killed him” is how the headlines could have read.

“The heart is not to blame,” I hear my teachers say.

What does it matter when language can minimize suffering at its best and erase it altogether at its worst?

As my graduate studies progressed, professors repeatedly told me that no one’s hands were clean in this “complicated” history. They felt my writing and my questions were too exacting in ways that perhaps made them uncomfortable. “This history is full of gray areas,” they’d say. They wanted my writing to be vague, passive. They wanted my writing to speak to the “complicated” nature of this conflict—but Palestine has never been that complicated to me.

The word “complicated” is often used to describe the occupation in Palestine, a word that insists that occupation is untouchable—Palestine’s history is too complex, there are too many moving parts, it’s a puzzle that can never be solved. But this word is condescending—a distraction. It wants us to feel small, worthless, and petty in our investigation. It demands power structures remain in place, allowing some to speak while requiring others to stay quiet. But what’s happening today in Palestine against the Palestinian people is not complicated. It’s a revolting violation of human rights. It is active and precise. Palestinians are killed or, if they’re lucky, violently evicted from their homes. The question— by whom? —is often never raised. Palestinian schools, hospitals, community centers, historic holy spaces, safe zones are bombed; their resources depleted; people are starving—as if all of this happened devoid of context or responsibility for those who hold power.

So let me amend the above statements, as my former English teachers would have requested, and put them into the active voice: Israel bombs Palestinian schools that house sacred archives. Israel bombs hospitals with necessary aid. Israel bombs community centers and historic holy spaces that have stood for centuries. Israel depletes Palestinian resources. Israel bombs Rafah , housing over 1 million displaced Palestinians, after claiming it a safe zone. Israel is starving Gaza.

More Must-Reads from TIME

How Kamala Harris Knocked Donald Trump Off Course
Introducing TIME's 2024 Latino Leaders
What Makes a Friendship Last Forever?
33 True Crime Documentaries That Shaped the Genre
Long COVID Looks Different in Kids
Your Questions About Early Voting , Answered
Column: Your Cynicism Isn’t Helping Anybody
The 100 Most Influential People in AI 2024

IMAGES

The Power of Language
Power of Language and the Value of Language Diversity Essay Example
📗 Essay on Improving Writing Power: Language Power Tutorials for
The Power of Language: How It Creates Your Reality and How to Use It
The Power of Language Free Essay Example
(PDF) The Power of language and the Language of powers.

VIDEO

Language and Power
Language and Power
importance of english language
Language and Power
The Power of Language: 5 Incredible Benefits of Learning a New Language
Language and Power

COMMENTS

The Power of Language: How Words Shape Our World
Conclusion. The power of language is undeniable. It serves as the foundation of human communication, influencing our understanding of the world, our interactions with one another, and our engagement with social and political systems. Language is both a reflection of existing power structures and a tool for challenging them.
The power of language: How words shape people, culture
Studying how people use language - what words and phrases they unconsciously choose and combine - can help us better understand ourselves and why we behave the way we do. Linguistics scholars ...
Essay on The Importance of Language
Essay on The Importance of Language. Language is a fundamental aspect of human communication, shaping our interactions, thoughts, and cultural identities. From the spoken word to written text, language plays a crucial role in expressing ideas, sharing knowledge, and connecting with others. In this essay, we will explore the importance of ...
The Power of Language Essay examples
1074 Words. 5 Pages. Open Document. The Power of Language Language plays an important role in communication by bringing people together and enriching their relationships. Language can also alienate those who do not speak it properly, or at all, from those who do. The essays, Mother Tongue, by Amy Tan, best known for her book, The Joy Luck Club ...
The Power of Language: How Words Shape Our Reality
It suggests that the words we choose, their truthfulness, and their kindness can reshape our reality, a concept that is as applicable today as it was in the past. The power of language extends far ...
The power of language: we translate our thoughts into words, but words
German has a rich collection of such terms, made up of often two, three or more words connected to form a superword or compound word. Compound words are particularly powerful because they are ...
Language and Power
Five dynamic language-power relationships in communication have emerged from critical language studies, sociolinguistics, conversation analysis, and the social psychology of language and communication. Two of them stem from preexisting powers behind language that it reveals and reflects, thereby transferring the extralinguistic powers to the ...
The Power of Language: Exploring its Significance in Shaping
The Power of Language: Exploring its Significance in Shaping Perceptions, Beliefs, and Relationships . International Journal of Socia l Sciences and Educational Studies, 10 (3), 3 62 -3 66 .
The power of language: How words shape people, culture
Stanford linguists and psychologists study how language is interpreted by people. Even the slightest differences in language use can correspond with biased beliefs of the speakers, according to research. One study showed that a relatively harmless sentence, such as "girls are as good as boys at math," can subtly perpetuate sexist stereotypes.
How Words Change The World: The Power of Language
Language is a remarkable tool that humans have developed to communicate, express ideas, and convey emotions. Throughout history, words have played a pivotal role in shaping societies, driving change, and influencing the course of events. This essay explores the profound impact of language and how words have the power to change the world.
Neelam Hussain: The Power of Language
The Power of Language. Neelam Hussain |. TEDxLahore. • March 2022. Neelam Hussain read English Literature at the universities of Punjab, Leeds and Sussex and taught English at Kinnaird College for over 22 years. She left Kinnaird in 1995 for Simorgh Women's Research and Publication Centre as an editor, writer and translator.
Language
"Language" is an essay by Ralph Waldo Emerson that explores the nature and power of language. Emerson argues that language is not simply a tool for communication, but also a means of expressing and shaping thought. He highlights the importance of using language in a way that reflects one's individuality and inner truth, rather than conforming ...
PDF 2018 The Power of Language, The Power of People: Celebrating 50 Years
The Power of Language, The Power of People: Celebrating 50 Years The 2018 Central States Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages, meeting with the Wisconsin Association for Language Teachers, was held in downtown Milwaukee at the Hilton City Center, March 8-10, 2018. Fifty years of annual conferences were celebrated, each
The Power of Language: How It Creates Your Reality and How to Use It
When language is used wisely, it can evoke very deep feelings in others, motivate others to action and construe the nature of our relationships. Language is a very powerful tool for change, both positive and negative. " Language creates reality. Words have power. Speak always to create joy ".
Essay on Language: Evolution, Culture, Society Influence
Language, the cornerstone of human civilization, is the conduit through which thoughts, emotions, and ideas are conveyed and understood. Defined as a communication system consisting of sounds, words, and gestures with agreed-upon meanings, language embodies the essence of human interaction and expression. Its importance transcends mere words ...
On Language and Power
Abstract. In this concise synthetic little essay the author tries to overlook the problem of the link between language and power from antiquity to the present. From the Greek belief in rhetoric as the basis of power, via Foucault's concept of 'the order of discourse' as the control of who can say what and the concept of hegemony of ...
Essay on The Power Of Language
Good Essays. 1283 Words. 6 Pages. Open Document. The Power of Language. Of all possible human qualities, the one that wields the most power is the ability to use, understand and communicate effectively through language. A proficient use of language allows us to clearly communicate an exact idea from one person to another person or group of people.
Essay On The Power Of Language
Power of language formed through individuals that form themselves into small or large social groups. Language is a reflection of a society's culture and its perception of the world; as it relays information, it demonstrates how a certain society takes in, processes, evaluates, and conveys that information. The development of a specific ...
PDF 1 Introduction: What is language?
Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913) was a Swiss linguist. His theories were fundamental in defining the study of language as a science. Saussure's work led to the twentieth-century development of the important linguistic subfield of semiotics, or the study of signs. We'll explore the field of semiotics in Chapter 7.
The Power of Language Essay
The Power of Language Essay. This essay sample was donated by a student to help the academic community. Papers provided by EduBirdie writers usually outdo students' samples. Language wields immense power over humanity. People from all over the world travel great distances with their words.
A Mother's Tongue by Amy Tan: The Power and Purpose of Language
In her captivating essay, "A Mother's Tongue," Amy Tan explores the power and purpose of language through her personal journey as a bilingual daughter of a Chinese immigrant. Through her vivid anecdotes and thought-provoking insights, Tan challenges societal norms and sheds light on the complexities of language use, ultimately emphasizing the ...
The Power Of Language
1464 Words. 6 Pages. Open Document. The Power of Language. Language is often defined as a system of communication, a way for humans to interact with one another. Language itself can hold a great amount of power. It can express one 's emotion, show love or hate, and could give meaning. For example an object has no identification unless the power ...
Palestine and the Power of Language
February 16, 2024 7:00 AM EST. Dudum is a Palestinian-Syrian-American writer currently working on a memoir about living in the diaspora as a Palestinian in America. She is a graduate of Columbia ...