The most
interesting topics I found through my readings of the article by Farr and Song
was te concept of the language ideology. This idea was expressed repeatedly
throughout the text and I think a good summary of this concept is necessary to
include in my reflection. The concept of
language ideology connects the linguistic aspects with the social aspects in
which they do in the “interest of a particular, usually powerful, social
position”. Within this definition there
are two different types; the belief in language standardization and of monolingualism. Although the concept of language ideology is
interesting, I think that monolingualism and language standardization are both
harmful ideas that would destroy the beauty of difference on this planet. If every person spoke the same language I
would assume the next step would be converting to the same religion, belief
system, cultural ways and much more that makes each person unique. Although it was expected that this would come
into affect when the world modernized and there was a rise of the European
nation-states, but I still believe that it is important to stress variety in
the human language system.
The article also
mentions the idea that language beliefs and education are inseparable, which
really puts future TESOL educators in a somewhat sticky situation. In order to abide by the education system and
its rules it is important to carry out the language policy through mass education
and it turn education is itself carried out through language. The authors expressed this idea in a much romanticized
way that really caught my attention.
I also had never
understood the concepts between language policy and language planning until
reading the assigned chapter. To
summarize, language policy refers to the more general linguistic, political and
social goals that are referenced in the language planning process. Language planning on the other hand is the
conscious effort that linguists put forth in a community to change the
linguistic behavior. These ideas
construct important decisions like to reference the example in the book in
which one variety of a language is to be selected to be used for school,
political documents and other official purposes. It’s interesting to see that I have been
using these ideas for all my life but never really understood there being a
term for this.
The idea of
language politicking is also strongly referenced in the reading which refers to
the direct bearing that language has on matters of identity, economic
opportunity, social status, power and human rights. When expanding the use and meaning of
language to such important ideas it really shows the influence one’s language
may have on themselves, those around them and the community as a whole.
I was somewhat disappointed
to read about the “English Only” debate because when adding the idea of
language politicking it truly shows how much one’s language can impact matters
of their identity and so forth. I can understand
why it may be easier for one nation to consider prohibiting the use of other
languages in order to make a more peaceful country, I also think that it would
be a hypocritical move for the United States to activate the English Only
policy because in the colonial times not everyone spoke English and our own
ancestors are from varying countries that helped build this country to what it
is today.
No comments:
Post a Comment