Words can't hurt...right?

Language.

I once wrote a poem about language...

Words. By Ellie Wood.

Words: that for which we cannot apologise, rectify or retrieve- a cut so deep.

That which we use to connect, excuse and comfort.

The sharpest tool, the best bandage to east pain and the smoothest of charmers.

The Queen of enigmas and prince of procrastination. King of ambiguity and princess of allure.

The best, worst and often only tool at your disposal.

Words: The genius, wizard, poet, politician, fighter- the average human being.

Attacked, defended and eased,

Infuriated or enlightened.

The champion of champions.

Words: Knowledge, conversation, hope, faith, pledge, truth, lies and trust.

To you, words, I swear, you are forever my indispensible and most faithful friend, assistant and companion.

Words.

As my poem points out, language has many uses and many effects. So how can so many people make throw-away comments not realising the lasting effects or how they make people feel?

I began to think about this as an important issue last week when I began looking at language as an important factor in changing attitudes and values in society, with reference to sex and gender, so I may use this as an example later on. But as a general principle it got me thinking about the power language has and how people seem to harness it in order to project views and opinions, and either diminish or exacerbate prejudice.

Hitler, for example, ultimate symbol of evil but worshipped by so many... how was what he said socially acceptable? He was obviously a wordsmith. Listening to his speeches you can hear his passion but more importantly he’s manipulative. He uses inclusive language for the public; they feel like they have a voice. He praises Germany beyond words it’s emotional and it was more than likely beautiful to hear for a country that had been undergoing such hardship. When he speaks about the ‘Jew problem’ it’s difficult still to fathom how anyone could just accept this but he slipped it in between radically heroic statements about saving Germany which is sneaky and manipulative. The hatred is repugnant to read but he speaks in such a way that’s descriptive and almost poetic with how he describes Jews as a disease, it’s not sane by any means but it shows what power language has if he could take such a ridiculous concept and weave hatred through it and then not even be scared to say these things out loud and THEN people accepted it and continued to love him. A lot is dependent on language. If Hitler isn’t the perfect example of how someone can manipulate a public and breed hatred using language, then there can be no other example.

In addition, it’s interesting to see now, in light of the recent ‘gay marriage’ debate, how attitudes can change.  It seems this is the great civil rights movement of our time. We had the Suffragettes in the late 19^th, early 20^th century, and the black civil rights movement through the 50s and 60s. These movements saw Emelline Pankhurst and Dr Martin Luther King go down in history for their great work and even greater sacrifices. I’m curious to see who may rise from this movement as a figure head. Ellen DeGeneres will forever be the ultimate ambassador of gay marriage, not only because she is gay and married but because she so proves how the sanctity of this institution is so sacred and meaningful when there’s Brittany Spears and Kim Kardashian running around and being married for a matter of days.

What I actually wanted to explore is the thought process in life and in everyday speech with reference to prejudices. One is fine to ‘sit on the fence’ but we were given two terms, linguistic determinism, meaning language shapes our thoughts, and linguistic universalism, meaning our thoughts shapes our language.

On the one hand I whole heartily agree that Linguistic universalism is the term of sense... if one is homophobic in attitudes and values then one shall use narrow and more than likely offensive language to convey this, right?

But is this right? Upon reflection, I don’t think it is. I think when we really look into this our attitudes and values are shaped by our language. We are naturally constrained or freed by language. We use it for so many purposes it cannot be a second thought... even our thought process is done in a language of some kind. So my conclusion on this point is that we, and the language we think in, determine our attitudes to most things. For example, the French have a so much wider vocabulary and often multiple terms for one thing. The abundance of synonyms in this language means that they can give a degree to the thing that they are talking about or rate its importance, intensity etc... It makes it much more expressive, and consequently portrays a stance or opinion, ultimately being interpreted in a tone and concluded as your specific value. Words are obviously our greatest communicator and language is obviously not a secondary thought...it’s a medium.

So when applied to the sex and gender subject, I find that the understanding of a topic and consequently the being ‘okay’ or ‘not okay’ with it, is dependent on language. In today’s society understanding of something different is imperative for the majority of people, although shouldn’t be necessary, and so the language has to be very politically correct and pragmatic and straight forward to avoid any confusion. Confusion leads to questions and stereotypes which lead to prejudice. All of which occurs in the mind but words are responsible for. Leaving the issue unclear and unstable subjects it to ridicule or hate and that’s when we attain inequalities for people that are different.

Ultimately language can cloud or clarify a situation and can therefore be awarded ultimate importance when wanting to persuade, manipulate or change attitudes.