The first amendment in theory is supposed to protect our right to free speech , but after reading How to Tame a Wild Tongue it is evident that many cultures primary language is under attack. silencing a person based on their language, in my opinion, is a blatant act of aggression, but one many of us fail to recognize because it may not have a direct impact on us. Anzaldúa recalls that getting caught speaking Spanish at recess "was good for three licks on the knuckles with a sharp ruler". She experienced at a young age institutional oppression. Her native voice was stripped from her at school by the same teachers that were supposed to build the basis of all learning and acceptance. she was physically punished for speaking a language deemed lesser by an intolerant educational system , actions like these create problems in the future because it teaches kids that one language is superior than another. Every conflict ever, has arisen from one group thinking they are better than another, which is why denying someone their language based on the belief that yours is better is an act of violence.
The unconscious lessons taught through the schools, that one language is inferior to the other, created divides in the thinking of Chicanos. Anzaldua notes that "chicanas who grew up speaking Chicano Spanish have internalized the belief that we speak poor Spanish. it is illegitimate, a bastard language.And because we internalize how our language has been used against us by the dominant culture, we use our language differences against eachother." Intolerance breeds intolerance, the culture that forced them to abandon their own language has no turned them into their weapons. They use them to tear away at their own culture until it is defeated. The same tactic was used centuries ago when prisoners were captured and then used as conscripts. It is ignorant to say that taking away someones language isn't violence. violence is spawned from ignorance and intolerance, which the school promoted in order to enforce the " dominant culture".
I strongly agree with the fact that silencing the primary language of a culture is indeed an aggressive act. As Anzaldua implied in essay, one's primary language is his or her identity. It is one thing an indigene can boldly take pride in ." Ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity." Our language is what defines us so a society, nation or group of individuals trying to make a cultural language inexistent or basically doing everything in their power to make it dead is also indirectly ripping the speakers of such language of their identity. "until l I can take pride in my language I cannot take pride in myself". A primary language is what brings about stringer relationships within a community and this all ties back to Toni Morrison's Nobel prize speech in which she used the tower of babel, a story form the bible too illustrate the dangers and ignorance that comes with everyone speaking and focusing on just one language. what I got from She said was that having just one common language isn't going to bring about peace or in other words "heaven". It is the diversity of language that opens up the willingness of we humans to understand or attempt too understand each other. That is when we can experience true peace. Our own little heaven on earth. So once again, denying a group their language is a violation of the first amendment which is also an act of taking away the uniqueness of each individual and this ongoing oppression of cultural and primary languages needs to stop.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Rhoda said. Silencing someone is an aggressive act, and its unlawful. It's a terrible thing to do , especially when it comes to their language. Our culture, our language, it defines us as humans. No other species on this earth can speak the way we do. English, Spanish, German, or even Chinese. Our languages are unique. Like the deaf boys in the podcast we listened to . They didn't know of a language. They were silenced due to their poor resources. The boys didn't even know they were deaf. They were at peace not knowing of a language, but they were also at a disadvantage.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with the statement “punished for speaking a language deemed lesser by an intolerant educational system”, mainly with a language deemed lesser. I do not believe that the education system is trying to diminish other languages, but universalize them. Languages originate in different areas of the world based on the indigenous peoples environment and experiences. In these areas the languages make perfect sense to the people that speak it. However, if you look at one specific area, such as the United States, there is already an established language accepted by the residents and understood because it matches their experiences and environment. As new people enter they begin integrating their own languages and people are expected to add another language to their repertoire, but the “native people” don’t have the same background as the immigrants so the language seems irrelevant to learn. So instead of one area learning all the languages of anyone who has ever immigrated there it is simpler for everyone to learn one common language that is already established in that land. The school system id trying to universalize language so that everyone inhabiting the same area will be able to communicate with one another. This way we avoid a fiasco such as the biblical Tower of Babel.
ReplyDeleteI greatly agree with your analysis and explanation. It is very ignorant and foolish to try to oppress a certain language on a person. Also, trying to silence someone and rob them of one of the best ways to communicate and express an opinion is very wrong. You did a great job explaining why language is important and why this is such a big problem. One of the best examples I know of that addresses a similar situation can be seen in deaf history. In the mid 1900's the deaf were looked at as dumb. They were seen as people with a disability who are lesser and need help. This was a huge issue because the deaf felt like they were fine and they were able to communicate with each other using sign language. However, since it was a common misconception they were dumb and needed help, people in authority thought it would be a good idea to force them to speak. Deaf people are able to speak and as a result people thought they should be forced to learn to lipread and speak. This left the deaf feeling isolated and stupid. It was a very aggressive way of teaching them that signing is no longer tolerable and they were expected to speak english. Thankfully, over time this problem was abolished but without a doubt is one of the most negative times in deaf history. With that being said, language is an important tool that everyone should be able to use in whatever way they want while understanding when used as a weapon, it can have consequences.
ReplyDelete