Language

Children’s acquisition of language has long been considered one of the uniquely defining characteristics of human behaviour.

Yet, it is today the commonly held belief that children acquire their mother tongue through imitation of the parents, caregivers or the people in their environment. Linguists too had the same certainty until a then relatively unknown man, A. Noam Chomsky, put forward his theory that the capacity to acquire language is in fact inborn. This revolutionized the study of language acquisition, and after a brief period of controversy upon the publication of his book his theories are now generally accepted as largely true. Experiments have clearly identified an ability to discern syntactical nuances in very young infants, although they are still at the pre-linguistic stage. Children of three, however, are able to manipulate very complicated syntactical sentences, although they are unable to tie their own shoelaces, for example. At only the age of three, most children, bred in a good environment have a word power of 1000. Indeed, language is not a skill such as many others, like learning to drive or perform mathematical operations – it cannot be taught as such in these early stages. Rather, it is the acquisition of language which fascinates linguists today, and how it is possible.

Language is the most powerful tool that we can use throughout out lives. Everybody has a language. Blind have Braille, deaf and/or dumb have sign language and to think, even animals have a language- each to their own understanding. Any means of communication can be considered a language and any language is a way of knowing. Well, if you see language can result in gaining information as well as giving information (something in Physics were Newton’s third law informally states that “Every action has an equal and opposite reaction” and so you give and gain at the same time). This is however, my opinion only and has been the base of a debate for many, many years. People still question whether language is really a source of knowledge and how the 2 are related. Hans Reichenbach said that “if you can’t say it then you don’t know it” but in agreement with Michael Polanyi, I believe that “I know more than I can say.” How can somebody describe all of his / her emotions, how can somebody describe an experience which he/she feels only he/she has experienced? I may not something but not put it in words, I have felt this and I am sure everybody else has too.

Language in essence is related to almost all other factors of knowledge. Say for example truth, we need to understand what a sentence means before we can decide whether it is true or false. It is true that a great deal of language is ambiguous and there is an element of interpretation built into all communication. The following cartoon given to us is suggestive of this last statement and shows how “it started after they learned to talk”:

Since there was man, there was language. Since there was language, there was war (in some form or the other. In this case even referring to a simple argument). It is all about your own belief and your interpretation of what the other person is saying. If you don’t agree and/or have misunderstood the meaning of what the other person has said, it could lead to fights. Language can be used for the negative. Adolf Hitler is the most appropriate example for this. Through all his speeches he seduced the Germans to believe that Jews were not worthy of living.

True, ‘language is power’ and the ‘pen is mightier than the sword’ but that is only in its effect. It can be for good and for bad. We have seen the bad. Now let’s look at the good. On August 28, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. delivered a speech regarded as one of the most famous in all of history. A speech that has inspired, uplifted, and challenged humans throughout the world to dream of a more perfect world... for all people.

Swami Vivekananda opened his address to The World’s Parliament of Religions with the most humble “Sisters and Brothers of America” and this earned him wide applause. It showed the Western world that the ‘other side’ is human. It conveyed a powerful message of oneness and ignited a fire of brotherhood amongst not only the Americans but the world. Yes, there are wars, terrorism but there is also love in this world, love for each other, love for the world, love for knowledge and love for the word! “ As the different streams having there sources in different places all mingle their water in the sea, so, O Lord, the different paths which men take through different tendencies, various though they appear, crooked or straight, all lead to Thee.” All people are ultimately one, made of the same dust that planets are made of. They are different in having a different language but they language conveys the same thing except in a different form.

Of the many well delivered and influential speeches I have read, former U.S. President John F. Kennedy. He brought together the states of the U.S.A. and brought equality to each. He spoke of the need for all Americans to be active citizens. "Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country", he said. He also asked the nations of the world to join together to fight what he called the "common enemies of man: tyranny, poverty, disease, and war itself." He motivated the world to unite through his words.

Oratory is designed to persuade, to provoke action and reaction. For perceptual theorists, persuasion operates by altering the person's perception of any object or of his attitudes. Advertising can be seen as a subvariety of oratory. In oratory words - language - are obviously powerful. Examples of successful oratory are hardly necessary: Khomeini, Luther, De Gaulle, Churchill, Hitler, Danton, John Wesley. Given the power of oratory, there is something to explain. How does the orator through the power of words succeed? How can words mould the minds of individuals and form them into a group, and then control the action of the group? What is the power derived from?

Although language may not determine our experience of reality, it certainly can influence it- Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. It is through words that the United Nations comes to decisions for the betterment of our world. Even the United Nations has fiery debates in different languages but people perceive it as one- the language of negotiation and peace. They learn of other nations and of their own and know when to initiate what kind of action through this. The significance of language as such in the evolution and development of human beings and human societies has been immense.

Language is the activists’ tool against injustice. With such a power, we are capable of stirring up the emotions of people. We are capable of making them passionate about an issue. We can give people the motivation to change themselves and change the world. So challenge yourself to take a speech class, or facilitate a meeting in your district. Read a book on public speaking or maybe even study the speeches of some famous leaders. Anything. Speak up and speak out loud. Learning these tools and becoming a better leader, makes us one step closer to the world that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. so boldly envisioned on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial 40 years ago. We have to continue the legacy and motivate people for the next generation.

We have thus seen that language has been existent as long as man. A child is born with a the blue-prints and just needs the tools provided by its environment to acquire a lingual sense. That child can then use this knowledge to perhaps change the world- for good or for worse but that does not matter. It only shows that language is a source of knowledge and knowledge is a source of power and thus in essence- language is a source of power.”