CDA: Identity and language

[John E Richardson]

hi all,

I absolutely agree with Linnea on this. I thought about responding a day
or so ago, but I am now glad I didn't: not being a 'trained' linguist
myself, I thought that Limmea's summary of the Whorfian position was put
so much better than I could have written.
In fact I have little else to add, other than to say that identity is
never fixed; always in flux; is a process rather than a product. -
Actually, thinking about it in this way meshes quite well with Cicero's
previous questions RE structuralism & post-structuralism. We can think
of identity in terms of continuity and change: we are always tempted to
see identity synchronically, that is as a static product, but it must be
considered diachronically, that is dynamic process.

Of course at any point, we all simultaneously possess a range of
identities, roles and characteristics that could be used to describe us
equally accurately but not with the same *meaning*. Some of these roles
- and even identities - may stand in conflict with each other. The
manner in which social actors are named identifies not only the group(s)
that they are associated with (or at least the groups that the
speaker/writer wants them to be associated with) it can also signal the
relationship between the namer and the named. As Blommaert (2005: 11)
explains:

Apart from referential meaning, acts of communication produce indexical
meaning: social meaning, interpretative leads between what is said and
the social occasion in which it is being produced. Thus the word ‘sir’
not only refers to a male individual, but it indexes a particular social
status and the role relationships of deference and politeness entailed
by this status

Reisigl and Wodak (2001) have called these naming options a text’s
“referential strategies”. Take this example: in an article reporting the
(temporary) defeat in the House of Lords of New Labour’s attempt to
introduce indefinite house arrest (Lord Irvine joins rebellion as peers
inflict defeat on anti-terror Bill, Independent 8 March 2005), the
Conservative Earl of Onslow is quoted asking: 

Why, if the Home Secretary thinks Mohammad el-Smith wants to do
something and is planning to do something and has talked to others about
doing something nasty, that is not a conspiracy?

The name “Mohammad el-Smith” is a clever variation on the name ‘Joe
Bloggs’ or the American ‘John Doe’: this is the hypothetical ‘average
man’, or in this case, the hypothetical ‘average terrorist’. Here, Smith
– the most common family name in Britain – is combined with Mohammed, a
name understandably associated with Islam. It is through the use of
‘Mohammad’ as a first name that the Earl implies (or perhaps lets slip)
he believes the hypothetical average terrorist suspect to be Muslim.

thanks for reading this far!

best

John


> Hi,
> 
> I think the matter of language and identity is a rich concept - and
highly 
> relevant to CDA.  
> 
> As far as second language learning goes (Cicero's quote), there is the 
> Whorfian interpretation that, as language and cognition are inextricably 
> linked (with language driving cognition) a new language would give the 
> learner access to new concepts, and therefore lead the learner to grow as 
> an individual. I agree with this idea, although I think other (non-
> lingustics) knowledge/experience, such as mountain-climbing, deep sea 
> diving, or changing one's socio-economic class or culture, can also
expand 
> one's cognitive horizons and alter one's identity.  
> 
> The quote defining identity as, "the linguistic construction of
membership 
> in one or more social groups or categories" is very interesting to me, 
> because it suggests that individuals only have power over their
identity if 
> they control the linguistic constructions that define them.  As an
example, 
> an individual who might want to define herself as "mother" or "American" 
> may instead be linguistically constructed as "welfare recipient" or
"poor" 
> by discourses that are beyond her control.  It's actually a compelling 
> question to consider how much of a person's identity is
self-determined "I 
> am _____." rather than other-determined "You are _____." 
> 
> Linnea
> 
> On Fri, 23 Sep 2005 01:13:27 +0900, =?ISO-2022-JP?B?
> GyRCP3k/ORsoQiAbJEJFNTtSGyhC?= <n_sugimori at YAHOO.CO.JP> wrote:
> 
> >Hi,
> >
> >What an intriguing question! I am more interested in the
> >material you read!
> >
> >Paul V. Kroskrity defines identity as "Identity is defined
> >as the linguistic construction of membership in one or
> >more social groups or categories"(Key Terms in Language
> >and Culture, 2001, edited by Alessandro Duranti, p. 106).
> >
> >Let me share my personal experience with you. Japanese is
> >my L1 and English is my L2 (I feel I am an L2 learner
> >rather than a balanced bilingual.) When I talk about Japan
> >in English, I feel that my identity is different from how
> >I was years ago when I had not been exposed to English. I
> >cannot explain more clearly, but I will continue to think
> >about it.
> >
> >Best,
> >
> >Noriko Sugimori
> >
> >
> >--- C�ero_Barbosa <cicerobarbosa at GMAIL.COM>  $B$+$i (B
> > $B$N%a%C%;!<%8!' (B
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> Something I read one of these days has really called
> >> my attention:
> >>
> >> "He who learns a new language is redefining himself
> >> as a new person".
> >>
> >> This was concerning identity and language learning.
> >> I would like to
> >> get comments from you on it: in what sense does it
> >> mean to "redefine
> >> oneself as a new person"? What do you understand by
> >> that?
> >>
> >> I really wish we could talk about it. Thanks,
> >>
> >> C�ero
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> 2005/9/20, Linnea Micciulla <polyglot at bu.edu>:
> >> > Hi everyone,
> >> >
> >> > I haven't had any specific reading suggestions
> >> from anyone, but I was
> >> > contacted offline by a list member from Egypt who
> >> was interested in "the
> >> > interconnections between bureaucracy and power,"
> >> and specifically
> >> > bureaucrat-client interactions.  Does anyone have
> >> any suggestions for readings?
> >> >
> >> > In the meantime, below is a reminder of this
> >> month's reading, and a couple
> >> > of suggestions for October and November.  The
> >> October suggestion is from
> >> > Sociological Quarterly, and Phil Graham has a
> >> pre-publication version of the
> >> > Journal of Language and Politics article on his
> >> website, so both of the
> >> > articles for October and November should be
> >> accessible to everyone on the
> >> > list.  Please let me know if you are having
> >> trouble finding anything!
> >> >
> >> > Best,
> >> > Linnea
> >> >
> >> > *******
> >> >
> >> > SEPTEMBER:
> >> > Koller, V. (2005). "Critical discourse analysis
> >> and social cognition:
> >> > evidence from business media discourse." Discourse
> >> & Society 16(2):199-224.
> >> >
> >> > OCTOBER:
> >> > THE SYMBOLIC CONSTRUCTION OF RUSSIA AND THE UNITED
> >> STATES ON RUSSIAN
> >> > NATIONAL TELEVISION. Philo C. Wasburn and Barbara
> >> Ruth Burke. The
> >> > Sociological Quarterly, Volume 38, Number 4, pages
> >> 669-686. 1997.
> >> >
> >> > NOVEMBER:
> >> > Graham, P. & Luke, A. (2005). The language of
> >> neofeudal corporatism and the
> >> > war on Iraq. Journal of Language & Politics, 4
> >> (1).  (Pre-publication
> >> > available here:
> >> >
> >>
> >http://www.philgraham.net/Graham%20and%20Luke%20-%20Final%20L&P.pdf)
> >> >
> >>
> 
> 

John E Richardson
Dept of Social Sciences
Loughborough University