CDA: Identity and language

Tue Sep 27 03:47:20 UTC 2005

Dear colleagues,

the idea that learning a new language produces some kind of change in
the learner's identity comes from a conception of identity as
something not fixed, not unitary, but rather multiple, constituted by
language. We can find this in Chris Weedon's book (Feminist Practice
and Poststructuralist Theory) and Stuart Hall's books. Even learners
who are in the classroom, in contexts where the target language is a
foreign language (not a second language, which is spoken/used in many
other contexts in that place), the new language may produce changes in
that person's identity. Kanavillil Rajagopalan also talks about it,
saying that the foreign language classroom is an arena for identity
clashes. What do you think about it? See you!

Cícero

2005/9/26, Esmat Babaii <ebabaii at gmail.com>:
> Dear Friends,
>
> The question of identity and maybe changing your identity by learning a
> second language is really interesting. I actually agree with Noriko. When I
> say the same thing in English or Persain (my first language) I don't have
> the same feeling. My exposure to English made me a more a extrovert, and
> confident person than I used to be. It may be interesting for you to know
> that in early years after the revolution, revolutionary officials in Iran
> were quite sensitive about the English language professors at the
> universities, but not others. They thought these people are 'brainwashed'
> and can negatively affect the naive students!!!! On the other hand, many
> believed that learning Arabic makes you closer to God, as this is the
> language chosen by Allah to talk to Prophet Mohammad. So, you see that
> people have this intuition about the effect of L2 or L3 on personality and
> identity. This is a very good topic for investigation.
>
> Esmat Babaii
>
>
> On 9/23/05, John E Richardson <johnerichardson at cds-web.net> wrote:
> > 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
> >
>
>