The Language Imperative: The Power of Language to Enrich Your Life and Expand Your Mind

by Suzette Haden Elgin

Many of us view language as a tool, a means by which to communicate our thoughts and emotions. But is there more to language than just "talk"? Can learning languages actually change the way you think? In The Language Imperative , best-selling author and linguistic scholar Suzette Haden Elgin makes a persuasive case that the linguistic differences between us are not trivial, that language and culture are inextricably linked, and that multilingualism has a profound (and beneficial) effect on the human mind. Drawing on examples from the worlds of medicine, business, religion, and family life, Elgin illustrates that each language learned gains for the speaker another worldview -- perhaps even another personality. This makes it all the more disturbing that many of the world's languages are rapidly disappearing, and that the "English Only" movement is gaining ground. Based on solid science and filled with personal insights, The Language Imperative is required reading for anyone interested in how words shape our lives, both as individuals and as a nation.

Genres: Psychology

304 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2000

About the author

Suzette Haden Elgin was an American science fiction author. She founded the Science Fiction Poetry Association, and is considered an important figure in the field of science fiction constructed languages. Elgin was also a linguist; she published non-fiction, of which the best-known is the Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense series.

Born in 1936 in Missouri, Elgin attended the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) in the 1960s, and began writing science fiction in order to pay tuition. She has a Ph.D. in linguistics, and was the first UCSD student to ever write two dissertations (on English and Navajo). She created the engineered language Láadan for her Native Tongue science fiction series. A grammar and dictionary was published in 1985. She is a supporter of feminist science fiction, saying "women need to realize that SF is the only genre of literature in which it's possible for a writer to explore the question of what this world would be like if you could get rid of [X], where [X] is filled in with any of the multitude of real world facts that constrain and oppress women. Women need to treasure and support science fiction." [1]

In addition, she published works of shorter fiction. Overlying themes in her work include feminism, linguistics and the impact of language, and peaceful coexistence with nature. Many of her works also draw from her Ozark background and heritage.

Elgin became a professor at her alma mater's cross-town rival, San Diego State University (SDSU). She retired in 1980.

Reviews

[George · Rating 3 out of 5]

What follows are just a few random and disparate thoughts on the book. My initial reason for wanting to read this book was sparked by seeing an excerpt from Chapter two of the book itself. The excerpt discussed the "language relativity hypothesis" (LRH) which states that our perception of reality is controlled by our language. This is a very controversial topic which no one appears to be in the middle on. Most either agree emphatically or disagree vehemently. This in itself is quite interesting. The book, while good was a bit disappointing for me since that was not really the main topic of the book as I was led to believe by the review I found on the web.

Instead, The Language Imperative is Elgin's personal crusade to promote interest in multilingualism. The book makes a very good case for it and some very interesting observations about people who know more than one language. Being someone who grew up with two languages myself, I do agree with her view that it leads one to have more than a single perspective on reality. In my case, I've always believed that in having to learn two ways of saying things at an early age, I can today easily switch between different modes of thinking. A definite benefit when it comes to my job working with multiple computer operating systems that use very different approaches to do the same exact thing.

Chapter two was my favorite portion of the book due to the discussion of the Whorf Hypothesis (LRH). It opened with a quote that was not only interesting due to it's content, but also it's structure which Elgin commented on and is something I've noticed in my own work related writing over the years:

"Although all observers may be confronted by the same physical evidence in the form of experiential data and although they may be capable of 'externally similar acts of observation', a person's 'picture of the universe' or 'view of the world' differs as a function of the particular language or languages that person knows". (Lee 1996, page 87)

First you have to claw your way through the linguistic thicket created by the academic register in which that quotation is written. Why is it written like that? One of the rules of Academic Regalian register is that the more you expect other academics to be opposed to what you're saying or writing, the more extreme your use of the register has to be. This is unfortunate because controversial subjects are also subjects about which it's important to be as clear as possible.

The section quoted above was especially interesting to me since I've found that when I am writing work related documents supporting or opposing certain decisions in the IT arena, I do tread into a lighter version of "Academic Regalian register". I try to anticipate all possible opposition to my points and refute each one preemptively. I've sensed this in my writing for some time but never really had anyone explain exactly what the tonal difference in my writing is when I do so.

Another interesting concept that I picked up from the book is that of the "lexical gap". Generally this refers to the lack of a simple word or phrase that accurately describes a concept, object, or action. She discusses lexical gaps throughout the book. One of the more interesting ones is the notion of a "water baby" which is an idea that is expressed in the Japanese language and culture. Americans have no equivalent. A water baby is a fetus that was either stillborn or intentionally terminated. The water baby is still considered a valued member of the family and as such, special shrines are built to remember the water baby. The shrines are visited yearly and gifts are placed there. The water baby is discussed with reverence and love and even joy at being able to visit the shrine. Putting aside the awkwardness this idea would pose to most Americans, it is fairly obvious to see that we have no simple word or phrase to describe it. This, is a lexical gap as well as a cultural one.

A somewhat surprising revelation is made when Elgin discusses the English sentence, "I was riding a horse" and it's translation into Navajo. To many people, the process of translating from one language to another is to simply locate like terms, where possible, and then construct the same sentence in the foreign language. After that, you work on the grammar to take any variations into account, and finally add some linguistic polish to try and make sure you're sounding like a native speaker of the foreign language. This assumption is generally wrong. Some languages differ so much from each other that the actions, subjects and objects are so specific to the culture and are viewed from such a different perspective, that this approach will simply fail. This is true of the Navajo language and the simple phrase "I was riding a horse".

To begin with, in the Navajo language, no one or nothing does something to something or someone else. You can't ride a horse. There is no proper verb for that action because it's not a possibility at all. The closest thing to riding a horse that you can say in the Navajo language is that you were moving with the horse. Even with that knowledge, you would also need to know whether or not the person moving with the horse was going from point A to point B with no intention of returning. Or are they going from point A to point B and then coming back to point A again? Or are they just moving with the horse aimlessly? According to Elgin, this only scratches the surface of translating that sentence. Imagine how that affects a person's perception of the world around them.

Yet another difference that she takes from the Navajo language is where the focal point is placed during observation of some action. An American speaking parent would say to their child, "Look! A ball!' if a ball bounced past their child. A Navajo parent would say, "Look! Bouncing"! Although it's a subtle difference and has only a minor impact on what is the more important focal point of reality in this case, it clearly illustrates just how much language can change your perspective on the world around you.

In preparation for writing the book, Elgin sent out a survey to a group of multilingual participants and asked various questions (the survey is included in the back of the book). One of the questions asked was, "Does speaking another language make you feel like a different person"? The results proved interesting as they were just as polarized as the opinions on the LRH. No one took a middle ground stance. After Elgin spent a good deal of time supporting the LRH, she then suggests a reason for such identical reactions to the LRH and her survey question. Instead of saying the the LRH applies to everyone, perhaps it only applies to those who agree with it and that it has no bearing on those that don't. She then says the same about the reactions to her survey question. Maybe some people are "wired" in ways that determine these relationships to their languages. I found this very interesting.

The topic of presupposition is interesting as well. Many languages have this property including English. It's possible for us to say, "Pick that up" in the appropriate context and to have the listener know exactly what "that" is. This is presupposition. We assume ahead of time that the person we're communicating with already has some information, so we don't consider the possibility that they don't. In the chapter on religion and language, she points out that presupposition plays a very large role in religious speech: Whether or not you share another person's beliefs, you absolutely must assume that they firmly believe what they are saying and you cannot discard their thoughts outright. It is presupposed on their part that their beliefs are true fact. This is why there is so much tension when religion is the topic. The person who is not a believer of the religion involved can very clumsily and possibly quite unintentionally be very offensive.

The rest of the book is broken up into chapters discussing language and how it relates to and affects, medicine, business, and the family and concludes with the last two chapters focused on the benefits of knowing more than one language. All of this information is used to support her suggestion that if everyone knew more than one language and it was a requirement of societies around the world, it would have the potential to create many positive benefits. She even toys with the idea of one language that everyone in the world would know and then points out the potential problems that would cause as well. Would we lose cultures considering how tightly intertwined language and culture are? (This is very controversial for some) Would we lose our current diversity of language and end up with a linguistic monoculture? If so, what possible negative side effects could that have? Overall, I believe Elgin achieves her goal. In my case it's awakened an interest in my to strengthen my knowledge of my second language and then perhaps try and pick up with some of the languages I tried to learn earlier in my life.

If you are interested in languages and other cultures, the book is a fairly fascinating read. If you believe that the mind can be affected by language, there are some interesting parts in the book as well. She also makes a few recommendations on other books that go into more depth on a few of the topics she discusses. One of those books is on my to-read shelf. I think it was definitely a good book for fans of multilingualism. It just wasn't what I expected which was not due to any failing of the book. However, I am glad that I read it and would recommend it if it sounds interesting to you based on my review.

[Lee · Rating 4 out of 5]

I have had a love for language learning for my entire adult life (starting in the teenage years) and have long been fascinated by linguistic and cultural differences. I had never heard of Haden Elgin until I was browsing the small language section of my little local public library and saw this book. Of course, I had to check it out.

Although the title does not clearly state it, this book presents an argument for multilingualism and the benefits multilingualism can bring to both individuals and greater society. She provides specific examples to first illustrate how language is necessarily contextual and culturally constructed, and that it also provides clues to cultural expressions and perspectives. She then illustrates how these expressions and perceptions can influence our individual views, whether about ourselves or others, or the social policies and unwritten "laws" that govern us. These theories extend specifically to the worlds of medicine, business, family, and religion, where language influences and reveals individual and cultural perceptions and exposure to new linguistic encounters allows one to expand a worldview. After making the case for multilingualism, she argues why a one language policy (whether national or global) is a terrible idea and encourages instead openness to language learning and linguistic diversity. The final chapter about language and the brain is the weakest. This chapter was of particular interest to me as I am interested lately in learning about language learning and brain cognition, but it was the weakest out of the book.

Haden Elgin's book is engaging, informative, and eye-opening. She writes in a clear, thoughtful, and sophisticated manner, but does not assume an overly academic tone that burdens many linguists. I wish everyone would read this book to understand the importance of linguistic diversity, especially in the current climate in the United States whereby many people are openly and publicly harassing people who speak languages other than English and yelling at them to go back from wherever they are assumed to come from (often an unfortunately incorrect assumption) . Not fearing linguistic difference and diversity (and thereby the people who contribute to such an ideal) would move us forward to a more tolerable and enriched life and community.