Language and Thought in Developmental Pyschology

The connection between language and cognition is difficult to fathom in its entirety. As a result, different fields have developed their own approaches to this problem. One theory I find especially interesting is Lev Vygotsky’s Social Learning theory in the field of developmental psychology because it approaches language as a key to cognitive development by linking people to the social sphere. In Vygotskyan thought, thinking is a result of internalizing the social processes in which we were raised. While not all thought occurs in language, Vygotsky claims that a sort of “inner speech” (Christy, 2013, p. 201) evolves as the result of speech based interactions with other individuals. In this framework, language is a key to socialization, and through joint attention of the child and an adult “The system of representation… can in turn be directed inward, with the internalization of dialogue making a shift from intersubjective to subjective communication” (Christy, 2013, p. 201).

               This perspective on language and thought not only indicates that the two are inextricable at many levels but gives a subtle nod to the ways that culture affects how we think and who we are. Because of internalization, joint attention becomes individual attention. Put another way, “language in this way becomes… a means of directing one’s own attention” (Christy, 2013, p. 201). This relates well to our class discussions, particularly to grammar. As Salzmann and his colleagues note (2015, p. 364-365), grammatical gender does appear to bias memory and associations of various concepts. This confirms Vygotsky’s thoughts because it means that language teaches us what to pay attention to as individuals via social interaction. Vygotsky’s work illustrates that language is a connector for culture and thought, allowing cultural ideas to be internalized and processed through education.

References:

Christy, T.C. (2013). Vygotsky, cognitive development and language: new perspectives on the nature of grammaticalization. Historica Linguistica 40 (1/2), 201. Retrieved from EBSCOHost.

Salzmann, Z., Stanlaw, J., & Adachi, N. (2015). Language, culture, and society (6^th ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Steven Le Blanc: Nonverbal Communication Blogpost

Inspired by various discussions I’ve had in my introduction to linguistic anthropology course, I have chosen to blog about non-verbal communication. According to Fatik Mandal (2014), nonverbal communication is defined as the behavior that “includes all communicative acts except speech”. Nonverbal communication is much like speech; humans perform both behaviors without having to think too much about it most of the time. Arguably, nonverbal communication conveys just as much information as speech does in a conversation. Mandal (2014) touches base on this phenomenon in his section on “interpretation of nonverbal behavior”. The people that demonstrate “good listening skills, have self-depicting humor . . . and show courteous behavior” (Mandal 2014) are likely classifiable as humble or insecure. Similarly, those who “keep greater than average distance from others, bore easily and quit listening,” etc, come a crossed as arrogant.

Similarly, did you know that effective salespersons must have a working understanding of appropriate nonverbal communication? A recent study conducted by Dr. K. Sri Gayathridevi, a Professor at the PSG Institute of Management, analyzed a random sample of 950 surveys a crossed 11 retail stores in order to determine the most important aspect of nonverbal communication in face to face interactions. The results of the study found that customers “considered smile, eye contact and facial expression to be the most important nonverbal cues” (Gayathridevi 2013). I read this and thought of similar encounters I have had in my life (like when I didn’t buy something I was interested in because the salesperson was kind of creepy)!

I find that I do many things subconsciously (like making facial gestures, nodding my head, etc), which in a sense is my way of nonverbally broadcasting something to the people around me. Are there nuances about how you nonverbally communicate with others that reveal truths about yourself?

References:

Mandal, Fatik B. (2014). Nonverbal communication in humans. Journal of human behavior in the social environment, 24, 417-421.

Gayathridevi, K. S. (2013). A study on nonverbal communication of salespersons and their service behavior towards customers in a sales encounter. Journal of contemporary research in management, 8(4), n.p.

Speech Community Diversity

A speech community is “All those who share specific rules for speaking and interpreting speech and at least one speech variety” (Salzmann, Stanlaw, & Adachi, 2015, p. 266). Everybody belongs to many speech communities. The diversity of speech communities in an individual’s life is fascinating. They all share important characteristics, but also have traits that make them distinct.

One of the main concepts that ties speech communities together is kinship terms. These terms indicate social status and often are apparent in the level of politeness of the speaker and honorifics used by the speaker (Salzmann, et al., 2015, p. 218). We often use these without thinking about them. They are determined by the context, or speech situation, in which we are speaking (Salzmann, et al., 2015, p. 268). Unless they are trying to cause a disturbance a speaker is going to use a completely different tone in a classroom than they are going to employ at the bar on Saturday night. They are also going to use different language.

 The difference in language used in different speech situations is intriguing. Even within the context of a classroom or bar, the speech community can be different, and therefore the form of language used will be dissimilar. Within a classroom, a student is going to use a different tone and vocabulary when discussing their weekend with their peer than they are going to utilize when discussing a reading assignment with the instructor. The similarities are interesting, but the differences found in speech communities make studying them captivating.

References:

Salzmann, Z., Stanlaw, J., & Adachi, N. (2015). Language, culture, and society (2nd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Welcome

Welcome to Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology (ANTH 2000) at the University of Wyoming this fall semester of 2016. Please come back to check on updates from our students.

-Tony Fitzpatrick