Language and Culture - Essay Example

Language and Culture 1. Introduction We often make judgements about texts- this is a good essay, this is a badly written novel. Are these judgements based on universal features of communication or are they culturally conditioned responses? People respond and judge text with varying result and many believes that it is more of a culturally-conditioned response than one based on universal features of language or communication. It is therefore necessary to study the various aspects of human behavioural patterns and responses in criticizing literary works. The following section discusses some of the most important concept of people’s behavioural pattern and explains how this behavior relates to literary criticism. 2. The Humans Behavioural Pattern One might say that the behavioural pattern of the physiological organism is totally conditioned or limited by its own make up, such as sense organs and all the other parts which have built-in codes of conduct. The creation of coded symbols in the form of language, ideas and images according to Malik (1989), is part of the socio-cultural pattern within which one is brought up (p.86). Moreover, pleasure is also learned and often a conditioned response to certain stimuli (Kellner, 1995). In fact, any act of behaviour including reactive ones such as shame and fear can describe as being culturally conditioned (Tsivian, Taylor, & Bodger 1994). The psychological purpose of humans for instance, is not rooted in original attractions and aversion such as attraction to sweets or to smiles, or the dislike to pain. Most conscious psychological purposes are “highly derived” (Milikan, 2004, p.6), distantly rooted in a variety of more original attractions and aversions, mediated by a number of beliefs, true or false, about causes and effects, and about other aspects of the environment. Often, people accept things as good not because it comes naturally but dictated by culture (Millar 2004). There is also some evidence that even ‘swearing’ is a learned behavior and culturally conditioned response to the experience of certain conditions (Montagu 2001). 3. Universal Features of Communication and Socio-Cultural Specificity The claim that a person’s critical power is grounded in universal features of language and does not purely emanate from a particular social context is questionable because according to Allen (2008), it cannot maintain an empirical basis, as it does not acknowledge the social-cultural specificity of that perspective (p.140). Communication between different cultures depends on the different cultures being able to develop a common understanding and we cannot fully understand any process of human communication without understanding the social context in which it occurs (Hartley 1999). We all have a range of hereditary responses, and the circumstances in which they are elicited depend on our particular learning history. When an adult human is happy, angry, or scared, this reaction consists of several factors. Altogether, responses or emotion is not hereditary but to a great degree is shaped by the experience of the particular individual (Ramnero & Torneke, 2008). 4. Ideological Criticism Some people believe that the ability of a literary critic to stand outside the boundary of values which are entirely culturally conditioned is his best quality. This is because those according to Carruthers, Goldies, & Renfrew (2004) who are purely inside a culture cannot know that culture properly because they are totally shaped by it (p.249). It is therefore necessary to note that a person must be independent of the influence of their culture to become a good critic. Ideological criticism locates the meaning of the text not in the author of the text, not in the world behind the text, and not in the text per se, but in the encounter between the text and the reader (Wimbush & Rodman, 2001). These are the readers, who contrary to the enlightenment ideals of neutrality and fairness, are always fascinated and always historically and culturally conditioned. Their interpretive strategies are circumscribed by their particular social locations, as influenced by factors such as race and ethnicity, class, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, socio-political stance, and religious background (Wimbush & Rodman, 2001). 5. The Social Context of the Literary Text or Essay The social context of the literary text is both acknowledge and at the same time reinserted into the framework of literary activity. Hall and Hobson (1992) explain that the critical act of reading, interpretation, and judgement is “fundamentally a social act” (p.221). For instance, although an aesthetic response is culturally conditioned as taste differs even among those within a single culture, the phenomenon of aesthetic response always remains selective since “nobody finds everything beautiful” (Eeckhout 2002, p.21). Criticism according to Kilcup & Edwards (1999) is propelled by the need to get things right rather than the desire to connect with readers. This adversarial method excludes the use of emotional response as part of its process of understanding. This is because emotions are culturally conditioned acts of communication that differ from group to group (Wilcox 2000). Emotions are transitory social roles and socially prescribed set of responses to be followed by a person in a given situation. The rules governing the response consist of social norms or shared expectation regarding appropriate behavior (Goodwin & Jasper 2009). Language and culture have a distinctive interrelationship and with the inception of culture, human behaviours responds to artificial, external patterns, social behavior becomes “culturally modified and variable” (Hinkle 1994, p.179). The recognition that the author does not control the whole meaning of his or her text prepared the way for ‘reader-response criticism’, with its emphasis on the reader as a source of meaning-giving, a source conditioned by cultural experience, conscious or unconscious, by social and sexual roles, by ideological assumptions, and so forth (Makaryk, 1993). For instance, art criticism is informed by an understanding of one’s own cultural and socio-political role in relation to the object of one’s criticism. An art critic does not have to make art in order to criticise since he or she has only to recognize her own creative process of criticism as a response to a socially and culturally conditioned object or situation. This kind of behavior is therefore in contrast with the belief that a critic may impersonally obliterate himself and his subjectivity in order to accurately deliver his criticism objectively (Piper 1999). People who read or view an object, for instance a film, are conditioned by the time, place, society, or institutions, which they inhabit. Their responses are bound to be affected by these factors which will influence either consciously or unconsciously their interpretations of what they see (Santas, 2002). In other words, individual response whether conscious or unconscious is unavoidable since the reader’s or viewer’s preconceived notions determines the meaning of what he or she views or reads. Through the medium of words, the text brings into the reader’s consciousness certain concepts, certain sensuous experiences, and certain images of things, people, actions, or scenes. The special meanings and the submerged associations that the words and images have for the individual reader will largely determine what the work communicates. The reader brings to the work personality traits, memories of the past events, present needs and preoccupations, a particular mood of the moment, and a particular physical condition. The reader makes choices, both conscious and subconscious. The reader selects those that fit with what has already been evoked and a dominant perception or purpose in the reader may activate or emphasize certain features or language over other that could skew the reading event to conform to the current circumstances. Moreover, close identification with characters or events may intensify the response. Social and cultural contextual differences are reflected in the reader’s choices since involvement and interest are conditioned by perceived identity with or distance from the culture and characters, issues, and events (Karolides, 2000). According to Stephens & Waterhouse (1990), readers are never as free as some ‘reader-response’ criticism suggest since the pertinent issues are how aware readers of the processes of textual manipulation are and to what extent that awareness should be cultivated. The circumstances with which individual writers and readers communicate via the text are conditioned by the fact that neither writing nor reading can escape its historical, social, ideological and linguistic context (p.259). 6. The Text and the Reader The creation of any literary work is culturally conditioned and as a result, the reaction to the literary work are similarly culturally conditioned (Malak, 2004). A text cannot have an existence independent of its readers, who recreate the text through bringing their own culturally-conditioned views and attitudes to bear on it. Each reader recreates the text as it is read because no reading is ever the same. This makes readers active, vital participants in the reading process, rather than mere passive recipients of accepted ideas. If readers are actively creating new meanings, then logically this means that the text cannot contain any single fixed permanent meaning (Beard, 2001). Reading whether individually or collectively, silently or out loud is an engaged activity in which reader’s perception of a printed object are fitted into certain cognitive frames through which sense is made out of what is presented to them. Such cognitive frames resulted from individuals past experiences in a given context and are conditioned socially and culturally. Even the most mechanical of reading generates mental associations of some kind with past experience. It evokes some situation, some place, some persons, some dream, and so forth. Reading therefore is generally not passive and takes place in the context of the reader’s horizon of expectations. The meaning of a text, literary or not, is constructed in the interaction between the reader’s expectations and anticipations and the text’s material and discursive form (Vera 2003). A reader’s understanding therefore is not independent of the situation that enables it, a cultural situation composing the discourses that constitute both texts and readers (Delany 1994). 7. Conclusion The behavioural pattern of individual is completely conditioned or restricted by its own make up and codes of conduct. Any act of behaviour whether reactive or not is culturally conditioned and people accept things good or because of culture and certainly does not come naturally. The critical act of reading, interpretation, and judgement is social act as humans respond to artificial and external patterns thus their social behaviours are culturally modified and variable. Criticism on text is therefore informed by understanding of owns cultural and socio-political role. Since literary works are usually culturally conditioned, the responses to it are similarly culturally conditioned. Reading in whatever form is engaging in activity in which reader’s perceptions are matched with a certain cognitive frames based on past experiences that is socially and culturally conditioned. The meaning of text whether literary or just plain text is created through the combination of reader’s expectations and anticipations and the material and discursive form of the text. 8. Reference List Allen A. (2008), The politics of our selves: power, autonomy, and gender in contemporary critical theory, US: Columbia University Press Beard A. (2001), Texts and contexts: introducing literature and language study, US: Routledge Carruthers G., Goldie D., & Renfrew A., (2004), Beyond Scotland: new contexts for twentieth Century Scottish literature, Netherlands: Rodopi Colebrook C. (1997), New Literary Histories: Theory After Poststructualism, US: Manchester University Press ND Delany S. (1994). Chaucer's house of fame: the poetics of skeptical fideism. US: University Press of Florida Eeckhout B., (2002), Wallace Stevens and the limits of reading and writing. US: University of Missouri Press Goodwin J & Jasper J. M. (2009), Social Movements Reader: Cases and Concepts, Singapore: John Wiley and Sons Hall S. & Hobson D. (1992), Culture, media, language: working papers in cultural studies, 1972-79, UK: Routledge Hartley P. (1999), Interpersonal communication, UK: Routledge Karolides N. J. (2000), Reader response in secondary and college classrooms, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Kellner D. (1995), Media culture: cultural studies, identity, and politics between the modern and the postmodern, US: Routledge Kilcup K. L. & Edwards T. S. (1999), Jewett and her contemporaries: reshaping the Canon, US: University Press of Florida Hinkle R. C., (1994), Developments in American sociological theory, 1915-1950, US: SUNY Press Makaryk I. R. (1993), Encyclopedia of contemporary literary theory: approaches, scholars, terms, Canada: University of Toronto Press Malak A. (2004), Muslim narratives and the discourse of English, US: SUNY Press Malik S. C. (1989). Modern Civilization: A Crisis of Fragmentation. Delhi: Abhinav Publications Millikan R. G. (2004), Varieties of meaning: the 2002 Jean Nicod lectures, US: MIT Press Montagu A. (2001), The Anatomy of Swearing, US: University of Pennsylvania Press Piper A. (1999), Out of Order, Out of Sight: Selected Writings in Art Criticism 1967-1992, US: MIT Press Ramnerö J. & Törneke N., (2008), The ABCs of Human Behavior: Behavioral Principles for the Practicing Clinician, US: New Harbinger Publications Santas C. (2002), Responding to Film: A Text Guide for Students of Cinema Art, US: Rowman & Littlefield Stephens J. & Waterhouse R. (1990), Literature, language and change: from Chaucer to the present, UK: Taylor & Francis Tsivian Y., Taylor R., Bodger A. (1994), Early cinema in Russia and its cultural reception, UK: Routledge Vera E. R. (2003), The British book trade and Spanish American independence: education and knowledge transmission of knowledge in transcontinental perspective, UK: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. Wilcox J. (2000), Humour in Anglo-Saxon literature, UK: Boydell & Brewer Wimbush V. L. & Rodman R. C. (2001), African Americans and the Bible: Sacred Texts and Social Structures, US: Continuum International Publishing Group Read More

We all have a range of hereditary responses, and the circumstances in which they are elicited depend on our particular learning history. When an adult human is happy, angry, or scared, this reaction consists of several factors. Altogether, responses or emotion is not hereditary but to a great degree is shaped by the experience of the particular individual (Ramnero & Torneke, 2008). 4. Ideological Criticism Some people believe that the ability of a literary critic to stand outside the boundary of values which are entirely culturally conditioned is his best quality.

This is because those according to Carruthers, Goldies, & Renfrew (2004) who are purely inside a culture cannot know that culture properly because they are totally shaped by it (p.249). It is therefore necessary to note that a person must be independent of the influence of their culture to become a good critic. Ideological criticism locates the meaning of the text not in the author of the text, not in the world behind the text, and not in the text per se, but in the encounter between the text and the reader (Wimbush & Rodman, 2001).

These are the readers, who contrary to the enlightenment ideals of neutrality and fairness, are always fascinated and always historically and culturally conditioned. Their interpretive strategies are circumscribed by their particular social locations, as influenced by factors such as race and ethnicity, class, gender, sexual orientation, nationality, socio-political stance, and religious background (Wimbush & Rodman, 2001). 5. The Social Context of the Literary Text or Essay The social context of the literary text is both acknowledge and at the same time reinserted into the framework of literary activity.

Hall and Hobson (1992) explain that the critical act of reading, interpretation, and judgement is “fundamentally a social act” (p.221). For instance, although an aesthetic response is culturally conditioned as taste differs even among those within a single culture, the phenomenon of aesthetic response always remains selective since “nobody finds everything beautiful” (Eeckhout 2002, p.21). Criticism according to Kilcup & Edwards (1999) is propelled by the need to get things right rather than the desire to connect with readers.

This adversarial method excludes the use of emotional response as part of its process of understanding. This is because emotions are culturally conditioned acts of communication that differ from group to group (Wilcox 2000). Emotions are transitory social roles and socially prescribed set of responses to be followed by a person in a given situation. The rules governing the response consist of social norms or shared expectation regarding appropriate behavior (Goodwin & Jasper 2009). Language and culture have a distinctive interrelationship and with the inception of culture, human behaviours responds to artificial, external patterns, social behavior becomes “culturally modified and variable” (Hinkle 1994, p.179). The recognition that the author does not control the whole meaning of his or her text prepared the way for ‘reader-response criticism’, with its emphasis on the reader as a source of meaning-giving, a source conditioned by cultural experience, conscious or unconscious, by social and sexual roles, by ideological assumptions, and so forth (Makaryk, 1993).

For instance, art criticism is informed by an understanding of one’s own cultural and socio-political role in relation to the object of one’s criticism. An art critic does not have to make art in order to criticise since he or she has only to recognize her own creative process of criticism as a response to a socially and culturally conditioned object or situation. This kind of behavior is therefore in contrast with the belief that a critic may impersonally obliterate himself and his subjectivity in order to accurately deliver his criticism objectively (Piper 1999).

People who read or view an object, for instance a film, are conditioned by the time, place, society, or institutions, which they inhabit.

Read More