LANGUAGE AS AN ELEMENT OF IDENTITY
People are communicators by nature. The language we speak reveals the
many ‘faces’ of our identity – physical, psychological, geographical, ethnic and
national, social, contextual, and stylistic (Crystal, 2003a: 16–78). In this section,
the connection between physical, psychological, geographical, and social aspects
of identity, on the one hand, and language, on the other hand, will be discussed
briefly.
The ability to learn and use language does not depend on the physical
appearance of a person (unless we focus on pathological cases or particular
physical conditions responsible for a person’s inability to communicate), but it
does depend on age. Besides, it is believed that males and females use language
differently (see the section MALE AND FEMALE SPEECH STYLES).
From a wide range of psychological characteristics of a person, intelligence
obviously stands out. Crystal points out that there is no evidence of a clear
relationship between intelligence and ability to learn and use language. However
there is a popular stereotype that the people who speak foreign languages, English
in particular, are more intelligent.
Language can also provide information about the speaker’s geographical
origin. If you hear someone speaking Polish, you may infer that they are from
Poland. But it is an oversimplified assumption. A person speaking Hungarian may
be either from Hungary or from Zakarpattia Oblast of Ukraine, which borders on
Hungary. Of course, the two dialects sound differently, but to recognize the
difference one has to speak Hungarian. People speaking English may be from GB,
the USA, Canada, or any other English-speaking country. In most cases, people
who speak English as a foreign language can tell British English accent from
American English accent, but matters get more complicated with Canadian
English, Australian English, New Zealand English, and other variants of the
language. Furthermore, non-English speakers often use British or American
variants of English as a lingua franca. Additionally, within each variant there exist
regional dialects; for example, the English spoken in the North of England and in
Scotland differs from the London/South Estern dialect.
Rural dialects differ from urban ones. Apart from that, people of different
social classes have their own dialects – the marks of their social background.
People belonging to the same social group or the same profession (politicians,
athletes, business people, managers, students, army and police officers, journalists,
psychologists, computer programmers, etc.) and those who associate themselves
with a particular subculture (rockers, football fans, postmodern artists, etc.) also
have distinct social dialects. In other words, the language and the dialect we use
reveal our geographical and social identity.
According to Crystal, everyone speaks a dialect; standard language is actually
the standard dialect intelligible to every member of a given society. Crystal points
out that there are no superior or inferior languages or dialects because all of them
fulfil their main function as a means of communication. He admits, however, that
some dialects are considered to be more socially prestigious.
Social life is a complex of different activities and relations. Our social status
correlates with our social background (family background, education, occupation,
financial status, etc.) and with the social context of interaction. The more social
relations we have, the more activities we are involved in; and it makes our social
status more diverse. The same person can be someone’s daughter, granddaughter,
girlfriend or wife, mother (if she already has a child of her own), a student, a
member of the Student Senate, a member of a basketball team or a fan club, etc.
Each of these social roles requires a particular mode of behaviour (including verbal
behaviour). Roles correlate with the language/dialect we use. Ignoring this
requirement may cause misunderstanding and communication breakdown because
language is a distinctive sign of social solidarity or distance, association with or
disassociation from a particular social group/community. Language demonstrates
that a person meets group/community standards. For example, ‘it is OK’ for a
student to use a local dialect while talking to their neighbours or a social dialect
while interacting with their peers. But the same student is supposed to speak
standard (literary) language talking to university professors, presenting a project in
class or a talk at a conference.
Finally, I would like to provide an example of how language people use can
create a picture of their identity. I was standing in a queue waiting for a boat to
take me from Sigtuna, a most fascinating tiny town, the first capital of Sweden, to
Stockholm. The boat was late and we all started to worry because it was the last
one that day. One of the passengers – the man looked poor and untidy, one of his
front teeth was missing, so I labelled him ‘lower class’ – took the trouble to find
out the reason for the delay. I was very much surprised when he returned and
explained, first in Swedish and then in perfect English (because some people in the
queue were speaking German and American English, and there were two Chinese
ladies there), what had happened to the boat, how the passengers would be
transferred to Stockholm, and where those who preferred to take a taxi could get
back the money they had paid for the boat ride. True, the majority of people in
Sweden speak English, but not everyone; and not everyone who does, speaks good
English. The man did, and I felt ashamed of myself – I had stereotyped him as not
very intelligent and uneducated just because of his strange appearance.
Check Your Understanding
Questions
1. Comment on the picture below. How does it illustrate the concept of personal
identity?
2. How is identity revealed through language?
3. What physical and psychological characteristics directly affect the ability to
learn and use language?
4. Does speech always reveal a person’s geographical identity?
5. What are the aspects of social identity?