Teaching the Language of Listening

 

Language as an art form has long since been understood. It has been only in recent times that language as a science is an important field of study. Because language can do so many things, it is only under an ethical consideration that the public and scholars alike understand language differences and support the diversity that grows from it. With this in mind I argue that we must all take some time to really hear people and understand the art of listening as a tool for social and personal growth.

But what even is language? How are we supposed to learn to listen? Great questions. Language is the art of transferring thoughts and ideas into verbalized or signed language that is audible or visual for other people to interrupt, and in turn, respond to. Language is a tool of collaboration and one of the reasons that makes this world keep spinning. For instance in this moment you, my dear reader, currently reside inside my thoughts. Pardon me for not welcoming you properly. My name is Michele Jackson. I am a senior linguistic journalist at Linguist United. Here we work tirelessly to understand the ways in which language impacts and improves, and at times hinders, the human experience.

There are varieties of language in which many of us use on a daily basis. The language you speak in with your doctor is not typically the language you would use at say a hockey game. This is a scenario in which I like to explain the difference between prescriptive and descriptive language. Think of prescriptive language as something that was prescribed to you like when you get antibiotics for a virus. People tend to rely on prescriptive language to do better in life or in capacities in which they feel they need to assert some sort of competence. This is because prescriptive language is what we consider standard language. Its language that annunciates and punctuates properly in SVO format. On the flip side, there is descriptive language that changes in formality. When you're out as a hockey game you do not typically scream out, "Hey Sir that was a great beating you performed!" you will however hear "'DAS RIGH BEAT HIS A**!" With more or less asterisk's. Learning the difference between prescriptive and descriptive language functions as a social tool. A tool that, "“Even if [people] never get to use the language, orally, in writing, or for reading purposes, their behavior, the very texture of their minds, will have been modified. And we hope, for the better, since it will make for greater tolerance, greater understanding and perhaps, greater sensitiveness to the significant things in the world around them” (pp. 170 & 172). Language is used situationally and describes the circumstance surrounding it. The game is rowdy so the crowd is rowdy and now you and your friend are speaking with little attention to semantics. This is done because the sensitiveness of the people around the game are subject to understanding what is both expected and tolerated around them.

Now I do not condone using rowdy language in professional settings but I am asserting that not everyone does this sort of code switching naturally. Specifically when it concerns English speakers of other native languages. More importantly, what I want to address is the quality of care we give those who reject standard American English in any capacity as it is inherently racist to consider only well formed English. Keep in mind that standard American English was language made by and for white, male, cisgendered, Americans. In this, "linguistics as an observational science has little if anything to offer to language pedagogy. What linguists can, and do, contribute to the language teacher is, hopefully, more accurate data, as materials of instruction" (Haden pp. 2). This language and the use of standard English was always meant to keep others out of conversation. This is why it is now imperative to understand that we need to actively fight against this pedagogy and push towards learning to listen to those who speak outside of standard American English. 

Now considering this we must look for the significance in our daily lives. For instance, I am from the Southern California area. I’m well acquainted with the rural areas and neighborhoods from San Diego to Los Angeles and all the cities in between. One of my favorite things about these regions is the character of every sign post and sidewalk. There are traces of people who value language on every block and something about this is so incredibly profound and special, but not many people think so. In response to graffiti people make assumptions of the perpetrators and argue that it trashes cities and devalues their homes. I argue there is no greater value than using art and language to spread a message. What people assume is that all graffiti does is assert gang dominance but oftentimes it is a means to bring up important social issues. For instance, “those who believe that writing on the walls is an act of vandalism or of low socioeconomic class. To which there are others that believe that there is beauty in the graffiti on the walls. For those artists who express their emotions through that medium to feel closer to their identity and to the culture”(Graffiti). “Graffiti: The language of a nonstandard form” brings up important facets of the evolution of graffiti art. It takes you through the journey of hieroglyphics to common pieces of street graffiti. What I found most special about this article is the relationship between the two very similar and yet different language forms. Hieroglyphics were used because that was one of the very few mediums ancient civilizations had to tell us they existed and to tell about the things they did. Similarly, current day graffiti works the same way. It tells others about who was where and what they were fighting for or protecting. Sometimes this means defending parts of the cities but a lot of the times it is defending social justice. So, the next time you consider someone who speaks a little different be curious of their diversity and celebrate their courage to have and form convictions no matter the delivery method.

Sources:

Haden, Ernest F. “Descriptive and Prescriptive Attitudes toward a Standard Language.” The South Central Bulletin, vol. 29, no. 1, 1969, pp. 2–3. JSTOR, 

Haden, Ernest F. “Descriptive Linguistics in the Teaching of a Foreign Language.” The Modern Language Journal, vol. 38, no. 4, 1954, pp. 170–76. JSTOR, 

Torres, Lindsay. Graffitify, Linguists United, https://graffitify.weebly.com/.