12/18/22 Research Essay

It is no controversy to state that a society needs a well functioning language system in order to operate with unity and efficiency. When examined in the context of a society as diverse as our own, the statement runs ever more true. This diversity exists in more forms than only ethnic, political, and economic diversity but it does not need to be mutually exclusive with unity. One of the most beneficial upsides of diversity is the generation of different experience and points of view that could not be otherwise created. This experience and these points of view can only be utilized to the extent that the state of communication allows for. Our society’s construction make communication a vessel for this unique advantage, but it also makes communication necessary for its survival. By its design, America is a free market republic with privately managed education, so it exists based on the exchange and competition of different ideas. Consistent communication is the platform that facilitates the movement of this vital information just as blood vessels that transfer nutrients between our organs. The will and ability of people to communicate, properly, with other, regardless of their differences, is crucial to make society function in a healthy manner. Unfortunately, communication in America is not in its best state. It is imperative for Americans to develop and use more dynamic social and linguistic abilities to avoid disunity and isolation between members of society. 

Americans are harmed by unhealthy political polarization which is at least partly due to failure and misuse of language. Most Americans who are politically involved identify very strongly with their political parties. They are loyal to the language, news sources, and icons, as well as the media and entertainment like musicians, movies, or sports and athletes that have become associated with their parties or ideals. America may be home to a healthy amount of political diversity, but the level of polarization is too large to be attributed to the range of ideals that the country is home to. Stanford graduate, Drew Calvert, in his article, “The Political Divide in America Goes Beyond Polarization and Tribalism”, published in 2020 by the Kellogg School at Northwestern University, addresses the topic of “partisan rancor” in America’s political climate and argues that it is better defined as sectarianism which has developed over the last few decades. He supports this claim by describing sectarianism and the nature of the way American’s view other political factions, then defining the issues it causes, and finally sharing the origin of sectarianism as well as some of its possible resolutions. Calvert’s purpose is to teach Americans to view their political climate in a new light in order to spark change in the system which may bring members of society back together. He adopts an informative and nonpartisan tone for his audience, the readers of “The Political Divide in America Goes Beyond Polarization and Tribalism” and others interested in the state of our nation’s politics. There is a strong trend of politicized Americans, on both sides, have become polarized passed a state of tribalism. Calvert explains the term sectarianism, which describes the way that Americans view their political stance as something almost religious, and “other” (or to classify and treat someone as alien and subhuman) the alternate side as an evil, and untrustworthy “sect”. American’s have started to see their factions as more of a religious or social identity rather than an organization of likeminded ideals. This political climate is very harmful as it creates gridlocked government bodies and causes voters to focus more on opposing other factions than voting for better political policy. Calvert proposes several origins of this political epidemic. One of the common themes in the origins is language and communication. Calvert identifies a cause, “And in the last decade, Facebook and Twitter have intensified sectarianism, since posts that use inflammatory and moralizing language are promoted by the algorithms  meant to push ‘engagement’.” He emphasizes bias and bias rhetoric in media and political elites. Calvert also illustrates that both parties use biased narratives which are generally false and slandering ideals about the other side that are held up and treated like truths. Not only does Calvert repeat the idea of language and communication in causes, he also integrates the idea into his proposed solutions. Calvert hypothesises that it is important for Americans to focus on communicating true and fair ideas rather than rewarding inflammatory speech and misused ideals. He also stresses the importance of “frame or use of language”(Calvert, pg one) when he implores Americans to use better moral language when communicating with the other sides. In “The Political Divide in America Goes Beyond Polarization and Tribalism”, Calvert illustrates an instance where America is harmed by communicative inefficiency and a misuse of language. He also points out that Americans working to improve their communicative abilities is a practice that should resolve this tension and the issues that are caused by this sectarianism. This article outlines one specific area where developing and using more dynamic social and linguistic abilities will help Americans to avoid disunity and isolation between different groups in society. 

Americans are harmed by social barriers enabled by failing to properly use language and other communicative skills. America is a metropolitan society, home to people of various cultures. It is a large country has no official language, making it home to speakers of many different languages and dialects. English may be the most common platform of communication, but accents and dialects could seem very foreign to people who are not well versed in speaking with people of different communities. Decorated American novelist and U.C. Berkeley graduate, Amy Tan, in her essay, “Mother Tongue”, published in 1990, addresses the topic of immigrant American families struggling to communicate with others and argues that there is benefit to be had when coming to understand unique forms of articulation. She supports this claim by first sharing her reflecting thoughts and experiences growing up with parents who spoke an ethnic interpretation of English, and second sharing how it affected her and how it may connect to broader trends by affecting immigrant Americans on a larger basis, and lastly how learning to better understand articulation positively impacted her writing skills and success. Tan’s purpose is to share her experiences and the knowledge it gave her in order to encourage people to make more effort to understand how to properly communicate with people who articulate themselves differently. She adopts a retrospective tone for the readers of “Mother Tongue” and others interested in sociolinguistics. Amy Tan’s mother speaks English in a way that is more natural for a native Chinese speaker to do. Her sentence structure is not what would be considered typical, but her words are totally discernable, and it is quite possible to comprehend and exchange her ideas with some effort and exposure. It would be incorrect to say that anything about her speech needed to be fixed, yet she has problems communicating with many people, usually because of these people’s lack of effort. Tan steers her discussion to some instances of communicative failure that have directly caused obstacles for her family and the people they are attempting to communicate with. Tan outlines an example with, “So she said she would not leave until the doctor called her daughter. She wouldn’t budge. And when the doctor finally called her daughter, me, who spoke in perfect English — lo and behold — we had assurances the CAT scan would be found, promises that a conference call on Monday would be held, and apologies for any suffering my mother had gone through for a most regrettable mistake.” (Tan, pg 2). This is an example of an unnecessary language barrier because the term “perfect English” is rhetorical. Tan already established that the ethnic English that this “perfect English” is being compared is in fact not imperfect and that its limitations are at least half the responsibility of people’s limited perceptions. In this instance, Tan’s mother has a hard time with hospital staff after a critical CAT scan because the hospital staff will not make effort to cooperate with her and provide what they owe her. It is made apparent that this is in fact the root of the issue because once someone who speaks a non-ethnic English, the only variable of change, makes an attempt at sharing the same ideas that Tan’s mother did, the hospital staff started to function properly and apologize for their lapses. Unfortunately, it is not rare for a lack of communicative skills and effort harm people like Tan and her family. Tan is able to relate this issue of articulation by displaying the phenomenon where Asian Americans gravitate to stem careers as their skills outside of the field are inaccurately evaluated. She is also able to share some ways that understanding these cross cultural forms of articulation have brought her the immense success that she stands on to this day. While Tan does a great job at showcasing its significance, the dynamics of cross cultural communication is well studied under the field of Pragmatics. Pragmatics is the study of language that features its context as well as nonlinguistic communication. In the book “Pragmatics For Language Educators: A Sociolinguistic Perspective” 2013, author Virginia LoCastro, University of Florida Academic English program director and sociolinguistic researcher, asserts the meaning and relevance of pragmatics and describes pragmatic failure in the context of Cross Cultural Pragmatics (CCP). She Backs up this claim by first defining CCP and illustrating examples of what it looks like in the real world, second describing Pragmatic Failures as well as its different categories, and lastly giving its causes and effects. LoCastro appears to write in hopes of teaching people to consider pragmatics in order for them to gain a better understanding of how people communicate and how to do it well. Because of the author’s simple informative tone, it seems as if she writes for a non-specialized and inclusive audience. LoCastro defines her terms with “Pragmatic failure refers to mistakes in producing and understanding situationally appropriate language behavior. According to Thomas (1983), the inability to interpret intended meaning may be due to regional, ethnic, gender, and class differences within a community and across cultural boundaries. In other words, there are intracultural and intercultural differences. Culturally influenced patterns of behavior not only result in production difficulties, but also incomprehension problems, as listeners tend to interpret others’ language use through the lens of their own worldviews. Even within one culture, pragmatic norms differ from region to region”(Locastrro, pg 81). LoCastro specifies that the “culture” differences she is referencing cultural ideas that have to do with education, gender, class, religion, ideals, or practices as well as aspects like art or speech that are more traditionally associated with culture. She analyzes the idea that engagement, tone, phrases, turn taking, reactions, body language or vocabulary that people of one culture may view as effective or appropriate use of communication may be received as uninformative, patronizing, impolite, intrusive, or subliminal by people of a different age, gender, level of education, occupation, or traditional culture. She also includes examples of this disconnect’s impact as she shares a story of controversy as a middle class police officer attempted to arrest a highly educated professor of different racial backgrounds that was important enough for the media to discuss it for days. She implies that there are much greater issues and division that can result from these Pragmatic Failures like racism, sexism, violence, or oppressive authority. This take on Pragmatic failures shows the reader just how relevant they are in their daily life. LoCastro’s research is well paired with the reflections provided by Tan’s essay. “Pragmatics For Language Educators: A Sociolinguistic Perspective” gives a third person outlook on the issue of communicative failure while “Mother Tongue” shares a personal account that is easy to conceptualize and relate to. LoCastro’s book is effective at educating the reader by breaking down the concepts involved and roots of the issue at play while Tan’s essay hooks the reader by giving a personal account that highlights the importance of the issue and allows them to understand how it affects American society and why it should matter. While LoCastro highlights an issue that is a genuine skill issue for many, Tan highlights an issue that is best attributed to a disconnect in effort. LoCastro remedies that disconnect in skill by breaking down concepts in a way that readers can understand and apply as Tan remedies the issue of effort by showing Americans exactly how they and their neighbors are affected and what they have to gain from putting in that effort. LoCastro and Tan complement each other’s work as they come together to show how important it is for Americans to develop and use better communicative and linguistic skills. 

Society is unnecessarily divided and inefficient due to the failure of its members to properly communicate. Americans face unnecessary barriers that divide them in the social, economic and political spheres of life. Dysfunction speech and language narratives clog and corrupt our system of political discourse and policy creation. A disconnect in language skills and practice create social barriers that divide different people in society and impact their lives. Society needs proper communication to function. The education and practice of communicating with others, especially of different class or identity, is important to sharpen society. As many members of society have great room to improve and better utilize their communicative skills, it is important for people to develop and use more dynamic social and linguistic abilities to avoid disunity or isolation between members of society.

Work Cited:


LoCastro, Virginia. “Pragmatics for Language Educators: A Sociolinguistic Perspective.” Ebook Central, 2013, https://cuny-cc.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/01CUNY_CC/gc81bt/cdi_crossref_primary_10_1353_lan_2003_0203.

Psychology, Eli J. FinkelProfessor of, and Drew Calvert Cynthia S. WangClinical Professor of Management & Organizations; Executive Director of Kellogg's Dispute Resolution and Research Center. “The Political Divide in America Goes beyond Polarization and Tribalism.” Kellogg Insight, 15 Nov. 2022, https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/political-divide-america-beyond-polarization-tribalism-secularism.
 
Tan, Amy. Mother Tongue, by Amy Tan - University of Missouri–St. Louis. https://umsl.edu/~alexanderjm/Mother%20Tongue%20by%20Tan.pdf.

This entry is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International license.