I Vocabulary

1. ultimately – в конечном счете, в конце концов

2. implication – смысл, подтекст

3. arid – засушливый, пустынный

4. to correlate –находиться в связи, устанавливать соотношения (to, with)

5. core – 1) сердцевина, ядро, 2) суть

6. distinction – различие

7. to lack – испытывать недостаток, нуждаться, не иметь

8. mental process – мыслительный (ментальный) процесс

9. discreteness – разрывность

10. to coerce – 1) принуждать, 2) сообщить движение

11. to prohibit – запрещать

12. New World Native groups – американские индейцы

13. deceased person – покойный, умерший человек

14. profanity – богохульство

15. acknowedgment – 1) признание, 2) подтверждени

16. to comprise – включать, заключать в себе

17. restricted code of speech – неофициальная речь

18. elaborated code – официальная речь

19. idiolect – индивидуальный словарный запас

20. dialect – диалект

21. Sapir-Whorf hypothesis – гипотеза Сапира-Уорфа, лежащая в основе теории лингвистической относительности

II Comprehension check

1. What affects the structure and content of a languge?

2. How can liguistic diversity be explained?

3. What is the reason for the increase in vocabulary items?

4. What does the vocabulary of a language reflect?

5. What members of a society may be able to call much more species?

6. What does the SapirWhorf hypothesis propose?

7. What is the difference between the Hopi language and English?

8. What is the opinion of the linguistic determinists about it?

9. What version do most linguists prefer?

10. How can we prove that a language reflects the structure of a society?

11. How does language help maintain social structure?

12. What people comprise a dialect?

13. When do people use the language’s standard style?

14. In what situations do people use a familiar and casual style?

15. What is the difference between the standard and individual or group level of a language?

Text 3

Nonverbal communication

Languages are often preserved in their written forms, and in some cases the written form has contributed to the continuity of the culture. Due to geographic isolation, migration, conquests, and other factors, very different spoken dialects have developed all over China. People in different parts of China may be unable to understand the dialect of a person from a different province, but both can read the written language. This has united and provided continuity to a widespread and diverse population. People communicate in many different ways other than spoken language – for example, with the clothing they wear; the way they present or move their bodies; facial gestures, such as grimaces or smiles; and synthetic odors, such as aftershave, lotion, or perfume. Most societies develop distinct meaning or uses for various physical gestures. Giving someone “the finger” in one society may mean something quite the opposite in another. In some cultures, you may only shake hands or handle food with the right hand; in earlier generations, the left hand was regularly used in lieu of toilet paper. In some cultures, showing the soles of your feet or crossing your legs would be an insult. A loud belch, considered impolite in the presence of others in the United States, would be an appropriate expression of appreciation for a meal in other cultures. Many societies have informal, deeply rooted understanding of desirable ways to relate to other people. A high value is placed on group integration and conformity. A folkway is an approved form of behavior that is important but not usually accompanied by formal sanctions, for example, fines, if the practice is violated. If you use the wrong fork at a formal dinner, people will notice but there will be no overt punishment. If you drive too fast, this violation may lead to traffic fines – you have violated a more. Mores are norms that involve sanctions for violators. Public humiliation in a society where “saving face” is considered important can be devastating. In China, you should go out of your way to avoid embarrassing people – to help them save face. The loss of face is particularly devastating in front of large crowds of acquaintances. During the Chinise Cultural Revolution of the 1960s, singling out the individual for public humiliation sometimes led to the person committing suicide.

Creating culture

We have mentioned on several occasions the emergent qualities of human culture. We may speak in general terms about the features of a culture or we may compare cultural similarities in different societies. However, in living societies culture is a dynamic, evolving, feature of human life. The culture of a particular people may change because the invironment changes. Arid conditions may cause groups to migrate and adopt new agricultural practices.The many ice ages have almost certainly brought an end to some cultures and produced dramatic changes in others.

A particularly important source of cultural change is the ability humans have to react to the product of their own handiwork. We invent something, use it, think about it, and then create a new, more desired version. Consider how rapidly our culture has changed in the area of our travel: from folk table to the designs of Leonardo De Vinci. This escalation of technology occurs for many reasons including a strong societal emphasis on technical education and willingness to devote societal resourses. In sience and technology as in other areas, every goal attained becomes the stepping stone for the next possibility. Language is the crucial ingredient in this process of cultural development. Specialty languages are created by various academic disciplines to explain their latest insights in understanding the natural world. The various sciences also develop by creating new instruments to more precisely measure, and analyse some new facets of nature. We learn more by creating the space telescope or creating the technology for genetic surgery. In every instance the new techniques are accompanied by new concepts that link new developments in science. Karl Mannheim worked on the sociology of knowledge. Since then several social theorists have studied the social aspect of knowledge creation. Language exists in human social activity. Scientists are not “finding something that is out there.” They are creating a new way of understanding some particular aspect of existence. Whether in medicine or biology, well-organized groups create new knowledge. If you wish to become a socioligist, you will be systematically initiated into the language appropriate to the study of human society. Consider for a minute the unfolding of knowledge in sociology or any other discipline. For example, the textbook used in college classes in physics, biology, psychology, or sociology have dramatically changed since 1930 or 1970. Scientific research is only one example of organized interest groups that are rewarded for their new cultural creations. Other groups attempt new cultural creations, often for economic reasons. As the twenty-first century begins, many individuals are eagerly trying to locate new forms of business opportunity that can operate on the Internet. Others are involved in creating new fashions in art, clothing, music, or popular culture. Imagine how much money was made from their manufacture and sales. The latest new rock star is also culturally created. To ” break in” one needs some level of talent and perhaps a new sound or idea, but this alone is not enough. You also need economic backing to help you produce and market your new sound. Much money is invested before the new entertainer finds his or her work on the Top 20 charts.

Creating Objective Knowledge

One tradition in sociology argues that the rigorous application of scientific techniques will produce objective data, which the scientist then analyzes and generalizes about. We find the facts and the facts speak for themselves. Science makes progress by more precisely describing facts or finding new ways to create facts. We are being objective, in part, because the facts are thought to be “out there,” something we have discovered, and in doing “good science” we are being objective. This means that we are being value-free. Another tradition of sociology argues that all knowledge, including notion of objectivity is a product of human social activity. If you are interested in a thorough critique of the idea that science is value-free and that there is objective knowledge, you might consider Value-Free Science by Robert Proctor(1991). There is a lively debate in the area of philosophy or social theory called the philosophy of science. This includes subareas dealing with the nature of knowledge and how we know what we claim to know. Many traditional defenders of “good science ” ignore these larger debates. No knowledge is absolute. Some speak of “probability,” while others of emerging nature of the universe. Many in this tradition argue that sociology and science in general are not value-free. Every person makes value decisions as they consider topics for research. This approach argues that a scientist can approximate and come closer to the goal of objectivity when she reflects upon her own values and considers how they affect the research process. Some argue that if there is no objectivity, everything becomes hopelessly relative. The response might be that things are not hopelessly relative. The various scientific communities are orgarnized to promote the ongoing quest for more adequate ways of understanding the particular slice of the universe claimed by each discipline. This approach simply recognizes the human social aspects of research and the importance of hornesty and communication in the various scientific communities.