"In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the Word was god. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through him and without him nothing came into being."[1]  That’s the way the Gospel of John starts - with the word.  This message is still an important one. Nothing is created without language. Luckily, language is created and evolves each day.  Wittgenstein wrote, "The limits of my language are the limits of my mind.  All I know is what I have words for."[2]   Clearly language is important as the limits of our understanding continue to grow as our language grows.  Certainly we have many more words than we had just 20 years ago.

Just think what the computer has done to the words back up, bit, boot, crash, disk, hacker, mail, memory, menu, mouse, scroll, virus and window.  No wonder we began to feel like no-brainers, totally loose cannons and ditzy airheads.[3]   And that’s just a sample, the author of The Miracle of Language goes on for pages making me dizzy with all the new words. He suggests this tells us our language is alive and well.  He believes that changes occur in our language not from decay or degeneration but like any healthy organism our language grows with time.

Our language is changing not just with the new gadgets and ideas we have but also as we expand our understanding and experiences. Recently the new Webster Thesaurus was added to the tools one could access on line.  Within a matter of hours it was the talk of one of the largest on line services, America Online.  It seems that the synonyms given for homosexual included such words as fruit, faggot and Homo.  Many people objected to those being listed as synonyms as they are pejorative.  The company recalled the product and has offered to remove the offensive words.  What many gay rights advocates wanted was the word derogatory attached to the synonyms, as Oxford dictionary did when it included the word derogatory in the definition of "nigger".  Rather than defining nigger as a word referring to a person of African decent, the dictionary now says this is a derogatory word used to refer to a person of African decent.  Words are powerful despite what the children’s rhyme says "sticks and stones may break my bones but names will never hurt me."

Hal Morse set before me a task, when he purchased this sermon at last year’s auction: to find a female linguist and discuss what she had to say about our language.  Particularly he was interested in changes in our language and the way they effected our view of the world.

 The toughest part of the assignment was finding a female linguist. When I went looking – talking with some via email they all suggested Deborah Tannen. Dr Tannen wrote the famous book, You Just Don’t Understand Me.  In that book she suggests that women and men have different understandings of words and the way they go together. In the process of looking however I found another linguist/journalist, whom I quoted earlier, Richard Lederer. Both of these linguists suggest, our language affects our view of the world and our view of the world affects our language. I would like to share with you some of Lederer’s work first.

 Lederer examinations language as a cultural package and a biased one at that.  Much like our reading from Jackie James he uses the words black and white as examples of the biased nature of our language. He challenges his readers to think of phrases using black in a positive way. He could think of black tie, in the black and black belt. He quotes Ossie Davis who maintains that the English language is the black American’s enemy. In "…the English language," says Mr. Davis, "I cannot conceive myself as a black man without at the same time debasing myself."[4]    Consider for a moment the impact on an individual to only have a word with a negative connotation with which to describe oneself.

Mr. Lederer ends his chapter by discussing the impact and meaning of various masculine and feminine words.  By now we are all quite familiar with this issue as well. Most feminine words carry an inferior meaning. It is with our language that we do damage to women’s self esteem and restrict their perception of what is possible.  Just a few quick examples: Which pair carries more respect: bachelor-spinster, master-mistress, sir-madam etc.? If a king rules a kingdom, what does a queen rule? If a man fathers a movement, what does a woman do?

Richard Lederer believes it is up to us to change things.  Our language is not in charge of us but we in charge of it.  He suggests that by abandoning control we abandon our basic human capacities to distinguish, discriminate, compare and evaluate.[5]   It is an ethical, moral and perhaps religious statement.  We are responsible for the language we use and its effect on others.  We can make the world a more humane place simply by paying attention to the language we use. I don’t always find it a simple task to look for words that profess another’s dignity – I frequently get called up short because I have chosen the wrong word at the wrong time– but as a Unitarian Universalist its important to struggle even in this small way. Religious values can be expressed by the words we chose each time we speak.

 Dr Tannen’s work approches the biases in our language from a different angle.  She suggests that men and women communicate for different reasons and often for competing reasons.  Tannen builds her case first by suggesting that an utterance can have different meanings at different levels.  It can have not only a message, but also one or more of what she calls "metamessages". The metamessage is information about the relations among the people involved, and their attitudes about what they are saying or doing and the people they are saying or doing it to. Different communities of people may tend to hear certain kinds of metamessages rather than other kinds. For instance an offer of help can mean, "I care about you." or "I am more competent than you." Or, women tend to use the phrase "I am sorry" to restore a balance in the relationship rather than as a literal apology: as men usually mean it. Essentially, metamessages let us know what is going on beyond the words: i.e. Is this an argument or a chat?  Is this helping, advising or scolding?  They help us to understand the meaning more fully and to determine the position of each speaker.

 Tannen suggests men typically communicate to establish themselves in a hierarchy, while women communicate to establish themselves in a network of relationships.  As a result women are likely to hear metamessages filtered through a lens of connection while men are likely to hear metamessages filtered through a lens of hierarchy. These differences mean men and women may engage in different kinds of talk. Report vs. rapport talk for example.

 She says that for most "women the language of conversation is primarily a language of rapport: a way of establishing connections and negotiating relationships.  Emphasis is placed on displaying similarities and matching experiences.  As an example in childhood girls criticize peers who try to stand out or appear better than others.  For most men language is primarily a means to preserve independence and negotiate.  Men do this by exhibiting knowledge and skill. "[6]  These differences result in different attitudes about what to say when, what kind of conversation is appropriate for the office, and confusion about what kind of conversation to have at the dinner table.

The joke about men who are afraid to ask directions reflects this same research.  So does the scene of two women talking to each other but about completely different things constantly interrupting with, "oh, I know just what you mean. When my sister did…blah blah blah."

In fairness, Tannen makes many generalizations.  Not all men communicate to achieve social standing and not all women are interested in connections, and none of us use any one type of style all the time.  Despite those critical caveats I still find her work helpful.[7]

One major contribution her work has made is that diversity in style is now viewed as valuable.  Tannen’s work makes it clear that communication is complex and anything we say can be interpreted in many different ways. It is apparent that we need to pay attention to all of what is being communicated. She has changed the way we view everyday conversations making us aware of the complexity. Dr. Tannen’s work is looking at men and women  - now we can do more by examining other communities based on race, class and economic status?

Language is a flawed instrument being used by flawed beings that are at best working from different frames of reference and at worst completely missing each other.  Returning to the bible and especially to John is helpful. "In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the Word was god; all things were made through him and without him nothing came into being."  Let us then as religious people be careful what we bring into being.[8] Let us be aware that our language is flawed but so are we, so language is a true expression of our living.  Let us remember that while our language is alive and well, we can change it. Let us remember to pay attention to our choice of words so that we through our language create a more just and peaceful world. Let us remember our own filters and preconceptions and listen as openly as we can.  Communication is complicated.  Its amazing it happens at all – but its amazing when it happens.  Lets strive to build a language; to create a language that brings good into being.

References
1. John 1:1-3
2. Lederer, Richard The Miracle of Language, p.3
3. Ibid. p. 44
4. Ibid. p.53
5. Ibid. pp. 60-61
6. Tannen, Deborah, You Just Don’t Understand  p. 77
7. home page for Linguistics 2400, University  of Colorado, Dr. Barbara Fox
8. John 1:1
 
 

  Back to the beginning of the First Parish homepage