Language and Mind

So this topic came from a somewhat unlikely source.  It's also surprising that it was voted, considering the lack of appreciation most people have for language, although they do fancy themselves observers of the mind.

From a psychological perspective, the two are said to be linked in that they appear together - language and thought depend on each other for development.  As for differences, language is relatively objective, being concrete sounds and words, whereas the mind is entirely subjective, since nobody can really share their mind with others.

The study at the University of Kansas, all those years ago, seems to point to language acquisition being essential in the construction of an "intelligent" brain; children who weren't in the best language environment were also not the best students.  Something about the way the brain builds itself around language, at least the English language, prepares the pathways for assimilating other information, or at least being able to make known that you have some idea about it.  Some in the group insisted that all children naturally picked up language, missing the fine point that the extent of their abilities depends very much on their environment.  The basic level isn't too hard to come by, but really refined capabilities require a lot more attention from caregivers.  This idea was echoed by a late arrival towards the end of the meeting, based on his studies on human language at the distance education university, so it sounds like this is what's being accepted academically at the moment.

Something that came up again and again was the link between culture and language, almost implying that the mind is a product of those two mental acquisitions.  We express our culture with our words and expressions, and part of the difficulty of learning another language is in fact the perspective it has on the world.  More than memorizing words, a new language is a new mindset, which is much more difficult to wrap our brains around and be able to use in a meaningful way.  For the vast majority, foreign languages are just "secret codes" for their own, and they never progress beyond their own native perspectives, either out of laziness or ignorance, or simple lack of access to the foreign linguistic perspective.  Although we can learn throughout our lives, the networks that allow for new perspectives in our minds seem to be created only in early childhood.

Following on the idea of cultural perspective, social hierarchies and prejudices can be conveniently coded in the language without the speakers even being aware of how it affects them.  This is the cause of debate on gendered insults, racial epithets being used as general insults, gender neutral job titles, etc.  Most of us like to believe that we are fair people, that we don't have any undue influence that makes us discriminate against others.  Yet, by using words that do in fact single out a particular group as less good or valuable, or solidifies a particular group as respectable or noble, our language does justify a social hierarchy we aren't even consciously aware of.  Social change comes when people are aware of the need and willing to address it.  Hence, we must be mindful when it comes to our language if we want to know what we are really saying and why.

Inevitably, animal language came up as well.  Most people agree that other animals don't have a language in the sense that humans do.  However, it also seems true that animals, especially pets, can understand a certain amount of human words, and they do have methods of communication, principally body language, that humans can learn to decipher.  The distance student put forth the opinion that some animals, e.g. dolphins and some primates, will have language similar to human language in the future, it just hasn't been evolutionarily necessary for them yet.  But they are on they're way to it.

Maybe Up and Steve Cash have shown us the future.