Language and Politic

1. Language and Politic Group 6 Risqi Sugiarti (2201410006) Niken Larasati Wening (2201410009) Mazidatur Rizqiyah (22014100 Fatimah (2201410 Lilik Suryani (220141

2. Beginnings: The Politics of LinguisticCorrectness and Persuasion The study of language and politics is aimed at understanding the role oflinguistic communication in the functioning of social units, and how this role shapes language itself. POLITIC POLIS CITY

3. Beginnings: The Politics of LinguisticCorrectness and Persuasion • The city as an organized social unit depends on linguistic communication for its functioning,and urban life places functional demands on language that are substantiallydifferent from those in a sparsely populated rural setting. • Politics is the art, and language the medium, • They position themselves to get what theyneed, and what they want.

4. Beginnings: The Politics of LinguisticCorrectness and Persuasion • The example of Transactional conversation between Crispin and John. John said “Bring to me”  Crispin replay “Bring it to me”. • The use of “standard” forms of language in politic will make the audience more persuasive , when it comes to convincing and this persuasiveness may well carry on throughout the life.

5. The “correction” in question is of a usage over which native speakersdisagree, both across and within dialects. • “Bring me it” is acceptable to manybut not all speakers; “Bring it me” is likewise semi-acceptable, but only inparts of England. “Bring them them” is fine for me in spoken usage, thoughnot in writing, and most native speakers seem to reject it in either mode.

6. Interpreting language use in this way is a political act. • It determineswho stands where in the social hierarchy, who is entrusted with power and responsibility

7. In modern times, particularly in the climate of twentieth-centuryideas about the unconscious mind and the possibility of thought control, it hascome to be classified under the still more loaded rubric of “propaganda.” • In the twentieth century, the understanding of language and politicswas shaped by an ongoing conflict and tension between structuralism (and later “poststructuralism”)

8. Ernest Renan (1882 p,26) A national is a soul, a spiritual principle. Two things that are actually one make up this soul, this spiritual principle. One on the past, the other in the present. One is the common ownership of a rich legacy of memories; the other is the present day agreement, the desire to live together, the will to continue validiting the heritage that has been inherited jointly.

9. It is in this sense that powerful “ideologies of language” may be said to condition language choice, from the level selecting a national language down to what one will speak, and how, in a given conversational situation.

10. Phillipson (1992) has very influentially promulgated the idea that the spread of English is being brought about through “ English Linguistic Inperalism” as set of practicies through which the dominance of English is asserted and maintained by the establishment and continuous reconstitution of structural and cultural inequalities between English and other languages”.

11. One of the most powerful tools of linguicism according to phillipson is laguage teaching and multilingual education. “linguicism occurs...........if there is a policy of supporting several languages, but if priority is given in teacher training, curriculum development, and school timetables to one language” (1992, p.47)

12. The other most important applied linguist working in the area of “linguistic human rights” , it regularly asserts that “languages are today being killed and linguistic diversity is disappearing at a much faster pace than before in human history” (Skutnabb-Kangas,2000).

13. The most significant development in opposition has been the concept of “linguistic hybridity”(Pennycook,1998). Hybridity denies that spread of English wipes out other language and culture, providing evidence instead of how resilient adaptive language and cultures are to intermingling.

14. Politics in Discourse (Approaches in the Marxist Line) • In the English-speaking world, the connection between language and politics was first brought to general attention in a 1946 article by George Orwell • The linguistic “bad habits” consist of strings of words that form well-worn patterns, coercing their users to think in certain ways. • The detachment of language from observable reality is what makes it possible for a political party to maintain orthodoxy among its followers, and in the most extreme cases, to dupe those it wishes to enslave

15. In Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), Newspeak is English re-engineered through massive vocabulary reduction and shifts of meaning The aim of Newspeak is “to make all other modes of thought impossible.” For instance, according to the Party, 2 + 2 = 5. There are 3 slogan >> “WAR IS PEACE / FREEDOM IS SLAVERY / IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH.” Propaganda can only be combated by rational analysis and argument.

16. In the nineteenth century, the ideology of Standard English was part of a wider ruling-class project to extend its hegemony over a growing working class and to meet the demands of mass education on its own terms. With Standard English and education: indoctrinating all working-class children to speak and write like the ruling class would represent the latter’s ultimate triumph over the former.

17. In continental Europe, significant contributions to a Marxist account of language would be made by Ferrucio Rossi-Landi (1921–85) and Michel Pêcheux the most important turn in the Marxist line has been that of someone who is clearly post-Marxist, Jürgen Habermas Habermas has remained in the Marxist line, where the politics of language use is real, and its analysis trivial in so far as it is abstracted away from this reality.

18. Structuralist • Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897– 1941) • Alan S. C. Ross (1907–80) Saussure (1920) Michel Foucault (1926–84) Pierre Bourdieu (1930–2002) • Lévi-Strauss 1955

19. Structuralist Person who concern in structuralism. a system of ideas used in the study of language, literature, art, anthropology and sociology, which emphasizes the importance of the basic structures and relationships of that particular subject

20. In the 1920s the mainstream of linguistics shifted from the historical enquiry of the nineteenth century to the “structuralist” analysis of language systems at a given point in time, following the inspiration of Saussure

21. It was not therefore congenial to a political understanding of language, and the linguists who occasionally touched upon the subject, such as Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897– 1941) and Alan S. C. Ross (1907–80), did so in popular writings rather than in articles for linguistics journals.

22. It was not therefore congenial to a political understanding of language, and the linguists who occasionally touched upon the subject, such as Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897– 1941) and Alan S. C. Ross (1907–80), did so in popular writings rather than in articles for linguistics journals.

23. In France, this was the period in which structuralism ascended from a linguistic method to a general intellectual paradigm, propelled by the great success of Lévi-Strauss (1955) (see Joseph, 2001). The two French structuralists who would have the most profound and lasting impact on language and politics, Michel Foucault (1926–84) and Pierre Bourdieu (1930–2002), would seem on the surface to have as much in common with the post-Marxist line represented by Habermas as with linguistic structuralism. There are indeed important points in common with Habermas, especially in Bourdieu’s case.

24. THANKYOU