Language as the Main Means of Communication

Language interacts with every other aspect of human life in society. It can be understood only if it is analyzed through its rela­tions with the society. It is a working system of communication in a definite period and in a certain community. Language is used as the product of the community’s past and the source of its future development. The social character of the language is proved by the fact that children learn the language of those who bring them up from infancy, even adopted infants whatever their race and physical type and the language of actual parents, acquire the lan­guage of the adoptive parents.

In regard to the production of speech sounds, all humans are physiologically alike. It has been shown repeatedly that children learn the language of those who bring them up from infancy. Even adopted infants, whatever the language of their actual pa­rents, acquire the language of the adoptive parents. Individual physiological differences, including shapes of lips, throat, size of larynx, etc. do not affect one’s ability or aptitude to speak any particular language.

Almost all mammals and many other animal species make vocal noises and evince feelings thereby and keep in contact with each other through a rudimentary sort of communication, but those members of the animal kingdom nearest to humans genetically, the great apes, lack the anatomic apparatus necessary for speaking. The development of humans voice-producing mechanism has been linked to upright posture and the freeing of the vocal cords from the frequent need to hold one’s breath in using the arms for loco­motion. Certainly, speaking and hearing — as a primary means of communication — have a number of striking advantages: speech does not depend on daylight or mutual visibility, it can operate in all directions over reasonably wide areas, and it can be adjusted in loudness to cope with distance. Also, the physical energy required in speaking is extremely small in relation to the immense power wielded by speech in human life, and scarcely any other activity, such as running, walking, or tool using, interferes serious with the process. Certain aspects of speech control are located in a particular part of the human brain, different from parts responsible for other activities. Whereas apes lack the anatomic structures that are necessary for the vocalization of human speech. Beyond doubt, biological factors played a substantial role in the human language development, though social factor shouldn’t be neglected. Under it we mean the necessity of language in society. Language couldn’t have come into being without the purpose for communication. Also children are in general brought up within the social group to which their parents and immediate family circle belong, and they learn the dialect and speaking styles of that group along with the rest of the subculture and behavioral traits and attitudes that are characteristic of it.

When individuals speak, they do not normally confine themselves to the mere emission of speech sounds. Because speaking involves at least 2 parties in sight of each other, a great deal of meaning is conveyed by facial expression, tone of voice, and movements and postures of the whole body but especially of the hands; these are collectively known as gestures. The contribution of bodily gestures to the total meaning of a conversation is in part culturally determined and differs in different communities. It found that it is the visual accompaniments (gestures, laughter, screams of joy, fear, pain, disgust, triumph) similar to those of animals and of voice that elicit the main emotional response of the interlocutor.

A language is a symbol system. But there are other systems recognized and institutionalized in the life of mankind. They are musical notation and dance notation, «computer languages (COBOL, Algol, FORTRAN, etc.), traffic and military signs, alphabets for deaf and blind, Morze’s code and so on. These means of communication, however, are peripheral in use in comparison with language.

Language and Culture

It is common knowledge that one’s mother tongue is intimately and in all sorts of details related to the rest of one’s life in a com­munity. This is true of all peoples and all languages.

There exists a close connection between language and culture (culture is here being used in the anthropological sense.) Accor­ding to the definition of culture given by the English anthropologist Sir Edward Burnett Tylor, culture covers a very wide area of hu­man life and behaviour; and language is manifestly a part of it.

Although the faculty of language acquisition and language use is innate and inherited, and there is legitimate debate over the extent of this innateness, every individual’s language is “acqui­red by man as a member of society”, along with and at the same time as other aspects of that society’s culture in which he is brought up. Society and language are mutually indispensable. Language can have developed only in a social setting, however this may have been structured, and human society in any form even remotely resembling what is known today or is recorded in history could be maintained only among people speaking and understanding a language in common use.

Language is transmitted culturally, that is learned. It must be emphasized that children very largely acquire their mother ton­gue by “grammar construction” from exposure to a random col­lection of utterances that they encounter.

If language is transmitted as part of culture, it is no less true that culture as a whole is transmitted through language. The fact that mankind has a history in the sense that animals do not is entirely the result of language.

Animal behaviour does not differ over widely scattered areas, e. g. bird songs are reported to differ somewhat from place to place within species, but there is little other evidence for areal diver­gence. By contrast with this unity of animal behaviour, human cultures are as divergent as are human languages over the world, and they can and do change all the time.

The greatest part of learned behaviour, which is what culture involves, is transmitted by vocal instruction, not by imitation. Through the use of language, any skills, techniques, products, modes of social control can be explained, and the end results of anyone’s inventiveness can be made available to anyone else with the intellectual ability to grasp what is being said. Modern tech­niques for almost instantaneous transmission of the written and spoken word account for the great rapidity of scientific, techno­logical, political, and social change in the contemporary world. All of this, whether ultimately for the good or ill of mankind, must be attributed to the dominant role of language in the trans­mission of culture.

The part played by variations within a language in differen­tiating social and occupational groups in a society are considered to be of great importance. Children are in general brought up within the social group to which their parents and immediate family circle belong, and they learn the dialect and speaking styles of that group along with the rest of the subculture and behavioral traits and attitudes that are characteristic of it. This is a largely unconscious and involuntary process of acculturation, but the importance of the linguistic manifestations of social status and of social hierarchies is not lost on aspirants for personal ad­vancement in stratified societies. The deliberate cultivation of an appropriate dialect, in its lexical, grammatical, and phonetic features, has been the self-imposed task of many persons wishing “to better themselves”, to move up in the social scale.

Languages and variations within languages play both a unifying and a diversifying role in human society as a whole. Language is a part of culture, but culture is a complex totality containing many different features, and the boundaries between cultural features are not clear-cut. Potent are political restrictions on the move­ment of people and of ideas, such as divide Western Europe from Eastern Europe, may represent much more of a cultural dividing line than any other European frontiers.

The distribution of the various components of cultures differs, and the distribution of languages may differ from that of nonlinguistic cultural features.

(Levitsky A.E. Linguistics / A.E. Levitsky, Slavova L.L.,

Borisenko N.D. – Kyiv: Знання України, 2006. – Р. 9, 49–51)