Translation of the Bible

(1) In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (2) Now
the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the
deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. (3) And God
said, "Let there be light," and there was light. (4) God saw that the
light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. (5) God
called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there
was evening, and there was morning-the first day.

El en principio, Dios creó los cielos y la tierra. Ahora la tierra era desordenada y vacía, ocsuridad estaban sobre la superficie de la profundidad, y la espíritu de Dios se movía sobre las aguas. Y Dios dijo, "Hagase la luz," y fue la luz. Dios vio que la luz era buena, y él separó la luz de la oscuridad. Dios llamó la luz "día" y la oscuridad "noche." Y era la tarde, y era la mañana- el primer día.

Changes/Decisions that I made:

1) "created": was it created in a quick moment, or over time? (creó or creia- preterite versus imperfect tenses in Spanish differentiates a moment in the past versus a process in the past)- important distinction of meaning

2) Also, "cielo" can refer to both the heavens (as it does here) or the literal sky.

3) "earth" = el mundo or la tierra (the planet earth or the earth/soil/foundation of the earth)

4) I noticed that the phrase "now the earth was formless and empty" seems to make little sense grammatically. It is interesting that when you read the sentence in context, it makes sense, but when you actually dissect the sentence grammatically, it does not. I feel as though this applies for both English and Spanish.

5) Two Spanish verbs for to be: ser and estar. I chose "estar" because the phrase relates to a location (perhaps momentary) rather than a set characteristic, for example.

6) "Let there be light": In Spanish, the "let" takes on a new verb form: the command form. This distinction does not exist in English.

7) A smaller linguistic difference: "tarde" in Spanish translates as both "afternoon" and "evening"

8) In the end, instead of "haber" which translates directly to "there was," I used "estar" which seemed to fit into the context / general idea that "there was the first day" (it is less literal than I understand "haber" to be).

Language in India and its Significances

As a follow up to a previous article/blog entry I did surrounding the revival of a single language, Sanskrit, in India, "Navigating India's Language Divides" gave me an incredible amount of information and insight into the complexities of having many widely spoken languages in a given country. In the 1961 Census, India had over 1652 spoken languages and dialects, while the 2000 Census showed a simpler statistic that 29 languages are spoken by at least a million people and 122 languages are spoken by at least 10,000 people. Overall, Hindi and English are the most widely spoken 41% of India's population speaks Hindi, while the next most widely spoken language is Bengali at 8.1%).

This article raised the question: What's in a language? The answer seems to be a lot. The language you learn, the language you choose to speak in a given context (like in the court system), and the language you teach your child have significant social implications. For example, one very intriguing anecdote the article gives is how Govinder Singh chose to address the high court in Hindi, rather than English. This action was widely praised and considered extremely groundbreaking, as English had been a language of the courts ever since British colonial days (and its legacy had been preserved until now) until Singh chose to break down that barrier and introduce his own language that reflected Indian pride, identity, and nationalism. This anecdote shows how closely linked language and power is. Since the British possessed the power in colonial days, they implemented a court system (considered very important in a given society) that used English, rather than one of the country's native languages. We see how this decision, which was able to be created and enforced through power, has long reaching effects on certain linguistic aspects in a given society.

It is interesting to me that after India declared its independence from Britain, Hindi became the powerful, widely spoken language that was "treated with suspicion" because of its noteworthy presence. In essence, Hindi overtook the role that English had previously held as the language spoken in most arenas by the largest population. This role came with selected conflict, as the English language had experienced, as well. For example, the article states, "Anti-Hindi sentiments have a long history and regional language activists opposed to its prevalence exist all over India, especially in southern states like Tamil Nadu where efforts to impose Hindi triggered bloody riots in the mid-1960s." I feel as though this discussion shows the power of language in both being linked to identity and being the cause of intense struggle. I never really realized the magnitude that conflict over language could reach until I read this sentence and connected language to identity and history. Since language can be so deeply rooted in and linked to history and culture, I can easily see how the attempt to override native/traditional languages in a given location or community with a newer, more dominant language could be met with intense resistance and violence.

One additional quote the sparked my interest was said by Tamil Nadu state legislator, M.K. Kanimozhi: "I can't speak Hindi but I am no less an Indian or patriotic than anybody else." Again, this quotation shows how even though language and identity can be closely tied, it is a very complex issue that often can be separate. Being "Indian" in a national identity for some people that is completely separate from a language, such as Hindi. At the same time, there are others who consider language and national identity, for example, to be extremely linked. In my personal experience, I have had many people question my ethnic identity as a Chinese individual as I do not speak any dialect of Chinese. People argue that I cannot be "truly" Chinese because language is such an integral part of a given culture. Before, I scoffed at that idea and responded, I am ethnically Chinese, my heritage (my family, my ancestors, etc) are Chinese, therefore I am, as well. I am now starting to question my overarching assumption and beginning to really understand the possibility of how my experience as an ethnically Chinese, non-Chinese speaking individual is markedly different from someone's experience as an ethnically Chinese, Chinese speaking individual. I wonder, because language and culture and experience are so linked in many ways, how can I not have a different reality/experience by being a non-speaker? At the same time, I don't question my legitimacy as a Chinese American person- I believe I simply have a different experience than those who speak the language. I definitely appreciated how this article brought up these questions for me, and probed me to think more deeply about what it means to be part of a community or an identity, and whether there are parameters for self identifying, or simply a multiplicity of possibilities for self identification that can and should be determined by an individual.

Finally, the changing significance of English in India is also fascinating. Previously, English was associated with imperialism, dominance, and privilege. Now, however, that association to Britain has been changing, as globalization has increased. English language skills are now seen as a practical advantage to have when entering the workplace. Rather than worshipping the language of people in power or resenting it for its colonial associations, English is now seen as a practical tool to possess in the modern age. This shift reveals how a community's conception of and emotions surrounding a language can really change with time. Therefore, a language's use and significance in people's lives can largely depend on the current political/historical climate and specific context.

Overall, this article communicated how powerful languages can be in shaping identity, inciting conflict, and reflecting historical and current feelings and realities.

Article Cited: http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5iSFJzofoZm4Sg223SHcz2S_H-FO

Language and Accent Changes after Migraines/Brain Impairment

As an aside from my main post below on Sanskrit, I found a different topic that is related to language that I find absolutely fascinating and puzzling. I remember hearing about it during middle school, and after coming across the same topic in a news article, I wanted to blog about it: There is an extremely rare syndrome, Foreign Accent Syndrome (60 cases in the last 65 years), in which individuals suffer brain damage, such as a seizure, migraine, or surgery, and subsequently speak with a completely different accent. Recently, for example, one British woman (with a British accent) suffered a terrible migraine and once it subsided, spoke with a thick Chinese accent.

I wonder how this change in accent after a seizure/migraine/brain surgery relates to language. Because these people do not acquire a new language, I would hypothesize that accent and language are separately represented in the brain. However, I find it puzzling that generally speaking, people from a certain part of the world who often speak a certain language end up having the same accent when speaking English. Are accents tied to location, culture, language, or something else?

Anyway...thought this was interesting and puzzling, so I wanted to post it to learn more and hear all of your thoughts!

http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-foreign-accent-syndrome,0,7971719.story

Sanskrit: Reviving a Language in Modern Day

http://www.livemint.com/2010/04/19202309/Sanskrit-reviving-the-languag.html? I read an article entitled Sanskrit: reviving the language in today's India, which was published in The Wall Street Journal on April 19, 2010. I chose to focus on this article for this class because it highlights how the existence and prominence of a language can depend largely on its significance to a community and how much effort a large group of people is willing to put into reviving the language. Additionally, this article highlighted the many reasons why language is important to people.

What strikes me about the re-emergence of the Sanskrit language is how well incorporated it is into many sectors of society. Rather than serving solely a linguistic or a cultural purpose, many communities have an interest and investment in the Sanskrit language, such as those who are religions, in the government, or in the sciences. The popular appeal, widespread respect, and the seemingly unifying force that Sanskrit is creating is very nice to see.

Going along with this idea, this quote was very interesting, as well: “I am interested in the grammar of the language. The religious stuff that we have been taught would not be so relevant to students who are non-believers, who love the language for its use of words and language alone and not because it is full of religious hymns,” says Rajesh Pratap, a postgraduate in Sanskrit from Haridwar’s Rishikul State Ayurvedic College. This quotation shows how scholars, as well as the general population, are also propelling the study and reemergence of a language. Some of these scholars are focusing purely on the linguistics of the language- on its structure and its history. Other scholars are taking this linguistic data and connecting it with the cultural and religious ties that this language has with the past. In the end, the study of Sanskrit has the strong potential to contribute to the global intellectual discourse surrounding linguistics and culture. Moreover, the study of this language reveals the possibility of rediscovering heritage and culture and bringing these insights back to modern day Indians who, until recently, have not been meaningfully exposed to this language and its associated traditions.

The investment in this language is especially apparent and affective due to its strong presence in schools: Sanskrit will be a compulsory subject till graduation. I believe that the strong, institutional educational component of the revival of this language is of the utmost importance. By enforcing this language requirement, all young people in the school system will be not only exposed to, but deeply immersed in learning this language during the very most formative years of their life (and during, in psychology terms, the critical periods of language development when acquisition is more easily possible). Although not every youth has the opportunity to go through schooling, the educational system is the best way to reach the greatest amount of people in the new generation. Youth are the optimal demographic in the revival of a language, as they have the sustained, available time to fully practice and ultimately adopt the language and the culture and history that surrounds it. Ultimately, while the participation and investment of everyone- linguistic scholars, religious institutions and people, and scientists, to name a few- is necessary and meaningful, the true success of reviving the Sanskrit language will stem from its presence throughout the education system and the trickle effects of having a huge community of educated people familiar with and fond of this language.

Swearing and its Consequences

This week, I read several articles relating to the firing of teacher Reed Walters for using foul language in an argument with a student in the classroom. Though many of the local Mississippi newspaper articles are very vague about the specific language he used, court papers show that Mr. Walters said "hell" and "ass" in a heated conversation with a student. This encounter caused the teacher of 11 years to be fired immediately, and his case is currently being heard at the Superintendent level.

I found this incident to be very interesting as it highlights how swearing and foul language is a touchy subject in American society- to the point where it can be the reason for someone losing their job. Why exactly are certain words deemed inappropriate and foul? It seems to me very intriguing that certain words, which have gained status as "swear words" through social construction (I wonder if there are actual roots of offensiveness to words such as "F*** or S***) hold so much weight in our social interactions that it caused the dismissal of a teacher. For me, this connects to how language is fundamentally human: humans create, appropriate, adjust, and fully immerse themselves in this complex system called language. We take meaningless phonemes and morphemes and combine them to create endless words, phrases, and sentences with very powerful meanings.

Additionally, the specific role that the teacher was in was indeed very key to the decision to fire him. Because he is a role model, an academic, and an occupant of a position of power (over the female student he was talking to), his language held more weight and potential negative consequences than if he were holding a different occupation, such as gas station attendee or vehicle technician. This highlights how language and its significance varies greatly depending on the speaker, the listener, and the overall context. Relating to the importance of "context," article also mentioned Mr. Walter's defense that if he is to be fired, then all sports coaches must be fired as well, as they are frequent users of swear words and other foul language. These coaches, however, have not been subjected to the same punishments (firing) as Mr. Walters. In fact, there has been no administrative response at all. This issue brings to light how certain language (such as swear words) is much more socially acceptable in some settings versus in other settings. After speculating as to why this is the case, I came to the conclusion that the fundamental culture difference between a classroom and a sports team cannot be overlooked.

This issue also brought up the topic of censorship and the media. I find it very peculiar that media outlets, such as television and the radio, are so adamant about censoring words from their broadcasts. While there is a "beep" noise, it is very

What is the purpose of canceling the sound of swear words, even when the vast majority of people still understand what the word is, and whose minds often fill in the blank anyway? My hypothesis would be that media outlets (and the pressures that make them keep their censorship regulations) view having no swear words as having "class." It has simply become socially understood that public and significant media outlets and figures should not engage in inappropriate language in order to uphold their image. Thus, by making a token effort to "erase" this language, these groups are seen as maintaining a wholesome, socially acceptable image. By doing so, they avoid possible prosecution, like that which the teacher received (though this is different as the teacher incident was one on one personal interaction). Nevertheless, it still seems silly to me that these regulations on media exist, as attempting to censor is futile as most viewers know the words anyway.

Question I have moving forward that I was not able to answer through online research: Is there a basis for the harm caused by swearing? Or, in other words, do swear words inherently cause harm? Is there a correlation between amount of "foul" language a person hears and his/her actions? Or is it simply that foul language, combined with a negative context or specifically threatening environment or relationship between the parties involved, has the potential to be extremely damaging and dangerous.

Links:

News Articles:

http://leadercall.com/opinion/x563624635/More-to-teacher-firing-than-foul-language

http://leadercall.com/local/x1687706738/Fired-WJ-teacher-likely-to-hear-fate-Monday

http://leadercall.com/local/x993497207/Meeting-gets-heated

http://leadercall.com/local/x58341799/Fired-teacher-gets-hearing

Psych/Science Research Articles:

http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=2&hid=15&sid=d27f5211-64ae-4027-a01f-4548980055c4%40sessionmgr10

http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?did=1337539271&Fmt=3&clientId=12498&RQT=309&VName=PQD

Language and Police

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/10/nyregion/10police.html

This week, I read a very fascinating article entitled US Reviews New York Police Dealings with People Who Don't Speak English, published in the NY Times on April 9, 2010. This article details a very noteworthy attempt of New York to investigate the police's treatment of people who do not speak English. Primarily, the search aims to determine whether or not non-English speakers (or, people speaking a different language than the officer present) experience police-citizen interactions in a more negative light (are treated worse, understand less, etc) than those who encounter language-matching police officers.

I feel as though this effort is extremely important, as it recognizes the power of language in affecting everyday interaction, treatment, and experience. I also appreciated how officials (and the author of the article) framed the issue as a social justice, civil rights issue, as the treatment of people by police is a very slippery slope, with many examples of abuse and largely inappropriate behavior by the police. Since a common language is such a fundamental part of human communication, I can easily see how a language barrier may create multiple problems, such as severe miscommunications about actions, rights, and penalties, and the tendency for the officers to treat others more poorly. (There are studies and examples about how treatment of a person is worse when you don't identify with them or don't see them as fully "human" ("dehumanization"). Therefore, I can see lack of communication due to a difference in language as being a contributing factor to the potential for worse treatment of a person by a police officer).

At the same time, a very valid counter argument would be that police officers need to simply do their jobs, and in a time of crisis and potential imminent danger, there is little time to discern whether language barrier is at the root of the interaction. Sometimes immediate police action is required for everyone's safety, and it seems to be unfair to expect police officers to determine the language component of the interaction before acting in what they deem the best way. I feel as though a way to solve this problem would be to ensure that the court system and subsequent hearings take into account any language differences that existed during the initial interaction- which might have caused the police officer to misinterpret the person's silence or lack of obedience, for example. However, even if justice is later repaired surrounding this language barrier (which in itself may be very idealistic of me to hope for), police departments need to further develop programs and protocol for these situations, as one single action in a moment (with a language barrier) has potential for extreme harm.

This article also pointed out how valuable multilingual police officers are, as they have the ability to effectively communicate and interact with many more people who they may encounter during their jobs. Thus, multilingualism is an asset in the police force, as it is in many other sectors of society, in maintaining an equitable enforcement and justice system.

http://das.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/16/6/829

In order to back up the stories that I have heard from the news (internet, TV, newspaper) and from community stories about police brutality and mistreatment of people, I read portions of article entitled "‘I’d grab the S-O-B by his hair and yank him out the window’: The fraternal order of warnings and threats in police–citizen encounters" that was published in the Discourse and Society journal (I found the article in the Ilumina database). Overall, this research study showed that between police-citizen interactions, there is no context when police force is not exerted and felt (even if the police did not intentionally cause harm). Simply due to the institutional power of police and the understood and enforced relationship between the two parties, police will inevitably exert various forms of power and authority over citizens, which in turn often transforms into inappropriate action and abuse. I believe these findings further reveal the need to investigate the role of language and language barriers in these interactions; if police officers are already inherently threatening and forceful against citizens (to varying degrees), a language barrier or inability to communicate has the potential to multiply the problem and the potential mistreatment.

Death of Polish President (Articles in English and Spanish)

Articles in English:

Wall Street Journal: Video http://online.wsj.com/video/polish-president-dies-in-plane-crash/9AF86AA5-B146-4B14-9CF5-7C46358793F9.html?KEYWORDS=Polish+President+Dies

Article: http://blogs.wsj.com/new-europe/2010/04/10/poland-nicknamed-government-airplanes-flying-coffins/?KEYWORDS=Polish+President+dies

USA today: http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2010-04-10-990271873_x.htm

NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/11/world/europe/11poland.html

LA Times: http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/europe/la-fg-poland-mourn12-2010apr12,0,6058111.story

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/apr/10/world/la-fgw-polish-president-crash11-2010apr11

Washington Times: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/apr/10/polish-leader-95-others-dead-russia-jet-crash/

Articles in Spanish:

El Mundo: http://www.elmundo.es/elmundo/2010/04/10/internacional/1270884924.html

El Pais:

Video: http://www.elpais.com/fotogaleria/internacional/Muere/accidente/aereo/presidente/Polonia/elpgal/20100410elpepuint_1/Zes/1

Articulo: http://www.elpais.com/articulo/internacional/Polonia/entierra/diferencias/honrar/preside

nte/muerto/elpepuint/20100411elpepuint_3/Tes

La Opinion:

http://www.impre.com/noticias/2010/4/10/muere-lech-kaczynski-president-182572-1.html

La Vida:

http://www.adn.es/lavida/20100410/PGL-0001-Polonia-Rusia-Kaczynski/_withThumbs/1.html

(Analysis and commentary in the following post)

Different Methods of Language Learning

http://frugaltraveler.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/expensive-language-lessons-doesnt-translate/

This article was a very interesting account of the various ways that a person can go about learning a language and the effectiveness and cost associated with each. Language acquisition is a very important part of modern day society, especially with the increased global interaction and awareness. One possible language learning environment is in the classroom, which allows for dialogue, human interaction, and immediate feedback. However, this depends on having the availability and the funds in order to attend school, which are not feasible for some. Nevertheless, it seems that learning actively with other people in a structured environment is ideal. One study showed how one's ability to learn a language is largely grounded in the reception of affirming, positive feedback (especially when it comes to the French language, interestingly enough). (http://csaweb115v.csa.com/ids70/view_record.php?id=3&recnum=7&log=next&SID=2euqmk7v73h73nvla7143hbvp6&&mark=6). Another more common learning environment is listening to CD programs, which provide culturally competent pronunciations of words and inexhaustible time to practice by yourself. While this may be more feasible for many, it seems that nothing can take the place of enrolling in a class, or actually visiting a different country and immersing yourself in the culture (which proves even more costly).

This leads to a complicated question: how do we make effective language learning equitable. Overall, I believe these findings show how important it is to preserve language classes in all schools. Language learning must be a priority (even amongst budget cuts), as the experience a student can get learning a language in a class cannot compare to any other form. Unfortunately, it seems that more and more often, language is one of the first academic disciplines to be cut from a school's budget. However, the benefits of bilingualism seem to be huge, such as an increased chance of obtaining many different jobs (in government, in non profits, etc) and an increased ability to see the world from a diverse perspective and interact with culturally diverse groups. Additionally, bilingual elders are less likely to have Alzheimer's and other forms of dementia. To me, it seems that these benefits are grounded in everyday, useful human experience and skill as well as fundamental health gains. Thus, language learning must not be abandoned by school districts and must be made available to everyone.

The Intermingling of Languages

The “Spicing local languages with English language is worrying” article was an extremely fascinating report on how the government of Ghana considers the intermingling of English and Ghanaian local languages to be dangerous and harmful. The theme of the conference, "Our roots, our hope for our progress and development" was very telling about the foundation of his comments (URL: http://news.peacefmonline.com/social/201004/41349.php) . It is really interesting how Mr. Khalid sees the furthering of Ghanaian’s own languages as the key to “progress and development.” In contrast, my first reactionary thoughts suggested that engaging with the global world and finding ways to mix one’s roots and the trends of modernity (including dominant, significant languages like English) is beneficial for a culture in the end.

One question the “Spicing local languages with English Language is worrying” article brought up for me is whether a country’s openness to adopting English language components is linked to its political or economic relationship to the United States and other English dominant countries. For example, is the Ghana-United States relationship strained (politically, economically, etc.) in such a way that the leaders in Ghana would actively resist becoming more associated with the country in a linguistic sense? Or, are there simply certain countries that value and emphasize their cultural heritage and want to resist language spread from globalization?

To learn more, I did some background research about the intermingling and mixing of languages in order to gain a broader (and more specific) understanding. Within Stanford’s databases, I found an article entitled Language Shift, Code-Mixing, and Variation (URL: http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/section?content=a713990878&fulltext=713240928), published in the Australian Journal of Linguistics. This article caused me to shift my thinking away from the idea that exchange and incorporation of various languages is healthy and natural. Instead, I came to realize to major languages are a serious threat to the extinction of many smaller languages. These include English in Western Africa (including Ghana) and Australia, as well as Malay varieties in Brunei, Malaysia, Indonesia, and the Dutch diaspora. Since language is so closely tied with a culture and a history, the extinction of many languages, while in some cases seemingly inevitable, is also deeply troubling. I wonder: how can the spread, dominance, and eventual overtake of smaller languages by powerful languages be prevented, or if it is an inevitable part of our world?

This Australian Journal of Linguistics article also illuminated the ambiguity associated with defining what a singular language is. With the common interplay of various languages, there exists many variations of any given language. This makes identifying any specific language at times very difficult. One fascinating part of this article was the discussion about how some language theorists are advocating for language to only be considered discrete in a socio-political sense. In these theorists’ minds, the concept of “a language” would not exist in other arenas. Rather, linguists would “concentrate on plotting elements of language (words, grammatical patterns) as they develop and recombine ultimately in an individual's speech, but also observe regularities and co-occurrence of elements in the speech of communities.” In today’s world, the complete abolition of the singular concept of “a language” seems unnecessary as I definitely do feel confidence and comfort when I say “I speak English, Spanish, and Japanese.” With these languages, there isn’t yet intense interplay and influence of other languages that leads me to question the individual identity of each. However, while I (and the authors of the journal article) do not agree with the abolition of the concept of “a language,” I think it is an interesting prospect that one day, there may be so much intermingling of language and of culture that one’s attempt to differentiate between various languages may be too complex to complete.