{"id":489,"date":"2025-05-13T17:25:22","date_gmt":"2025-05-13T17:25:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppsccom1150publicspeaking\/?post_type=chapter&p=489"},"modified":"2025-07-13T20:49:56","modified_gmt":"2025-07-13T20:49:56","slug":"what-language-is-and-does","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.ccconline.org\/ppsccom1150publicspeaking\/chapter\/what-language-is-and-does\/","title":{"raw":"What Language Is and Does","rendered":"What Language Is and Does"},"content":{"raw":"The Ancient Romans who studied and taught rhetoric divided its study and process into five \u201ccanons:\u201d invention, disposition, style, memory, and delivery. The term \u201cstyle\u201d does not refer to clothing styles but language choices. Should a public speaker use very basic language because the audience is unfamiliar with his topic? Or more technical language with many acronyms, abbreviations, and jargon because the audience has expertise in the topic? Or academic language with abstract vocabulary, or flowery, poetic language with lots of metaphors? Perhaps you have never thought about those questions, but they are ones that influence both the clarity of the message as well as the credibility a speaker will gain during the presentation.\r\n\r\nHowever, we would be wrong if we treated language as an \u201cadd-on\u201d to the ideas and structure of the speech. Language is a far too complex and foundational aspect of our lives for us to consider it as an afterthought for a speech. In this chapter, we will look at how language functions in communication, what standards language choices should meet in public speaking, and how you can become more proficient in using language in public speaking.\r\n\r\nLanguage <\/strong>is any formal system of gestures, signs, sounds, and symbols used or conceived as a means of communicating thought, either through written, enacted, or spoken means. Linguists believe there are far more than 6,900 languages and distinct dialects spoken in the world today (Anderson, 2012). The language spoken by the greatest number of people on the planet is Mandarin (a dialect of Chinese). Other widely spoken languages are English, Spanish, and Arabic. English is spoken widely on every content (thanks to the British Empire) but Mandarin is spoken by the most people. While we tend to think of language in its print form, for most of history and for most of the world, language has been or is spoken, or oral. More than half of spoken languages have not even been put into written form yet.\r\n
\r\n\r\nLanguage<\/strong>\r\n\r\nany formal system of gestures, signs, sounds, and symbols used or conceived as a means of communicating thought, either through written, enacted, or spoken means\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n
\r\n\r\nWe have already seen in earlier chapters that public speakers have to make adjustments to language for audiences. For example, spoken language is more wordy and repetitive than written language needs to be or should be. It is accompanied by gestures, vocal emphasis, and facial expressions. Additionally, spoken language includes more personal pronouns and more expressive, emotional, colloquial, slang, and nonstandard words.\r\n\r\nThe study of language is, believe it or not, controversial. If you are an education, social sciences, pre-law, or English major, you will somewhere in your college career come up against this truth. While we use words every day and don\u2019t think about it, scholars in different fields concern themselves with how we choose words, why we choose words, what effect words have on us, and how the powerful people of the world use words. One theory of language, general semantics, says that meaning resides in the person using the word, not in the word (\u201cBasic Understandings,\u201d 2015). It is helpful for the public speaker to keep this in mind, especially in regard to <\/span>denotative <\/strong>and <\/span>connotative <\/strong>(see Chapter 1) meaning. Wrench, Goding, Johnson, and Attias (2011) use this example to explain the difference:<\/span>\r\n
When we hear or use the word \u201cblue,\u201d we may be referring to a portion of the visual spectrum dominated by energy with a wavelength of roughly 440\u2013490 nano-meters. You could also say that the color in question is an equal mixture of both red and green light. While both of these are technically correct ways to interpret the word \u201cblue,\u201d we\u2019re pretty sure that neither of these definitions is how you thought about the word. When hearing the word \u201cblue,\u201d you may have thought of your favorite color, the color of the sky on a spring day, or the color of a really ugly car you saw in the parking lot. When people think about language, there are two different types of meanings that people must be aware of: denotative and connotative. (p. 407)<\/em><\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\nDenotative meaning is the specific meaning associated with a word. We sometimes refer to denotative meanings as dictionary definitions. The [scientific] definitions provided in the first two sentences of the quotation above are examples of definitions that might be found in a dictionary. Connotative meaning is the idea suggested by or associated with a word at a cultural or personal level. In addition to the examples above, the word \u201cblue\u201d can evoke many other ideas:\r\n
\r\n
    \r\n \t
  • State of depression (feeling blue)<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Indication of winning (a blue ribbon)<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Side during the Civil War (blues vs. grays)<\/li>\r\n \t
  • Sudden event (out of the blue).<\/li>\r\n \t
  • States that lean toward the Democratic Party in their voting<\/li>\r\n \t
  • A slang expression for obscenity (blue comedy)<\/li>\r\n \t
  • In plural form, a genre of music (the blues)<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\nLanguage is not just something we use<\/em>; it is part of who we are and how we think. When we talk about language, we have to use words to do so, and language is also hard to separate from who we are. Each of us has our own way of expressing ourselves. Even more, it is almost impossible to separate language from thinking. Many people think the federal government should enact a law that only English is spoken in the United States (in government offices, schools, etc.). This is opposed by some groups because it seems discriminatory to immigrants, based on the belief that everyone\u2019s language is part of their identity and self-definition.\r\n
    \r\n\r\nNot only is language about who we are; it is about power or at least is used by powerful people. In fact, some educational and political theorists believe that language is all about power. For instance, euphemisms <\/strong>are often used to make something unpleasant sound more tolerable. In one of the more well-known examples of the use of euphemisms, the government commonly tries to use language to \u201csoften\u201d what many would see as bad. During the Vietnam War, \u201cair support\u201d was invented to cover the <\/span>real meaning: \u201cbombing.\u201d When you hear air support, you probably think \u201cplanes bringing supplies in,\u201d not \u201cbombing.\u201d<\/span>\r\n
    \r\n\r\nEuphemism<\/strong>\r\n\r\nlanguage devices often used to make something unpleasant sound more tolerable\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\nEven today, terms like \u201crevenue enhancement\u201d are used instead of \u201ctax increases.\u201d The word euphemism has at its core \u201ceu,\u201d (which is a prefix from Greek meaning \u201cgood\u201d or \u201cpleasant\u201d) and \u201cphem\u201d (a root word for speaking). Just as blasphemy is speaking evil about sacred things, \u201ceuphemism\u201d is \u201cpleasant speaking about unpleasant things.\u201d We use euphemisms every day, but we have to be careful not to obscure meaning or use them deceptively.\r\n\r\nThere\u2019s an old saying in debate, \u201cHe who defines the terms wins the debate.\u201d In the 1988 election, George H.W. Bush was running against Michael Dukakis, who was the governor of Massachusetts. Vice President Bush was able to stick a label on Dukakis and it stuck, that of \u201cliberal.\u201d He not only labeled Governor Dukakis, but he also defined what \u201cliberal\u201d meant. The word was in disuse after that, and you don\u2019t hear it as much now. The word in use now is \u201cprogressive.\u201d Unfortunately, this incident in 1988 politics obscured the fact that the U.S. has always been a \u201cliberal\u201d democratic republic. The word \u201cliberal\u201d has shifted meaning, another trait of language, since meaning exists in the minds of users, not in some protected, never-changing space or form. In the majority of Americans\u2019 minds, \u201cliberal\u201d has become associated with specific political positions rather than a form of government in general.\r\n\r\nThis example brings up another issue with language: words change meaning over time, or more specifically, the meaning we attached to them changes. \u201cPretty\u201d used to mean \u201cclever\u201d 250 years ago. \u201cPrevent\u201d meant to \u201cprecede,\u201d not to keep from happening. Language is simply not static, as much as we might like it to be. One of the main reasons we find Shakespeare daunting is that so many of the Elizabethan words are either no longer used or they have changed meanings.\r\n\r\nWith regard to the use of language for power, even unknowingly, feminists in the 1970s argued that the common way we use English language was biased against women. King-sized means \u201cbig and powerful,\u201d but \u201cqueen-sized\u201d means \u201cfor overweight women.\u201d \u201cMaster\u201d was not equivalent to \u201cmistress.\u201d \u201cMadame\u201d has taken on a negative connotation, even though it should have been equivalent to \u201csir.\u201d Many words referring to women had to add a suffix that was often \u201cless than,\u201d such as \u201c-ess\u201d or \u201c-ette\u201d or \u201cco-ed.\u201d In the last thirty years we have gotten away from that, so that you often hear a female actor referred to as \u201cactor\u201d rather than \u201cactress,\u201d but old habits die hard.\r\n\r\nWe see another example of power in language in the abortion debate. Prior to 1973, abortions could be obtained legally, to some extent, in three states: California, New York, and Hawaii. After the Roe v. Wade decision in January of 1973, they could, at least theoretically, be obtained in all fifty states. Roe v. Wade did not make abortions legal so much as it made anti-abortion laws illegal or unconstitutional. Practically, the effect was basically the same, but we are often imprecise about language. The people who were against abortion were now on the defensive, and they had to start fighting. It\u2019s generally better to be \u201cpro-\u201d something rather than \u201canti-\u201d something, so they became \u201cpro-life.\u201d Those favoring abortion rights then automatically became \u201cpro-death.\u201d One side had defined the terms of the debate, and the other had to come up with something comparable. \u201cPro-choice\u201d takes advantage of the American belief in personal freedoms.\r\n\r\nCan you think of how advertisers choose words in a way that is meant to affect your thinking and see an object in different ways? Realtors sell \u201chomes,\u201d not houses. McDonald\u2019s sells \u201cHappy Meals\u201d even though it is essentially the same food they sell that are not \u201cHappy Meals.\u201d As you progress as a public speaker, you will become more aware of the power certain words have over audiences. An ethical communicator will use language in a way that encourages respect for others, freedom of thought, and informed decision-making. First, however, a speaker should seek to meet the standards of clarity, effectiveness, appropriateness, and elegance in language, which are discussed in the next section.\r\n
    \r\n

    How Language Shapes the Way We Think<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n

    \r\n\r\nIn this TedTalk, cognitive scientist Lera Boroditsky explores the ways language may impact the way we think about our world.\r\n\r\n[embed]https:\/\/youtu.be\/RKK7wGAYP6k?si=0dDl43hM6X5kFHuw[\/embed]\r\n
      \r\n \t
    1. How does language influence the way you think about the world?<\/li>\r\n \t
    2. In what ways can you use language to invite others to explore topics?<\/li>\r\n<\/ol>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>","rendered":"

      The Ancient Romans who studied and taught rhetoric divided its study and process into five \u201ccanons:\u201d invention, disposition, style, memory, and delivery. The term \u201cstyle\u201d does not refer to clothing styles but language choices. Should a public speaker use very basic language because the audience is unfamiliar with his topic? Or more technical language with many acronyms, abbreviations, and jargon because the audience has expertise in the topic? Or academic language with abstract vocabulary, or flowery, poetic language with lots of metaphors? Perhaps you have never thought about those questions, but they are ones that influence both the clarity of the message as well as the credibility a speaker will gain during the presentation.<\/p>\n

      However, we would be wrong if we treated language as an \u201cadd-on\u201d to the ideas and structure of the speech. Language is a far too complex and foundational aspect of our lives for us to consider it as an afterthought for a speech. In this chapter, we will look at how language functions in communication, what standards language choices should meet in public speaking, and how you can become more proficient in using language in public speaking.<\/p>\n

      Language <\/strong>is any formal system of gestures, signs, sounds, and symbols used or conceived as a means of communicating thought, either through written, enacted, or spoken means. Linguists believe there are far more than 6,900 languages and distinct dialects spoken in the world today (Anderson, 2012). The language spoken by the greatest number of people on the planet is Mandarin (a dialect of Chinese). Other widely spoken languages are English, Spanish, and Arabic. English is spoken widely on every content (thanks to the British Empire) but Mandarin is spoken by the most people. While we tend to think of language in its print form, for most of history and for most of the world, language has been or is spoken, or oral. More than half of spoken languages have not even been put into written form yet.<\/p>\n

      \n

      Language<\/strong><\/p>\n

      any formal system of gestures, signs, sounds, and symbols used or conceived as a means of communicating thought, either through written, enacted, or spoken means<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

      \n

      We have already seen in earlier chapters that public speakers have to make adjustments to language for audiences. For example, spoken language is more wordy and repetitive than written language needs to be or should be. It is accompanied by gestures, vocal emphasis, and facial expressions. Additionally, spoken language includes more personal pronouns and more expressive, emotional, colloquial, slang, and nonstandard words.<\/p>\n

      The study of language is, believe it or not, controversial. If you are an education, social sciences, pre-law, or English major, you will somewhere in your college career come up against this truth. While we use words every day and don\u2019t think about it, scholars in different fields concern themselves with how we choose words, why we choose words, what effect words have on us, and how the powerful people of the world use words. One theory of language, general semantics, says that meaning resides in the person using the word, not in the word (\u201cBasic Understandings,\u201d 2015). It is helpful for the public speaker to keep this in mind, especially in regard to <\/span>denotative <\/strong>and <\/span>connotative <\/strong>(see Chapter 1) meaning. Wrench, Goding, Johnson, and Attias (2011) use this example to explain the difference:<\/span><\/p>\n

      When we hear or use the word \u201cblue,\u201d we may be referring to a portion of the visual spectrum dominated by energy with a wavelength of roughly 440\u2013490 nano-meters. You could also say that the color in question is an equal mixture of both red and green light. While both of these are technically correct ways to interpret the word \u201cblue,\u201d we\u2019re pretty sure that neither of these definitions is how you thought about the word. When hearing the word \u201cblue,\u201d you may have thought of your favorite color, the color of the sky on a spring day, or the color of a really ugly car you saw in the parking lot. When people think about language, there are two different types of meanings that people must be aware of: denotative and connotative. (p. 407)<\/em><\/div>\n<\/div>\n

      Denotative meaning is the specific meaning associated with a word. We sometimes refer to denotative meanings as dictionary definitions. The [scientific] definitions provided in the first two sentences of the quotation above are examples of definitions that might be found in a dictionary. Connotative meaning is the idea suggested by or associated with a word at a cultural or personal level. In addition to the examples above, the word \u201cblue\u201d can evoke many other ideas:<\/p>\n

      \n
        \n
      • State of depression (feeling blue)<\/li>\n
      • Indication of winning (a blue ribbon)<\/li>\n
      • Side during the Civil War (blues vs. grays)<\/li>\n
      • Sudden event (out of the blue).<\/li>\n
      • States that lean toward the Democratic Party in their voting<\/li>\n
      • A slang expression for obscenity (blue comedy)<\/li>\n
      • In plural form, a genre of music (the blues)<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n

        Language is not just something we use<\/em>; it is part of who we are and how we think. When we talk about language, we have to use words to do so, and language is also hard to separate from who we are. Each of us has our own way of expressing ourselves. Even more, it is almost impossible to separate language from thinking. Many people think the federal government should enact a law that only English is spoken in the United States (in government offices, schools, etc.). This is opposed by some groups because it seems discriminatory to immigrants, based on the belief that everyone\u2019s language is part of their identity and self-definition.<\/p>\n

        \n

        Not only is language about who we are; it is about power or at least is used by powerful people. In fact, some educational and political theorists believe that language is all about power. For instance, euphemisms <\/strong>are often used to make something unpleasant sound more tolerable. In one of the more well-known examples of the use of euphemisms, the government commonly tries to use language to \u201csoften\u201d what many would see as bad. During the Vietnam War, \u201cair support\u201d was invented to cover the <\/span>real meaning: \u201cbombing.\u201d When you hear air support, you probably think \u201cplanes bringing supplies in,\u201d not \u201cbombing.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n

        \n

        Euphemism<\/strong><\/p>\n

        language devices often used to make something unpleasant sound more tolerable<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

        Even today, terms like \u201crevenue enhancement\u201d are used instead of \u201ctax increases.\u201d The word euphemism has at its core \u201ceu,\u201d (which is a prefix from Greek meaning \u201cgood\u201d or \u201cpleasant\u201d) and \u201cphem\u201d (a root word for speaking). Just as blasphemy is speaking evil about sacred things, \u201ceuphemism\u201d is \u201cpleasant speaking about unpleasant things.\u201d We use euphemisms every day, but we have to be careful not to obscure meaning or use them deceptively.<\/p>\n

        There\u2019s an old saying in debate, \u201cHe who defines the terms wins the debate.\u201d In the 1988 election, George H.W. Bush was running against Michael Dukakis, who was the governor of Massachusetts. Vice President Bush was able to stick a label on Dukakis and it stuck, that of \u201cliberal.\u201d He not only labeled Governor Dukakis, but he also defined what \u201cliberal\u201d meant. The word was in disuse after that, and you don\u2019t hear it as much now. The word in use now is \u201cprogressive.\u201d Unfortunately, this incident in 1988 politics obscured the fact that the U.S. has always been a \u201cliberal\u201d democratic republic. The word \u201cliberal\u201d has shifted meaning, another trait of language, since meaning exists in the minds of users, not in some protected, never-changing space or form. In the majority of Americans\u2019 minds, \u201cliberal\u201d has become associated with specific political positions rather than a form of government in general.<\/p>\n

        This example brings up another issue with language: words change meaning over time, or more specifically, the meaning we attached to them changes. \u201cPretty\u201d used to mean \u201cclever\u201d 250 years ago. \u201cPrevent\u201d meant to \u201cprecede,\u201d not to keep from happening. Language is simply not static, as much as we might like it to be. One of the main reasons we find Shakespeare daunting is that so many of the Elizabethan words are either no longer used or they have changed meanings.<\/p>\n

        With regard to the use of language for power, even unknowingly, feminists in the 1970s argued that the common way we use English language was biased against women. King-sized means \u201cbig and powerful,\u201d but \u201cqueen-sized\u201d means \u201cfor overweight women.\u201d \u201cMaster\u201d was not equivalent to \u201cmistress.\u201d \u201cMadame\u201d has taken on a negative connotation, even though it should have been equivalent to \u201csir.\u201d Many words referring to women had to add a suffix that was often \u201cless than,\u201d such as \u201c-ess\u201d or \u201c-ette\u201d or \u201cco-ed.\u201d In the last thirty years we have gotten away from that, so that you often hear a female actor referred to as \u201cactor\u201d rather than \u201cactress,\u201d but old habits die hard.<\/p>\n

        We see another example of power in language in the abortion debate. Prior to 1973, abortions could be obtained legally, to some extent, in three states: California, New York, and Hawaii. After the Roe v. Wade decision in January of 1973, they could, at least theoretically, be obtained in all fifty states. Roe v. Wade did not make abortions legal so much as it made anti-abortion laws illegal or unconstitutional. Practically, the effect was basically the same, but we are often imprecise about language. The people who were against abortion were now on the defensive, and they had to start fighting. It\u2019s generally better to be \u201cpro-\u201d something rather than \u201canti-\u201d something, so they became \u201cpro-life.\u201d Those favoring abortion rights then automatically became \u201cpro-death.\u201d One side had defined the terms of the debate, and the other had to come up with something comparable. \u201cPro-choice\u201d takes advantage of the American belief in personal freedoms.<\/p>\n

        Can you think of how advertisers choose words in a way that is meant to affect your thinking and see an object in different ways? Realtors sell \u201chomes,\u201d not houses. McDonald\u2019s sells \u201cHappy Meals\u201d even though it is essentially the same food they sell that are not \u201cHappy Meals.\u201d As you progress as a public speaker, you will become more aware of the power certain words have over audiences. An ethical communicator will use language in a way that encourages respect for others, freedom of thought, and informed decision-making. First, however, a speaker should seek to meet the standards of clarity, effectiveness, appropriateness, and elegance in language, which are discussed in the next section.<\/p>\n

        \n
        \n

        How Language Shapes the Way We Think<\/p>\n<\/header>\n

        \n

        In this TedTalk, cognitive scientist Lera Boroditsky explores the ways language may impact the way we think about our world.<\/p>\n