Does A Rose by any Other Name Truly smell as Sweet?: A study of how language effects behavior.

When I was a Writing Tutor, we were taught about the different ways academic essays are written in different languages. In English, we are always taught to write essays in an introduction-thesis-argument-conclusion format. Yet, many other cultures save the thesis statement for last and in others the beauty of your language matters more than the core subject. Reading Chapter 8 of Brown & Lee (2015)’s book regarding the socio-political and cultural facets of language really resonated with me as a result of this experience.

Brown & Lee (2015) draw their readers’ attention to Agar’s notion of languaculture (p. 157). Agar’s notion suggests that language cannot be separated from the culture it is based in and that “language users draw on all kinds of things besides grammar and vocabulary—their biography, the nature of the situation they’re in, history, politics—material from pretty much every discipline that’s ever dealt with people.” (Agar, 2006, p. 2). When I learned about diverse styles of essay writing, I learned that these styles are born from normalized conversation structures in everyday communication. In English, we tend to “get to the point” immediately in conversation, just like how our thesis statements come at the beginning of the paper. For others, the “point” of the conversational story does not come until after a long build up, and in these cultures, it would make sense that their thesis statements wouldn’t appear until the end of the paper. Thinking about Agar's statement, this lead me to wonder if a culture's informal conversation style is the foundation for how they define their formal linguistic standards in academics. Furthermore, how much does this simple difference of "get to the point right away" vs. "build up to the point effect our behavioral norms beyond linguistics? 

While I may not have found the exact answer to my question, my research did lead me to discover the fascinating ways that our languages may  effect our behavior beyond our words. Lera Boroditsky (2017) refers to languages as little "cognitive universes" that have the ability to completely change the reality of the speaker. To highlight her description, she draws attention to the Kuuk Thaayorre Indigenous people from Australia. In their language, the Kuuk Thaayorre people are constantly aware of directional coordinates based on the land around them instead of on the self (e.g. they would say "my west arm" instead of "my left arm"). Boroditsky (2017) then draws her listeners' attention to the fact that this simple difference in language has caused the Kuuk Thaayorre people to have such a acute sense of direction that has changed scientists views on what was once thought to be humanly possible. If language is powerful enough to help its speakers think in ways that were once thought to be impossible, there is no way that we can deny its effect on casual conversation or everyday learning.

Can how we describe direction truly change how we experience it? Boroditsky says yes!

While the effects of language are certainly profound, we must exercise caution to not adhere too closely to the debunked theory of linguistic determinism. NAFSA (2017) describes linguistic determinism as the theory that "one's language determines the ways one's mind constructs categories" (NAFSA, 2017). This concept may sound very similar to Boroditsky (2017)'s observation of the Kuuk Thaayorre people. However, Costa et. al. (2017)'s paper On Language Processing Shaping Decision Making  suggests that further research is needed before one claims that language changes our worldview as Boroditsky's "cognitive universe" description suggests. Instead, it is better to recognize language, culture, and behavior as having a related relationship as opposed to a determinant one. Although Boroditsky suggests that the Kuuk Thaayorre people's sense of direction comes from their language, she does not address their lifestyle. She presents no evidence to clarify if their sense of direction is a direct result of their language or if their linguistic style was established as a result of having more nomadic lifestyle compared to many other cultures.

How does all this information effect our teaching practices? Certainly, as EAL teachers we must be sensitive to the diversity of the cultures of our students. We must also recognize that their background can contribute to their unique strengths and challenges. However, we must be careful not to ignore how similar we all are either. Using commonly effective language teaching practices should remain universal while you speak to every student as a unique individual. Yes, their cultures have an impact on their behavior, and yes, their L1s are strongly linked to their cultures; but neither of these factors mean that their mindsets are immovably "set." When applying the preceding information into the classroom, one should not necessarily alter their teaching practices, but instead keep the concept of "langaculture" in the back of one's mind and use it as a source of empathy for one's students instead of using it as a backbone to one's methods.