Imagine a world without language. There would be no means of expression or communication and individuals wouldn’t be able to function efficiently. Language defines an individual as a part of a group that communicates in the same manner and allows ideas to be translated into words and signs understandable by those around us. It also permits interaction and is a carrier of emotion. Some writers, however, such as Gloria Anzaldua, Amy Tan, and Richard Rodriguez insist that language holds greater importance. Though, it may hold great value to some individuals, language only exists out of necessity to communicate.
Language has been long defined as an embodiment of character and identity. This perception originates back to purpose of language, which is, as a tool of interaction. Different people speak from various styles and dialects, and thus, language has become diversified to accommodate for the different geographic settings existent in our world .Language has come to be known as an aspect that defines the type of character you are, for it tells more about your type of education, past, and lifestyle better than any professional biography could.
Assimilation has burdened some in their efforts to accept a new experience in a different location. Many may disregard the need to conform, feeling that their current being shouldn’t be changed. The mindset of complacency is practically the most disadvantageous choice of living when submerged in a new environment. Though some may feel that they are being “loyal to their heritage”, new customs and traditions reside in the realm of opportunity reachable only by those who want to evolve into influential persons of their time. So, while your state of content and satisfaction seems assuring, remember that greater strengths and skills await for those willing to change for the better.
Before I discuss the matter at hand, I must commend Gloria Anzuldua for her pride in her language. Not many can master so many dialects but she also challenged those that stand as just English and Spanish speakers, and don’t ‘belong’ to either group. She has quite the experience in English and Spanish speaking, and her writing is exceptionally unique in style. Her comparison of language to a dentist visit was brilliant in form for the visualization of depriving one of his or her language.
I feel the sentiments of this story at moments, as when Chicano students were coerced to “get rid of [their] accents” (Anzaldua 438). Similarly, the classification of a group of females as “nosotros” instead of “nosotras” is by no means just or fair. That, however, is not the nature of my argument, for I, too, sympathize with such moments.
With that in mind, I have something to say in response to her piece of writing “How to Tame a Tongue”. There was something in her perspective that rubbed me the wrong way, something I couldn’t pass up with commentary or criticism, something in the way she described the idea of robbery of language as unjust and unnecessarily harsh.
On this point, I couldn’t disagree with Anzaldua more so I don’t say this lightly; in its natural sense, this robbery is really not a robbery at all. This is quite a provocative claim for it seems implausible that something, like language, that is valued so much can, if seized from someone, rob them of a fragment of their identity. I realize that this statement might be too much for individuals like Gloria Anzaldua to gulp in one sitting, so allow me to assist in this digestion.
The core of my response is that in choosing to mainly speak a “Chicano” Spanish, a mix-breed of the English and Spanish languages, you were limiting the audience that you appeal to. Because only few can understand this intricate language, you are restraining your potential in communication. In using Chicano Spanish, your persuasive attack is flawed as your message only relays to Chicanos and Chicanas.
Gloria Anzuldua uses code-switching throughout the essay, which reveals your form of English-Spanish speaking but simultaneously anger the vast majority who speak only English or Spanish, for any chance of understanding her is dwindled by every occurring ambiguous sentence. Any thoughts of good intention have now seized as she only appears as a stubborn child in the eyes of many. So, in essence, your own writing is part of your downfall, for I too struggled to understand phrases such as “nos quieren poner candados en la boca “, which seemed rather important due its context in the story (Anzaldua 439).
As another writer in the face of the feared assimilation, Richard Rodriguez relays his experiences of adjusting to the American culture. Unlike Gloria Anzuldua, Richard Rodriguez took hold of his opportunity after much self-debate. It seemed as though his situation was perhaps more severe than that of Anzaldua. Rodriguez was tracked down and addressed directly for his language usage and that brought about a change for the better. Rodriguez argues that a sacrifice of self-identity is at work but the advantages outweigh the consequences. I see no sacrifice but rather an embracement of a new world with different expectations. I agree, however, that individuality is defined as being part of a group. (Rodriguez 520) By accepting the American experience, Rodriguez gained a new light of wisdom to transcend his character to the next level.
Amy Tan, a Chinese American lives in an environment that expects here to speak different “Englishes”, based on the circumstance, and the persons been addressed. She realizes the effect of language on the perception people had of her mother, who spoke of a distinct dialect (Tan 78). Even though, she kept her heritage, she understood that certain situation called for a certain dialects, such as standard English, a dialect understandable by the majority of English speakers.
These passages seem to elude a key concept that is very contradictory of their passages. You can’t truly lose your identity. To stop being you would be quite unnatural and it would have to result from an intense oppression which is non-existent, in the action of assimilation. To seize an individual from his or her native language might seem quite cruel of an act, but perhaps this isn’t the case at all. Living in a new experience, one must change accordingly, just as how animals adapt to extreme climatic conditions and environmental changes for the better.
Assimilation isn’t analogous of a strident switch from red to blue but rather a natural fade from red to purple, whereas characteristics of your previous self live on but new features arise, features that have been locked for years in the rigid box of self-potential.
One personal experience of mine with language stands out to me from my past. At school, there was a young boy in my grade level. He didn’t speak much but he kept on appearing in my life on different occasions. It dawned on me that we happen to have similar interests. We eventually began communicating and it was then he told of how he didn’t know English as well as he knew Spanish but was eager to learn. Ironic, I didn’t know Spanish as much as I knew English but was also eager to learn. So, day in and day out, we would point at objects. “Como se dice…” he would say, which meant “How do you say…” I would slowly say the English pronunciation and he would say the Spanish pronunciation. We never mastered either language but we gleamed with joy, witnessing our novice minds grow in the field of the unknown.
Work Cited
Anzaldua, Gloria. “How to Tame a Wild Tongue.” The Norton Reader, 12thEdition . Ed. Linda
Peterson & John Brereton. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2008.p436-451. Print
Rodriguez, Richard. “Aria.” The Norton Reader, 12thEdition . Ed. Linda Peterson & John
Brereton. New York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2008.p517-522. Print.
Tan, Amy. “Mother Tongue.” Rotten English: A Literary Anthology . Ed. Ahmad, Dorah. New
York: W.W. Norton & Company, 2007.p76-80. Print.