Language Reflects the Culture and Thought of Society:
From Theory to Implication on EFL Teaching
by
Tanzil Huda
Muhammadiyah University of Jember
Abstrak: Bahasa merupakan sebuah bentuk kreativitas sejati
(true creativity) yaitu tingkat kecendikiawanan (Latin:
ingenio) atau (Inggris: wit) tertinggi dari tiga tingkat
kecendikiawanan makhluk. Dengan bahasa, manusia mampu
menciptakan karya yang sama sekali baru yang belum pernah
diterima panca indra sebelumnya. Dengan bahasa itu pula,
pikiran sebagai karya manusia dapat diekspresikan.
Ditengarai pula bahwa terdapat hubungan timbal balik antara
pikiran (yang juga tercermin dan merupakan cerminan
budaya) dan budaya. Prinsip tersebut memberi implikasi
yang besar terhadap pengajaran bahasa Inggris sebagai
bahasa asing.
Key Word: Language. culture, thought, EFL teaching.
Introduction
Simply, language is defined as a means of communication, or precisely
(setting aside sign language used among the deaf) language is a means of verbal
communication (Kadarisman, 2008). The other experts or scholars may give
different definitions to sense the concept of language. Chomsky in Kadarisman
(2008) perceives that human language should directly reflect the characteristics of
human intellectual capacities, that language should be a direct ‘mirror of the
mind” in ways in which other system of knowledge and belief cannot. Referring
to Sapir’s (1921), Francis’ (1958), and Finochiaro’s (1974) ideas, Kadarisman
(2008) perceives language as a system of arbitrary vocal and visual symbols used
by people in a given culture to carry on their affairs. The definition, in the writer’s
opinion, implies some important premises. First, language is a perfect symbolism
of human experiences in a given culture. Second, people in the world do not
always share the same culture due to their different affairs, so that the language
used by people in a given culture is potential to be different from the others.
[Type text]
Third, among the languages, there must be still similarities; for every language is
the product of human mind which one to another must share precise potential and
capacity. These premises then become the starting point of this paper discussion.
Language Reflects the Culture and Thought of Society
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis in Blount (1974) incorporates two paramount
theories: the theory of linguistic relativity (weak version) and linguistic
determinism (strong version). Within the theory of linguistic relativity implies that
different ways of interpreting the same world are caused by different cultural
backgrounds of the interpreters and that languages encode these differences.. The
theory of linguistic relativity underlines that the content of every culture is
brought about by its language. Culture is a system of shared meanings that are
expressed through different symbolic forms such as symbols, rituals, stories, and
myths that hold a group of people together.
With the reference of the ideational system, culture is approached as a
system of ideas in three different ways, i.e., cognitive, structural, and symbolic
systems. Culture as a cognitive system is believed to be the system of knowledge,
which epistemologically has been in the same realm as language (Casson, 1981).
Language used as a means of communication is understood as a matter of
individual behavior, individual thought processes, and bioneural functioning,
which is usually beyond the individual’s awareness and control (Littlejohn, 1992).
In this sense, culture is analogous with the Saussurian idea of langue and the
Chomskyan concept of competence. Culture perceived to be a structural system is
in line with Levi-Strauss’ (1974) idea which claims that culture is a cumulative
creation of mind. Culture viewed as a symbolic system is what Geertz in Casson
(1981) views that culture is a semiotic which means studying culture is studying
shared codes of meaning.
Culture is a sub-system of society as the result of human’s creative power,
intention, and feeling in a form of experiences is reflected in social behavior
which is constructed by individual’s behavior. Those human experiences, then,
are expressed by symbols in a form of language. Thus, there is no human society
that does not depend upon, is not shaped by, and does not itself shape language
[Type text]
(Chaika, 1982). This idea is clearly seen in the characteristics of languages used
by the societies of different cultures. Javanese perceive coconut tree differently
from what English people do for their distinct cultural background. Apparently,
unlike the English terms of parts of the coconut tree, Javanese has various terms:
pondoh, plapah, janur, sada, manggar, mandha, bluluk, cengkir, degan, kerambil,
glugu, etc (Wahab, 1995). In English, rice means everything that relates to rice.
Javanese has various that terms represent rice: pari, gabah, sekkem, beras, upa,
menir, las, dhamen (hay) etc (Kadarisman, 2008).
The theory of determinism states that not only does world-view of
speakers of certain language influence their language, but also that the language
they use profoundly affects how they think
In such a sense, language is
metaphorized as a tyrant both reflecting the speaker’s experiences, and, not
defining it, imposing upon his/her particulars and ideas about the world. Thus,
language is the shaper of ideas rather than a merely reproducing instrument for
voicing them (Thomas & Wareing, 1999). According to the theory, language
provides a framework for speakers’ thought. Therefore, it is difficult for the
speakers to think outside that framework. Once a linguistic system is in place, it
affects the way in which members of a speech community talk about and interpret
their world. The evidence of this idea can be seen in the rhetoric of English
writing, especially academic one, which structurally is different from that of
Indonesian writing. The studies conducted by Kaplan (1980), Wahab (!995),
Latief (1990), Sulistyaningsih (1997), Kartika (1997) Harjanto (1999), Budiharso
(2001),
Susilo (2004), and Basthomi (2006) have proved that the rhetorical
pattern of English writing apply linear or directive method rather than circular or
indirective method as it is applied in the rhetorical pattern of Indonesian writing.
In particular, the study done by Cahyono (2001) tangibly shows that EFL
students’ English learning development was likely to affect their rhetoric in
writing Indonesian essays.
On the other hand, the theory of linguistic relativity strengthens the
position of the study language in context which strongly holds the principle that
“variation is the norm”. This principle then becomes a counter-balancing power to
the principle of micro-linguistics, which is identical to context-free linguistics,
[Type text]
which keep the principle that “uniformity is the norm”. Perhaps, it also counters
Chomsky’s “language universals”. In contrast, the theory of determinism is
disputable for it only touches the influence of language to individuals’ thought in
general sense. The empirical evidences only concern extra-linguistics (especially
supra-sentential) aspects of language. Then this theory, if it is not a “sin” to say, is
weaker than Chomsky’ Universal Grammar.
Implication of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis on EFL Teaching
The implication of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis on EFL teaching was marked
by the establishment of Audiolingual Method to respond to the Army method or
Direct Method which had been widely used as the language teaching method . It
was Fries (Director of
English Institute at Michigan University) and his
colleagues who rejected approaches like those of the Direct method, in which
learners are exposed to the language, use it, and gradually absorb its grammatical
patterns. For Fries in Richards & Rodgers (1992), grammar, or “structure”, was
the starting point. Pattern practice was a basic classroom technique. Then, he set
forth his principle in Teaching and Learning English as a Foreign Language in
1945, in which the problems of learning a foreign language were attributed to the
conflict of different structural systems i.e., differences between the grammatical
and phonological pattern of the native tongue and the target language. Contrastive
analysis of the two languages would allow potential problems of interference to be
predicted and addressed through carefully teaching materials. This underlying
idea inspired the behaviorists to introduce Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis.
Theoretically, the Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis was formulated by
Lado in 1957 (Ellis, 2001) which was based on the assumption:
…the student who comes into contact with a foreign language will find some
features of it quite easy and others extremely difficult. Those elements that
are similar to his native language will be simple for him, and those elements
that are different will be difficult.
The first effort of the project was by comparing groups of learners with different
L1 to detect L1 influence on the linguistic and discourse features of their L2. The
different of elements of L1 and L2 is potential to produce errors which are
[Type text]
beneficial for the teachers as the information of learners’ learning achievement
and as the feedback for the evaluation on the instruction he/she runs.
In the classroom, especially in writing class, the learner writers who come
from different cultures may have developed certain preconception about features
of culturally and rhetorically appropriate writing which they learn in their
countries and which may differ dramatically from those operated in the English
writings. With the knowledge of Contrastive Analysis, since it is in the area of
writing well known as Contrastive Rhetoric [Kaplan, 1966], the teacher can
predict and describe the patterns that will cause difficulty in learning, and those
that will not cause difficulty, by comparing and contrasting systematically the
language and the culture to be learned with the native language and culture of the
learners. Accordingly, this will give fundamental value for preparation of the
teaching materials, tests, or language learning experiments.
A simple example of such method can be seen in teaching writing English
letters in Indonesian context. English and Indonesian have a lot of linguistic
aspects which are different. In addition to the aspect, the organization of English
letters, as the extra-linguistic supra-linguistic aspect, is quite different from
Indonesian letters. In English letter, it is not necessary, after the salutation, to tell
unimportant things but Indonesian is. It is very common in Indonesian letters, the
writer or the sender writes everything as courtesy (Indonesian: basa-basi). This
characteristic is also found in the body of Indonesia letters. Therefore, in such
kind of teaching, the teacher should teach both linguistic aspects of English and
extra-linguistic aspect (rhetorical pattern) of the language as well.
Conclusion
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis becomes the fundamental principle in the
study of language in relation to culture and human mind. Culture as the result of
human’s creative power, intention, and feeling is a form of experiences that is
reflected in social behavior which is constructed by individuals behavior. Those
human experiences are expressed by symbols in a form of language. Sapir in
Blount (1974) asserts that the content of every culture is brought about by its
language. That principle has inspired applied linguists to establish the approach in
[Type text]
foreign language teaching which is known as Audiolingual Method, and more
particular Contrastive Analysis or Contrastive Rhetoric. This
method is still
relevant to the recent foreign language teaching. Some principle used as the
underlying theories of the method is identical to the human potential, that is,
human creative power, mind.
References
Blount, Ben G. (ed). 1974. Language, Culture, and Society. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Winthrop Publisher, Inc.
Casson, Ronald W. 1981. Language, Culture, and Cognition. New York:
Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
Chaka, Elaine. 1982. Language the Social Mirror. Rowley, Massachusetts:
Newbury House Publishers, Inc.
Ellis, Rod. 2001. The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford
University Press
Kadarisman, A Effendi. 2008. The “Language is a “Mirror” Metaphor and Its
Implications on Foreign Language Teaching. Paper presented in
National Seminar in Linguistics. Malang: State University of Malang.
Kadarisman, A Effendi. 2008. Course Materials in Schools of Linguistics.
Malang: State University of Malang.
Budiharso, T. 2001. Rhetoric and Linguistic Features of English and Indonesian
Essays Made by EFL Undergraduate Students. Malang: Unpublished
Dissertations, PPS - UM.
Cahyono, B. Y. 2001. How English Learning Development Influences EFL
Students’ Rhetoric of Indonesian Essays. Bahasa dan Seni. 29 (1): 98108.
Casson, R. W. 1981. Language, Culture and Cognition: Anthropological
Perspective. New York: Macmillan Publishing Co. Inc.
Harjanto, I. 1999. English Academic Writing Features by Indonesian Learners of
English. Malang: Unpublished Dissertations, PPS IKIP MALANG.
Kaplan, R. B. 1980. Cultural Patterns Thought in Inter-Cultural Education. In
Croft, K. (Ed.). Readings on English as a Second Language for Teachers
and Teacher Trainees (2nd ed.) Cambridge, Massachusetts: Winthrop
Publishers, Inc.
[Type text]
Kartika, O.R. 1997. A Study on Rhetoric by Indonesian and English Native
Writers in the Jakarta Post. Malang: Unpublished Thesis, PPS UM.
Latief, A. 1990. Assessment of English Writing Skills for Students as a Foreign
Language at the Institute of Teacher Training and Education IKIP
MALANG Indonesia. Iowa: Unpublished Dissertation, University of
Iowa.
Levi-Strauss, C. 1974. Language and The Analysis of Social Laws. In Blount,
B.G. (Ed.). 1974. Language, Culture and Society. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Winthrop Publishers, Inc.
Littlejohn, W. S. 1992. Theories of Human Communication (4th. ed.) Belmont,
California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Lorch, S. 1984. Basic Writing. A Practical Approach (2nd ed.). Toronto: Little
Brown and Company, Ltd.
Sampson, G. 1977. Schools of Linguistics.
University Press.
Stanford, California: Stanford
Sulistyaningsih. 1997. A Descriptive Study on Rhetoric in Students’ Expository
Essays. Malang: Unpublished Thesis, PPS UM.
Wahab, A. 1995. Isu Linguistik. Pengajaran Bahasa dan Sastra. Surabaya:
Airlangga University Press.
Wardhaugh, R. 1982. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. New York: Basil
Blackwell, Ltd.
[Type text]