#is the categorisation of sounds of speech as having certain inherent qualities truly objective—or do they happen to align with certain
Explore tagged Tumblr posts
Last Seen Blogs
Text
believe it or not but assigning morality to phones/phonemes isn’t the haha quirky little joke you think it is!
#like that has uh. a History!#elli rambles#there are definitely some Posts in the linguistics tag sometimes.#it definitely isn’t the most egregious example I’ve seen/heard and the op probably didn’t mean anything by it but. hm!#haha funny alignment chart. now quick tell me what you think about foreign languages. or the sapir-whorf hypothesis perhaps.#ok to take off my Silly Mask for a moment: what I’m getting at with those understatements is that assigning morality/any qualities really to#language has a bigoted—& more specifically: usually racist—history. language has often been used as a tool & justification for oppression.#take a look at the languages currently & historically deemed ‘pretty’ or ‘civilised’. compare that with the ones deemed ‘ugly’ or ‘barbaric’#who speaks them? exactly which features make them ‘worthy’ of those adjectives? is it only phonetics? if so: in what way exactly?#is the categorisation of sounds of speech as having certain inherent qualities truly objective—or do they happen to align with certain#cultural or personal biases? what purpose does this categorisation serve?#are a people deemed ‘barbaric’ because the language they speak is inherently & objectively barbaric—or is it perhaps the other way around?#could this type of view of a language possibly be used to justify the subjugation of its speakers under the guise of ‘civilising’ them?#Perhaps?#which is obviously not to say phonetic features are the only ones used to assign certain qualities to languages! but it was what the post#I’m referencing was about so#anyway sorry I went off on a tangent. I just feel quite strongly about this#languageposting
6 notes
·
View notes