Blog Assignment: Free Gift?

Read "The Gift", then tell me if there is such a thing as a free gift.

Your blog posts can be very dynamic: you can talk about the essay, you can talk about your own life, you can talk about rituals.

Remember that additional participation on the blog will earn you course participation points.

Blog Assignment: Free Gift?

Read "The Gift", then tell me if there is such a thing as a free gift.

Your blog posts can be very dynamic: you can talk about the essay, you can talk about your own life, you can talk about rituals.

Remember that additional participation on the blog will earn you course participation points.

Catching up on Lost Time

I tend to take my time for granted. I do believe that time is precious and the concept of time as a gift probably means something completely different to me than it would to someone else. Every minute we are given on this Earth is a gift or an opportunity to do something meaningful or productive with it. A lot of people (including me) forget about the fact that their time on Earth has a limit, and every minute is precious. Saying "time is a gift" basically is saying to take advantage of what you are given benefit from it. The idea of "time as money" is commonly associated with greed. People who think this way in my opinion are not concerned about making the world a better place or making a difference, they are simply concerned with themselves and how if time is wasted it affects them directly. Living this way is a completely different way than living thinking that time is a gift. Personally I think if you believe as time to be a precious gift, you will live much more effectively and happily.

The Only Way I See It

Time is the future, the possibilities, and it is the first thing people think of when they need strength to grow. Anything is possible one day and that dream is at the heart of anyone who longs for more, but most importantly.

Time is the handbook that tells us what has happened around the world, and how people have reacted. Beyond anything else it is out gateway into the future by being able to dissect similar situations and life lessons learned by others years into the past. Everything that governs what we chose to do in the future is a direct cause of what has already transpired be it a week, or a thousand years ago.

It makes sense that time is money is a more popular saying in America than it is in other countries where saying such as time is a gift, might be more common. Just watching Slumdog Millionaire the other day it shows Americans are focused at money, as is most of the world, but not like our great country. Money is the goal, money is the end of the day, the end of the life, it's human's ultimate goal.

Even the idea of gifts in western cultures revolves around how much money we spend, and how great we are for selflessly giving our green to someone else.

Time makes fools of us all as the saying goes makes the most sense for me, and I have to admit I find the other two quite similar at least in my idea of western culture.

I don't have any money, but I have alot of time!

My mom has this saying that goes something like " Yesterday is History, Tomorrow is a Mystery, so thats why we call right now The Present... because it's a gift." Or something like that. She says it to me every time I get all freaked out about the future or stuck on things in the past. She is someone who really drills that idea into my head on a constant occasion. I feel that we live in a society that is so consumed with the idea of 'time is money" because people are go-go-go all the time. There is such a pressure to be the "perfect student" or "perfect mother" and so on. Our society is also very set on materialistic happiness and making money to create this unrealistic ideal and standard. But I also don't think you should wast your time by never doing anything. People sometimes take advantage of the idea of "living in the moment" by making very stupider dissections that could change your life forever. Like taking revenge on someone or doing something malicious to hurt others. My roommate is half Mexican and all she said Americans are too on time and in her culture they are a bit slower when is comes to the idea of staying on time. 

what time is it in ethiopian time?

2b) If you are from another cultural background than most of the students around you, briefly describe any differences or similarities you notice between your own notion and approach to time and those that are dominant here.

My father was born in Ethiopia and also lived in Greece for a while. Whenever we get together with the Ethiopian side of the family we never meet up at a definite time. They may say they are coming over at 1pm and they might not arrive until 5 or 6pm. My mom has taught my father to be on time more often. In the United States, if you say something starts at a certain time, or you are going to be somewhere at this hour, it is expected. Their perception of time is much different than what is 'acceptable' here. I have no problem with it, but it bothers my mother!

Time is not a commodity, nor is it real.

Why in the West has time been nothing more than a commodity that we never have enough of? First of all time is both the best and worst invention ever created, it has brought order to the world which has enabled us to progress but it has also given us countless stresses as we panic to find time to fit everything into our schedules. There is just so much that we have to accomplish in such a short span of time and we never take the time for ourselves to just sit back and relax. We have become slaves to the clock, a non existent concept that must be constantly checked in order to ease our minds that we are still on track and doing everything as we are supposed to. I wish more people would view time as a gift but the greater majority, particularly in America find themselves diagnosed with imaginary mental disorders from the fast paced, over demanding schedule we have generated for ourselves to insure our spot at the top of the pops as being the most productive and most progressive society in the world. If we could all just chill out for a second and relax, take the time to reanalyze our situation and understand whether or not we're content with this drone esc style of living we would most likely realize that filling every waking second of our lives with something to do has pre-mapped a dull, strained sense of existence. But the people in power know this so they make sure to keep you blind sighted, make sure to keep you slaving away accomplishing nothing but obtaining more crap you don't need, looking to acheive standards that don't exist, and all in the quest for "happiness". Religion especially the Christian faith and more specifically the descendants of the Calvinists, the Puritans brought about this aweful condition with their concepts of predestination, a tireless work ethic, and a socioeconomic hierarchy that placed the wealthiest people as the holiest. We have them to thank for our capitalistic society of fuck over who ever you can so you can make it to the top, and its all a mad dash since the clock is ticking! I say we stop playing their game and start living more fully by enjoying life more through leisure and less through preplanned "fun time". Life is supposed to be spontaneous, and "time" a gift.

Class Tonight Cancelled

Hey everyone,

I have a stomach flu today. I'm going to have to cancel class tonight. Sorry about this.

Andre

Pace of Time Living in Italy

I grew up in America and started my life at America's fast pace. I suffered through beyond full workdays from both parents, both with several post graduate degrees, some obtained after I was born. School took up a majority of my time and when I wasn't busy with assignments, even from an early age, I had social obligations that filled my calender. But then I moved to Italy with a friend and experienced an entirely different pace of life.

Their workday start much later in the day than ours, and their jobs are much less labor intensive except in the worst of situations. They get multiple breaks during the day and it is expected that they have an easy day at their jobs. Leisure is far more important to them than work, and their leisure is much more laid back than ours. Americans schedule their leisure, make plans with friends weeks in advance, throw planned parties, and celebrate every little detail of a persons life on schedule. In Italy, leisure means simply doing nothing, sitting on the bridge/ledges overlooking the town, walking around bridges and boardwalks, playing in piazza's, or enjoying fine italian quisine (only during their limited open hours). Going to the clubs is also much different, its far more impulsive, you don't plan it with your friends in advance, especially not days, much less hours. When it gets late enough you simply feel like going or you don't, people don't get overly dressed up, people don't plan on going to the clubs, its simply, if your out and in the mood, you go, if your in, you stay in.

Time passes much slower in Italy than in America, their economy is probobly worse off for it, but to me, their way of life is simpler, easier. It also makes appreciated the beuty of the country much easier since you actually have time to stop and look around.

Time is all we have.

"Time is a gift."  You really don't think about time as a gift on a daily basis.  Most people think they have all the time in the world, so they waste time or they wait to do something they always wanted to do, or they forget to catch up on life, talk to those they love.  Time truly is precious like a gift.  You never know when you won't have any time left.  I had a very good friend pass away yesterday, so this concept of time is hitting very close to home.  And it makes me even more sad to think that we don't even realize how much of a gift time is until it's too late.  If we only thought of time as a gift more often then I believe people would be happier.  People would probably do more with their time, make the most of it, and truly desire to be all they want to be.  I can't really think of anything negative about believing that time is a gift.  It needs to be thought of like that way more often.

Time: A history of Misunderstanding.

Time as a scientific concept has truly only existed since the Renaissance. Galileo (c.1540) was the first to accurately record time in order to calculate the force of the earth's gravitational pull on a falling stone. Since then, time has been seen as a universal constant, something that will exist indefinitely. In the modern, westernized, perspective, we measure our own lifespan against this infinite value. One finds that we will always come up short. For many in our society, this is disconcerting; from a psychological standpoint, it could be argued that one of our primary motivations in life is the fear of death. 

The concept of time in relation to money developed around the period of the industrial revolution. Farmers moved en masse to the cities, and were paid by the hour to increase mechanical productivity at the cost of their physical health. They were paid well below what anyone could call a subsistent standard of living. They began working for more than 15 hours a day. This is in stark contrast to the lifestyles of the Hunter-gathering peoples, whose short periods of high intensity work strike us as uncivilized. No, we the "civilized" people would much prefer to work ourselves to death. The phrase "time is money", is a misnomer. Work is money. People think that working longer, while being paid at an hourly rate, results in more money. This is simply an exploitation of an unfair system. In the early industrial age, people's life expectancies were so short that money became more important than lifespan, as it assured an immediate improvement in the standard of living. 

Time is only a gift to those that are willing to appreciate it. We measure it, trade it, sell it, alter it. We treat time as a resource that we can control. The Hunter-Gathers see time as a privilege, a blessing. They value time far more than our materialistic civilization. Time truly is priceless. And no, they wont take your mastercard. 

Slow it down

I take a lot of interest in how we in America view and approach time, so I'll spend most of this post answering the second question. A female student in my photography class is originally from Columbia (and is now here at Columbia, heh) and I recently spoke to her regarding her home country's relationship with time. She explained how different it is back home, how in the city, everyone is "always running, always too busy, I don't like it." Just from hearing other people discuss city life, it appears that a lot of hispanic nations have a much slower cultural lifestyle. Based on my own travels and studys abroad to Europe I've seen the same thing. I studied in France for a while and noticed something similar. Other than in Paris, the smaller cities I visited had a much slower and relaxed sense of time. It wasn't like they were "wasting time" by moving at a slower pace, but they were seeming absorbing time, they were not concerned with getting things done "now" "instantly" "in a hurry." This was completely new to me.
I grew up spending my time downtown St. Paul, Minneapolis and so forth where things move fast. Even where I lived, in the suburbs, people drove fast, walked fast and spent most their time in express lanes at the supermarket or in drive thru lanes. This, to me and apparently to my Columbian photo-pal is how America lives. We live fast. We dont take any time to just, live, and this whole process doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Take for example the express-lanes and the drive-thru; we use those everyday because we think it'll save us time, we go to fast food restruants so we don't have to "waste" time cooking. We have credit cards that are simply touch and go processes where the cashier isn't even needed any longer to hand over a reciept. We have mircowavable meals that take mere minutes to cook. It leaves us extra time.
But what do we then do with that time? Watch television? Vote for a crappy new popstar? There is no time literally spent, we waste our time by, trying not to waste time. These other countries I visited and spoke about take time slow, walk places, don't build super highways and go to food stores where food is wrapped up with care and relationships are built with their neighbors. I never see the same person twice at Jewel, that I know of. Every person, in every country around the world, is given the same amount of time everyday to do with what ever they please. I think in America, we think, the less amount of time we spend doing other things, like eating...the more time we'll have to make money. We value money over time, which brings in the question of "time as money," the more time we have, the more money we'll have, in theory. That's why we run around the city and complain when the train is delayed, because we won't have enough time to get every minute on our timecard. It get to the point where when we do have...nothing to do. We get bored. We get bored so easily because in America we don't know how to relax, how to have good relationships where in person conversation is valued higher than a text message. Its unfortunate but its how our culture is.

Blog Assignment #3: "Time is Money" or "Time is a Gift"

Of course Stonehenge:



The Mayan calendar:




Here's an artist's depiction of woodhenge:






Please answer one, or more than one of the questions below:

1)What would it mean to say “time is a gift”? How different is “time as a gift” from “time as money”? How might such a view change our lives? Can you think of any negative aspects to this view of time?



2a)Talk to a student with a cultural background different from your own. Ask that person what they have noticed about Americans’ view approach to time. How is it different (or similar) to the approach with which they are familiar?

OR

2b) If you are from another cultural background than most of the students around you, briefly describe any differences or similarities you notice between your own notion and approach to time and those that are dominant here.

More than just losing a language

By losing languages we are missing more and more aspects of human nature, and how we came to be in our present form. It should be everyones concern to preserve languages because by losing our diversity of language, we are losing our diverse understanding of ourselves as humans. The articles also bring up a point that by losing languages, we are also losing possibly valuable insights into medicinal plants. Every single one of our drugs we have today is derived from our natural world, and we certainly have not identified or discovered all plants that could prove to be revolutionary in the medical field. By losing native languages that have identified and used medicinal plants, we could be delaying the process of or entirely missing out on the further development of extremely valuable medicines and drugs that coule be used on a more universal level. So saving languages goes beyond getting a a better cultural understanding, it reaches out into how each and everyone of us could be living in the future

It's all in how you say it

{empty blank space}

Without the English language, I wouldn't have been able to communicate that. I wouldn't be able to write out anything here either. The English language is the foundation of American culture and something, I believe, a lot of us take for granted. There is no foreseeable threat to our language, millions speak it, it's written for advertisements, literature, translated in our movies and music for other countries around the world, it is a very stable form of communication, however this isn't that case for a lot of languages in the world.
As it is our foundation, other cultures take pride in their language because it serves the same purpose, to communicate abstract ideas from person to person. Without language, stories and fables teaching morals and lessons could not be passed down from generation to generation. Also, art holds a different meaning when you cannot have the words to support something you have created. Even music has it's own language, a set sort of rules to abide by in order to create something beautiful. Without these languages, cultures start to lose their identity, and with that, people start to lose their identity.
It is important for people to hold on to their native language reguardless of where they immigrate to, however it is just as much their responsibility to learn communication skills of their new country. I use Spanish as an example. I believe that it is great that Mexican immigrants have held on to their native language while living in America, however, I feel like both English speaking Americans and Mexicans have the responsibility to learn the basics of the other's language in order to create a cohesive, comfortable environment and culture. I think the acceptance and understanding of the other languages and cultures surrounding you or that you interact with leads to peace and comfort as well as amazing creativity. I mean, japanese fusion food came from somewhere.
I find it saddening that so many smaller cultures are losing their language. However, I only find it upsetting that these cultures are literally disappearing because nobody practices the tradtions of the culture anymore, or that all the people have died out. However, I do feel that there is light at the end of the tunnel. One language will not only birth one culture. With dialects and regions comes new cultures. While these older languages have died out, new ones have been replaced and new cultures are born from the influences of the past and present. It is impossible to hold on to every piece of your old culture for the next generation. Your parents took pieces they have pride in and passed them onto you and you'll take pieces and pass them onto your children, but they won't nessicarily be the same because of experiences and what-not. And eventually, quite possibly a new language could be born from your great-great grandchildren learn. Take for example slang and internet lingo, your parents didn't teach you those things. They are things you learn and you will pass on. Times change and as they do culture develops and changes right along with it. While I find the extinction of these languages sad, I cannot help but think that with the addition of the new language, the dominant language, more diverse cultural identies will be born. But that's just one way to say it.

Stayin' alive in 09!

We should care about languages dying out because they show the rich cultural differences in the world. If all of the people in the world converged into speaking one language we would also loose a great amount of history. The language of a culture shows a great deal about the people themselves and their way of life. Imagine if French ever became a dead language, the French people in themselves would loose a piece of their identity. France would still be France essentially; their customs may not change. But I can’t imagine if for whatever reason, old languages started dying out that the way the society functioned collectively would not change. So, lets keeps these languages alive.

jessie little doe

I found it almost unbelievable that jessie little doe started to have weird dreams and realized she was the one to bring back a language that had not been spoken in 7 generations. It was pretty cool how she connected the language that was spoken in her dreams to the street signs she passed one day and followed through with the research.

Since we only use about 10% of our brains as humans, to my knowledge, what does the other 90% do? From what I have learned in the past, there are electrical waves running through our brain and I believe it is possible and almost inevitable for one of the sparks every once and awhile to jump over to a part of our brain that we never use. They do say that if we were able to use all of our brain power that we would be able to walk through walls, fly, and move objects like John Travolta did in that one movie he did in the 90's (I can't remember the name). I realize that I am going a bit off topic, but what I am trying to get at is that I believe that it is possible that jessie used a different part of her brain while she was asleep to understand that the people who were speaking in her dream were speaking her ancestor's language.

Baaahhhzzpp...that means i had a good day.....?

I was actually having a conversation with one of my friends the other day about language and its evolution. We began to hypothesize that language would eventually just be noise that we make (well actually that's what we kind of do now). What i mean is, for example, we thought that one day you would be able to express how you were feeling, what your day was like generally, and talk about the weather all in one sound like, "BAAhhhzzzp". At the time it was pretty hilarious to try and come up with sounds that would describe an emotion, situation, or event, but i began thinking again about this conversation after reading these articles. I don't think that language dies, but rather i would like to think that in some ways we as a human race, and I'm sure other species, become more efficient with communication over time, and thats why language changes, "dies", or evolves. We are making life a little easier when it comes to communication. For instance you can have an entire conversation with someone now without even uttering a sound via your cell phone. Making life easier one less sound at a time.

So your language died, what next?

Unfortunately like most things, languages will decrease and condense. This is not necessarily a bad thing, since a common language will prevent misperceived communication and ideas. It has the potential to help unify people in a collective conscious which can be beneficial, but of course there are also tragedies to consider such as the central means of communication for an entire culture disappearing and the Orwellian factor of becoming mindless drones as we lose ourselves. However since all of the world's problems stem from inexperience with various situations and misunderstandings as a result of everyones unique life experience, a lessening of languages could help in massive ways to resolve issues and bring about global understanding to higher degree. People fear what they do not understand and even if everyone were to learn one common language which currently is pretty much english with spanish and mandarin somewhere behind we could communicate with a more similar understanding. This is of course scary at the same time since losing these unique languages only able to be spoken and understood by a select group of people would no doubt be a tragedy. So I believe it is up to people to record these languages and inform people that they once existed.

What if no one speaks my language anymore today?

That is not a normal question that we ask ourselves every day, however lately people should be asking themselves just that. Language is very important, but how many languages do we really need? When one country has several different languages it would be hard for a language to survive. In the United States Spanish is the second language spoken, however in the current working world, many jobs you need to know a second language. When someone is standing in front of you at a store and they are speaking another language that you don't understand, it gets very annoying. When you are in another part of town, and no one speaks english, that is annoying too. I believe that there should be one language that everyone should have to know how to speak. If everyone can speak at least one common language everyone would be able to communicate much easier than in today's world. If a cultures language dies out it is because the culture either doesn’t want to carry on the language or they can’t. When someone loses a language they may lose communication between them and older people, but as for the younger generations, I don’t believe they lose anything. Cultural identity doesn’t necessarily have to do with only language. Identifying your culture could include cultural ceremonies, the way in which you live, and many other things.

Language Preservation

I think that languages do evolve, but these languages that are becoming extinct should definitely be preserved because they tell a lot about a culture. The people who speak these indigenous languages might not be adopting to the homogenizing cultures because they want to, but because they do have to. If they do not receive the education to record their language, but do learn how to write another, then they will have to adapt, which makes their language extinct. I think that the researchers who are preserving the languages are doing the right thing because languages are evolving against the will of the people who speak these languages.

Our Land

When reading these articles one thing above all else stood out in my mind, and though I agree with it with all my heart, in an Anthropology class it may not be taken too well. The movie Hero recalls a time of chaos in China where lands were being conquered and absorbed into the central nation. In the movie a assassin who had the chance to kill the emperor responsible stays his hand, and not until the end do you realize why, when he writes the 20th form of the word sword, which shares the shape of a phrase in Chinese which stands for "All under Heaven."

The point of all this is to say languages are an important part of culture and are the words in which we use to channel our ancestors and history, but we live in a world of suffering and only feel more isolated the harder it is to communicate what's in our hearts. The emperor of China saw this as well, he laughed at 20 ways to write one word, how confusing, how useless. Now I don't hold those same views, but I do believe that there is a benefit in being able to communicate with people at ease.

Language is an art which should never be lost, and should remain as diverse as the people speaking it, however I do believe that a globalized language is not the enemy of these endangered languages, I don't believe it even belongs in the same category, the enemy of these dying languages is laziness, is the cultures themselves. I will always morn Bloody Sunday, but what do you think when I say Bloody Sunday? Chances are that event is something different to you than it is for me, but being that the Irish rebellion was so important in my family's history how could anyone think that would die? Just like my friend who's first language is Spanish, though was born and raised in Minnesota, that part of him will never die, and it won't die with his children either. Now after that who knows these languages are an art, but their also a choice.

Save them or not I won't be forgetting my culture any time soon, and for those who do I only hope they can find an amazing ray of new and exciting pieces of themselves to replace whatever is lost, so that their children too can channel their history, their ancestors.

-Bryan D. Racine

preserve a language, preserve a heritage.

In the book Conformity and Conflict Language is defined as " a system of cultural knowledge used to generate and interpret speech". If language is meant as a way to express ideas and opinions, to keep records and hold conversations,  to pass on cultural knowledge, then how can it be that so many languages are slipping away every day, some with only single members that remember how to speak it? When I read the article from The New York Times I imagined what it would be like if I were the only person on the planet that knew how to speak English. How would I even begin to explain the intricacies and small complexities to somebody, especially when there would be no practical use for them to learn it. I soon stopped thinking about this because it made my brain hurt, but the thought remained that preserving a language, any language, is important not only because it can help us understand a culture, but because it can help us to understand our current position in the world. While it is true that cultures both big and small often live and die like a living organism, it is important to keep a record of these languages and their people, to learn from them and record their histories. We as modern citizens and as human beings owe it to these people to at the very least make a record of their language. To note that they inhabited the planet and made some sort of mark. Languages and cultures evolve just like people, certain things become homogenized or antiquated, but it is important to recognize these things and their significance in the grander scale. 

Save the languages!

It is sad to think about languages dying out.  I think we should certainly care about languages dying because they are such an integral part of different cultures and civilizations.  It is, obviously, how each culture communicates and can show us how a culture came about.

For example, I read about the Bantu culture in Africa recently.  There are several hundred different languages in the Bantu culture, and a lot of them were used to discover the past cultures of the Bantu.  It showed where different cultures were located in Africa and the kinds of systems they used from political to economical.  Anthropologists used linguistics to characterize certain cultures in Africa, so languages were extremely important.

When you lose a language, you start to lose everything that came with the language.  In our culture, with our language, we have a lot of different slangs and ways to describe what is going on with our world and to describe different people.  If our language happened to die out, then so would a lot of our opinions and a lot of our past.  People wouldn't be able to remember what we thought, and that is sad.  So, it's the same for all these other languages dying out.  We won't know much about the people as a culture or as individuals.  I wish English would stop trying to dominate our world.  It is not all about us.

'dead' is subjective.

I'm a little torn about the subject, to be honest. 

On one hand, I suppose in a way it's a little depressing to think of languages as disappearing completely -- they're such integral parts of culture and to have that forgotten or taken away is crippling. On the other hand, I do agree with the sentiment that language doesn't die, exactly. It evolves, and it's necessary for language to change with the times. Things that were relevant years and years ago, while they should be respected and upheld in memory, aren't always logical for a modern standpoint. The same really goes for any aspect of society. 

It's hard for me to say, but in some ways perhaps it's better that languages are falling out of use, changing, or mixing...

Changing the Definition of a Dead Language

When one thinks of a "Dead Language", aramaic, latin, heiroglyphics and other ancienct languages come to mind. But those languages died for different reasons then the ones mentioned in the article. Originally the homo-sapien world was confined to small portions of the world but when humanity started expanding across the globe, distinctions emerged between the societies and that's what we refer to as culture. A big part of that is language, and when the "center of the world" became just another place on the map there were 100s of languages to match to 100s of new cultures that had emerged. So the original few languages were dying off and being replaced by languages engrained in specific cultures. So to sum up, the spread of culture can be viewed as a strong factor in ancient languages dying.

But in modern days, indigenous tribes are losing their cultures to more mainstream ones. Slowly their languages and traditions are being swallowed by not only the English language (in reference to native american languages), but to other foriegn languages that are prevolent in the tribes area. So the term "dead-languages" was once used to refer to humanities original written words, but can now be expanded to include languages which are being swallowed up by mainstream cultures. The pressure to conform for survival is also putting a strain on indigenous tribes to maintain their culture, which includes their language.

Languages don't die, they evolve.

When one says, "dead language", the first thing that comes to my mind is latin. Latin, the holy language of the Roman Catholic Church. Europeans wrote primarily in latin during the times of the roman empire and the middle ages. But then, something changed. The holy works of latin were translated into a variety of european vernacular tongues, in order for biblical texts to reach a wider audience. And slowly, latin was used less frequently, both in speech and in writing. Once the language of academia, we started to rely on its variations: French, Spanish, and Portuguese, to mention a few. This occurred within the context of hundreds of years of social and economic reforms in early modern europe. Political boundaries changed, and people began to identify themselves by ethnicity, of which language is a major component. 

So I challenge the idea of dead languages. I believe that languages are dynamic; they either keep up with the pace of contemporary society, or become extinct.  I admit that the homogenization of cultures is a concern, but I believe that people are adopting to the homogenizing cultures and languages because they want to, not because they have to. 

I took Spanish in High school.......but don't ask me if i know any

I think we should care about other languages dying out. Language is something that can connect us to our cultural identity. Its like the basic hitory book into our past. If we lose languages we almost lose some diversity in the world too. With everyone specking the same language life might become boring, a from of culture might disappear. Different languages distinguished people apart ( not in a bad way), they can also help create communities of people with the same cultural identity. Plus, if everyone spoke english where would the fun be in taking another language in high school, when you could never use it anyway? 

Shakespear and the Bush

In Bohannan's article she makes the assumption of naive realism, that there is a certain universal truth to all things and that everyone everywhere will perceive basic concepts of morality and culture in the same way. She was hoping that through literature as classical as Hamlet she could get across the same basic story once translated into the Tiv's native language. This experiment ultimately failed due not only to the fact that certain words are untranslatable to other languages, but also because their is no such thing as a universal perception of the world. The Tiv could not grasp the idea of life after death as she attempted to explain what a ghost was, and something as taboo as the king's wife remarrying directly after his death and to his brother was applauded by the Tiv. Bohannan was left frustrated trying to tell them the story as they continually corrected her and she continually condensed the story to make it easier to understand. Her story had become entirely different than Shakespear's original work with the key elements of the language that generated the emotion cast out. However the Tiv luckily still enjoyed the story. :)

Blog 2: Following the Fate of the Dinasaur

and the dodo...



According to the NY Times article “Languages Die, But Not Their Last Words”, there are about 7,000 languages spoken in the world today. Of these languages, nearly half will likely be extinct in the next 100 years. [Read this article before your answer these questions.]

In your blog response, I want you discuss one or more of the following questions:

Should we care about languages dying out? Why? Is language important to cultural identity? What is lost when we lose a language?

Please think of an original title for each of your posts. I will count comments on other people’s posts as your post for the week when your posts respond to something that the original poster stated in her/his blog response.

Shakespeare in the Bush

The Tiv people of West Africa who had never read Hamlet who interpreted the story have a completely different culture than ours as Americans. The details that we see and read in popular literature are examined to our best of knowledge based on the traditions and the ways we live our lives on an every day basis. The Tiv people see their priorities and life lessons according to what they know and what they have grown up with. Their interpretation of Hamlet proved a much different interpretation than ours; discrepencies and confusion provided a wake up call to Bohannon making her realize that just because she, in her own culture saw the story one way inside and out, did not mean other cultures would have the same take on it, which had never crossed my mind.

Shakespeare Translated

The author had the assumption that the play, Hamlet, had one possible interpretation that was universally obvious between all cultures. This, however, was not verified since the tribe’s elders that the author was sharing the story with had different understandings of what the author was trying to tell them in the story. Many details of Hamlet just simply could not be translated to be understood by this particular tribe. For example, the elders of the tribe could not understand the concept of a ghost, It just did not exist to them. Also, their idea of death and how it should be handled by family members did not match up at all, the elders did not believe in a mourning process, and found it completely normal for a widow to remarry immediately simply for survival purposes.

If the author had the ability to go back and take the time to tell the story, and go more in depth with explanations and how things typically work in English culture, then the author may have been able to get a closer interpretation to what Hamlet actually meant. But I do not think that there is a way to render Hamlet completely understandable to this tribe. This is mostly because many of the details of the story were just untranslatable.

Did you understand Hamlet?

          Laura Bohannan believed that Shakespeare’s, story of Hamlet had an a universal understanding to all people around the world. That the basic story line would be interpreted the same way to all people. She assumed that even to a remote tribe in West Africa the story would hold the same meaning and understanding that it does to people living in America, Europe and so on. What she found was that the town elders of the tribe found the story to be wrong and didn’t share in the same interoperation Bohannan assumed it would be. The tribe didn’t believe in things like “ghost” or the idea of sons killing uncles. Their customs and beliefs also saw it as impossible for someone to die from drowning because water could only be used to drink and bathe in. So Bohannan found that many aspects of the story of Hamlet could in fact not have a universal meaning and be understood by all people in the same way. Not only for the story of Hamlet but for a lot of things in general. That all things have a different interpretation and meaning to all people. Universality (Is that a word?) in some ways does exists. 

What assumptions did the author test out in the bush?

The author assumed that the elders would understand, or shift their way of thinking temporarily to try to understand American social rituals such as marriage, power and death which is obvious that the elders didn't and perceived the story of Hamlet completely different than how most Americans would.  A good example is how the author assumed that the elder's would be able to understand the concept of a ghost, when in actuality the elder's could not understand that and related the idea of a ghost with a zombie which is a connected to the bush's peoples pagan beliefs which must have been very hard to get across thus initiating the new interpretation of Hamlet by the Elders.