Thursday, May 22, 2014
Anzaldua: How to Tame a Wild Tongue
Discuss Anzaldúa’s view of language. How is it that “robbing” a people of their language is violent? How can language, according to Anzaldúa, be a “homeland”? What is the connection between identity and language? Use specific examples from the text to support your claims and warrants.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
In How to Tame a Wild Tongue, Anzaldua establishes language as the key to identity and validation of that identity. Language unifies and allows people to identify with one another, however, it is also known to attract violence. Violence is instilled when people rob others of their language. There are fights between the native language/culture and "civilized/modern" language/culture; exemplified by "250 years of Spanish/Anglo colonization" (79). Forcibly instilling a new language/culture kills off tradition and pride through the violent tear of ancestral roots in native land.
ReplyDeleteRobbing a people of their language also takes away a commonality that they use to identify with one another. Not only is their violence against those responsible for (post)colonization, but the varieties of english, spanish, and spanglish now spoken in brown communities makes victims of theft use "language differences against each other" (80). Anzaldua points out that "Chicanas who grew up speaking Chicano Spanish have internalized the belief that we speak poor Spanish" a feeling that comes from being suppressed by other Spanish speakers. Ultimately, the feeling that Chicano Spanish, like any other language, "is illegitimate, a bastard language" (80) brings violence against self. Should the Chicana stick to english, feeling "uncomfortable talking in Spanish to Latinas, afraid of their censure" (80)? Or should she be able to freely use any language she chooses without having to accommodate? Code switching, which Anzaldua practices, without being burdened by what OTHER people may not understand, is a way to connect identity and language to a homeland. As a bilingual Chicana, Anzaldua's tongue connects her to experiences in Mexico and in the United States allowing them to become part of her identity. Her "I will no longer be made to feel shamed of existing" (81) mentality gives validation to her homeland, her language, and therefore how she identifies.
Lucy, I really like your comment! I thought it was interesting how you said language is known to attract violence, as if that is a way for people to instantly spot members of an outside group. It was also interesting to note that towards the end of your 1st paragraph you made language synonymous with culture, which makes sense as culture is tied closely to one’s identiy, which is largely influenced by one’s culture. I think you captured the complexity of language really well, by mentioning the various paths that Latinos can choose from in an attempt to decide which language to speak. I agree with your strong emphasis on how language gives one a sense of validation, and I think it’s important to remember that in terms of looking at our own lives, as well.
DeleteLucero - I really enjoyed reading this response. You contextualize the chapter very well and present the complexities of language to understanding culture. I particularly enjoyed your analysis of language as a form of violence--the destruction of language is a form of cultural genocide that occurs far too often within the Latino homes. This violence is evident in the public vs. private for many first generation immigrant groups as immigrant parents strive to "preserve" culture by not allowing their children speak English in a home, however, the irony is that this "preservation" turns into a form of rebellion and betrayal.
ReplyDeleteIn How to Tame a Wild Tongue the action of “robbing” people's tongue or language is described by Anzaldua as equally violent as “war” (75). She describes how her own experience in school lead to violence because she spoke her own native language rather than using standard english that which everyone was expected to subcome too. Because language is form of communication between people it is vital for people to uphold their language in high regards it becomes sacred, but when dominate group believes that their language is superior and tries to enforce others to adopt their language conflicts of violence arise from the other cultures refusing to give up their tongue and the dominant group trying to enforce their own. Clashes of language can cause eruption of violence because language is not only a form of communication but also a “homeland” one which people express themselves freely and without restriction of governing provisions. Because “homeland” is part of our very being it then that our language is also part of our own identity, it is a from “communicating the realities” that people hold “true” to themselves in essence a form of self validation (77).
ReplyDeleteFirstly, contexualize the violence Anzaldúa faced in school. Language being a form of communication is not why it is important nor sacred; maybe on some basic sociological level. But Anzaldúa stresses the unique way language carries culture. Next, your sentence, "Clashes of language can cause eruption of violence because language is not only a form of communication but also a “homeland” one which people express themselves freely and without restriction of governing provisions." is unsupported in its entirety. Explain how eruptions of violence occur because language is a homeland. Language is not a homeland because people express themselves freely and without governing provisions, thats the entire argument of chapter five. Strengthen your connections.
DeleteI again think you have great ideas you just need to proof read and expand your response. I agree with Nicholas that you need to contextualize the violence Anzaldua endured and you need to make more connections between the points that you are making. Your response is also a little vague. It needs some more specific examples.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteLanguage is self, Anzaldúa argues in chapter five of Borderlands. There are many distinct variations and combinations of English and Spanish. Chicanos "have developed significant differences in the Spanish we speak" (Anzaldúa 79). Like ethnic identity, language varies by region. Therefore "ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity-I am my language" (81). The way Latinos are robbed of their language is that they are taught that their language "is illegitimate" and that they "speak poor spanish" (80). When Chicanos internalize their sense of identity as invalid "we use our language differences against eachother" (80). Anzaldúa argues that "we oppress eachother trying to out-Chicana eachother" (80). By Chicanas modifying language and in turn themselves they are forgetting their culture. A culture only lives if it is practiced By not cultivating these tendencies cultural genocide is committed; which is more violent than war ever can be.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYour response is straight forward and flows well.. You back up your ideas well. Good job on that. I think your second and third sentences could be a little bit better and more relevant to the rest of your post. I like your discussion on violence and how diminishing language leads to diminishing culture.
ReplyDeleteMelanie Hernandez
ReplyDeleteMr. Saldivar
May 24,2014
Latino Lit (4)
Anzaldua begins Chapter 5 with a line that is far too familiar for many Latinos in the US- " If you want to be American, speak American" (75).Hearing this is like a slap in the face-it reminds you that no matter how long you've lived in this country, even if it's the only country you've ever lived in you'll never be considered " American" unless you're willing to abandon your culture and conform to an entirely different one and even then chances are it won't be enough and you'll just have to learn to live the rest of your life being "othered". The irony in this is that Latinos are probably some of the most American people living in the US considering that Latinos have lived in North America for far longer than the Anglo-Americans who have taken upon themselves to dictate who and what gets to be " American" and who and what doesn't. The focus of this chapter is centered on the relationship between Language and identity. Anzaldua believes that robbing a people of their language is a violent act because of the immense amount of damage that it does to a person's sense of identity. She points out that many in the US have the belief that "wild tongues can't be tamed. They can only be cut" (76). So rather than trying to work with the language(s) that Latinos bring with them when they immigrate to the US we simply get rid of it completely because we would rather not take the time to adjust our culture to the idea that maybe there is more to the world than just English. Anzaldua also introduces the notion that "Because we speak with tongues of fire we are culturally crucified..we speak an orphan tongue" (80). Unfortunately the languages that many Chicanos come to speak are seen as inferior by both standard English and standard Spanish speakers-neither will take ownership of the language and by default neither will take ownership of the accompanying culture, and so Chicanos are left struggling with a dual identity and at times with the complete lack of identity- "I have so internalized the borderland conflict that sometimes I feel like one cancels out the other and we are zero,nothing, no one" (85). We often fail to realize how important language is to culture-there is not one without the other, as Anzaldua points out- " Ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity-I am my language" (81). It is for this reason that "robbing" a people of their language is violent. In robbing them of their language we take away their culture, their identity, and their homeland because how can someone feel at "home" without being able to freely express themselves.
I love your opening statement, it sends a really powerful reminder of the importance of language and identity. I really enjoyed reading your response and it was well supported.
DeleteI think your response is very straight forward and your beginning sentence is very powerful.
DeleteI couldnt agree more with the comments above. It was very clear and well thought out.
DeleteI loved how straight to the point it was and still very well supported. You didn't lose me with all the citations :)
DeleteWhether one is giving offense, or taking offense, they are still creating offense. In How to Tame a Wild Tongue, Anzaldúa takes offense on behalf of her culture by feeling, “a sense of homecoming as well as alienation (82). According to Anzaldúa, language can be a “homeland” (77) that can be “distorted and reconstructed” by English influence (78). Language is a part of ones identity, and when it is stripped from dialect, it is stripped from the conscious. The act of depriving ones language through Anglo schooling is attacking self-expression and identity, and only leads to violence. When language is internalized, we “use our languages against each other” (80), creating a violent culture.
ReplyDeleteI love that opening statement. I don't know if you believe in Anzaldúa's point of view on Anglo schooling. Because I personally think learning English helps shape a unified identity for both U.S. born people and foreigners. What do you think?
DeleteI really like how you started this. I think you were missing a bit of how violence comes about. I feel like you touch on it in those last few sentences but it didn't really hit home. There wasn't this one thing where i just knew that's what it was.
DeleteAbby your response is short and gets straight to the point although i do agree with the statement above, you need to elaborate a little more on how depriving people of their language is violent. Apart from that i think you did a good job on explaining how language is part of ones identity.
DeleteIn Chapter 5 of Borderlands, Gloria Anzaldua establishes the idea that "ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity- I am my language" (Anzaldua 81). Language is one of the major connections that an individual has to their culture, not only by the words, but by the oppression and violence that was endured "after 250 years of Spanish/Anglo colonization" (Anzaldua 79) by their ancestors to keep the language alive. Latinos and Latinas are connected by this passion, but the ongoing extermination of the Spanish language in American society has forced Chicanas and Chicanas to try and "out-chicano each other" (Anzaldua 80) in order to show that they have not sold out their culture. Language can be a "homeland" because an individual's language is an aspect of their identity that makes them unique to other cultures. In any spanish-speaking country, a Latino who is fluent in Spanish is comfortable in their community and can feel pride in his words. However, because of language barriers, a spanish-speaking Latino is put at a disadvantage in the United States. In an attempt to fit in, these individuals begin to adopt Spanglish to show that they can speak English, too. The multiple variations of the Spanish language has shown that through all attempts at elimination, the language has continued to live on. However, the cycle of oppression is continued through the existence of Spanglish and other variations that force other cultures to adapt to American societal norms and guidelines.
ReplyDeleteI think that the first quote that you used made your comment start off very strong. I agree that language is one of the major connections that one has to their culture, and that latin@s contribute to their oppression through the use of Spanglish.
DeleteI agree with Julia, the first quote is super strong. I like your explanation of Spanglish and think you contextualized really well according to Anzaldua's message.
DeleteMario Torres
ReplyDeleteLanguage is a form of communication. It shapes your identity because when people know each other's language, they can share ideas and opinions to form a synthesized introspection. "I am my language" (Anzaldúa 81), the author says. This statement, which can be seen as just deep and vague, is powerful because it holds some truth. Mexicans are looked down upon when they don't know Spanish. I have several friends who tell my non-Spanish speaking friends "Oh you don't speak Spanish? What kind of Mexican are you?" or even "You're not Mexican." And those statements should be considered acts of violence. It's a harsh thing to tell someone they do not belong to their own culture.
Even the opposite end of this. Telling someone they can't speak Spanish is an act of violence. Paulo Freire, liberator of an oppressed Brazil, said, “Any situation in which some men prevent others from engaging in the process of inquiry is one of violence;… to alienate humans from their own decision making is to change them into objects.” When an oppressive power system (government; education; etc.) inhibits individuals from speaking their own language, they are robbing them of their identity. No one should ever have to tell anyone to "Shut the fuck up."
I did enjoy reading you response and especially how you connected it with how language can produce violence. My only suggestion is that you went sluggish on the part on how language can be homeland and I am not sure if you truly answered that inquiry. Perhaps connecting how the identity relates to homeland could answer that question.
DeleteIn chapter five of Borderlands Anzaldua discusses the disapproval of speaking Spanish here in the United States. She believes that this ultimately leads to a loss of identity and leaves people especially the youth in a land of confusion. “Chicana’s who grew up speaking Chicano Spanish have internalized the belief that [they] speak poor Spanish. It is illegitimate, a bastard language” (Anzaldua 80). When we realize this as we begin to grow up and see these realizations that we take as lies of our own identity then it becomes personal and emotionally frustrating to believe we are seen as “other” by everyone else.
ReplyDeleteLanguage becomes an adjective when you describe yourself to others to let them understand that you speak Spanish. “As a culture, we call ourselves Spanish when referring to ourselves as a linguistic group” (Anzaldua 84). We use it in order to connect ourselves to other Spanish speaking groups. It gives the speaker some comfort to fall back on this adjective to describe him or herself. Language then becomes the most important thing. It’s what you want people to know about you when you first meet them. Being a Spanish speaker becomes part of who you are and comes with this package that holds many misconceptions. We sometimes forget to make the connection with our Indian, Spanish, and black ancestry. Instead our identity remains as the Spanish speakers from Latin America instead of indentifying ourselves with our ancestry.
Good job talking about how language becomes a part of our identity and how it composes a part of the person. I think its true that language is used to comfort when talking to another person who speaks the language but would have liked if you mentioned how it becomes a discomfort as well. When language becomes a reflection of us that can be seen in other native speakers it frightens us of discovering who we are. I really liked some of the points you brought up but it was alittle hard to follow.
DeleteIn chapter 5 of Borderlands/ La Frontera by Gloria Anzaldúa, she addresses the question "who is to say that robbing a people of its language is less violent than war?" (Anzaldúa 75). Robbing other cultures of their language is the western cultures way of becoming dominant over that other culture, making them abide by its rules and conform to its standards, giving this action the same purpose as war. Silencing a culture's language is violent because "wild tongues can't be tamed, they can only be cut out" (Anzaldúa 76), leaving a wounded and powerless culture bleeding out it's identity and sense of belonging within its own community. "Because [other cultures] internalize how [their] language has been used against [them] by the dominant culture, [they] use [their] language differences against each other" (Anzaldúa 80), resulting in more violence, and "repeated attacks on [their] native tongue diminish[es] [their] sense of self" (Anzaldúa 80). Without its native language, a culture looses its identity and home, causing it to become separated from its roots, leaving only an empty shell speaking a foreign language with the accent of its former self.
ReplyDeleteJulia,
DeleteI really enjoyed reading your response, you did a good job supporting all of your points while keeping it very concise and to the point. I especially liked your point about how "Robbing other cultures of their language is the western cultures way of becoming dominant over that other culture".
I think you did a really good job explaining your points and I definitely agree with you. You explained how robbing a culture of its language is parallel to war very well and also made great use of the text. However, you did not really mention how language is a "homeland".
DeleteLanguage is the essence of people, a way of expressing themselves and letting the world know who they are. Robbing people of their language is the same as taking away any of their senses, they are being mutilated. Anzaldua refers to language as her homeland because it is where she feels safe and free to be who she truly is without anyone telling her what it right from wrong. She explains that Chicano Spanish is for those “who cannot entirely identify with either standard Spanish nor standard English”(Anzaldua 77) therefore they have created a new language for the new mestizo race. This new language allows Chicanos to communicate the “realities and values true to themselves” (Anzaldua 77). For the Chicano, language is the base of their identity, its what defines them, apart from their appearance. Without the ability to communicate, the people loose power and are forced to accept what society will label as them because they cannot fight back. Anzaldua argues that Mexicans are shunned for not speaking proper Spanish or speaking English with an accent, yet having no language at all is the violent blow that leads straight to the heart.
ReplyDeleteI like how you tie everything together in your response. The quotes you use effectively justify your claim that language is the essence of the people. When that language is attacked, then, the identity is affected, which can lead to the violence that is mentioned. Good job on this response!
DeleteI agree with the above statement I liked how you talk about the importance of communication in the response. You used good insight about how language really developes and indent it's yet can hinder an individual.
DeleteTo Anzaldua language is power, but more than power it is our identity. Not only does a language define an individual it defined a culture. “For a people who cannot entirely identify with either […] Spanish nor standard English, what recourse is left to them but to create their own language?” (Anzaldua 77), this language cannot be just any but one that embodies the “realities and values true to themselves”. Anzaldua says, “If you want to really hurt me, talk badly about my language. [...] I am my language” (Anzaldua 81). Robbing someone of their language is robbing them of who they truly are, we can speak the Anglo language but will never suit it the Anglo way, and we can speak the Proper Spanish but will never speak it as proper as it is meant to be. With our language we choose/demonstrate who we are and this becomes our “homeland” because even if I do not live in Mexico and was not born there it is what I identify as, a Mexican. “Being Mexican is a state of soul- not one of mind, not one of citizenship. Neither eagle nor serpent, but both. And like the ocean, neither animal respects borders” (Anzaldua 84). Anzaldua returns to her homeland of that border country neither part of the U.S. or Mexico but both, a combination of language which gives a clear identity, the state of soul of belonging and a voice that “will overcome the tradition of silence.”
ReplyDeleteI really liked how you started off your response by saying "language is power, but more than power it is our identity". I thought it was really effective in helping to make your argument right away. The only thing that I would suggest is towards the end, where you say Anzaldua lives on the border and speaks "a combination of languages". You don't mention the specific variations on language, like Chicano Spanish, and I feel it would better support your point. Good job overall though!
DeleteJasmine, Thank you for the suggestion. I would have to correct that because the whole point of the chapter is about how its a language of its own the Anzaldua speaks.
DeleteIn chapter five of Borderlands/La Frontera, Anzaldua argues that language is an essential component that makes up ones identity. Language is used as a form of expression and is an identifier of culture; our culture constructs our identity and therefore a certain language must be present so that that culture is made aware of. For example, Chicano spanish was created out of the "Chicanos' need to identify ourselves as a distinct people," because it is not easier to relate to Spanish people, nor Anglos, "neither español ni inglés, but both" (Anzaldua 77). Robbing a people of their language is ultimately robbing them of their cultural identity, it gives the message that they are not good enough and must speak differently in order to be valued as a person. Stripping someone of their language causes them to feel shameful of who they are as a human being, "ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity," they go hand in hand and one can not take pride in who they are if even the slightest part of them is doubting their self-validation (Anzaldua 81). Language is not only representative of ones identity but it is also their "homeland," it is how they stay connected to their roots when they are not physically where they came from, "deep in our hearts we believe that being Mexican has nothing to do with which country one lives in," it is a "state of soul" not mentality or physical being (Anzaldua 84).
ReplyDeleteYour response was very clear and well supported. I definitely agree that language is a major component to the make up of ones identity as well as how the question of value as a person comes in when one is being robbed of their language.
DeleteYour response was really well typed and your ideas touted together very eel with what the author was stating in the chapter also agree with your statement "language is s major component to the make up of one's identity"
DeleteIn chapter five, “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, Gloria Anzaldúa writes of how language serves as a reflection of self, allowing people to establish identities for themselves. She writes of how Chicanos as a whole speak many languages, as a result of the many complexities they internalize. Not considered solely “Mexican” or solely “American”, Chicanos created Chicano Spanish which “sprang out of the need to identify [them]selves as a distinct people” (Anzaldúa 77). In a similar way, caló, which breaks the rules of standard Spanish and standard English, was created by the Pachucos to further their acts of rebellion, treating it as a “secret language” that figures of authority could not understand (Anzaldúa 78). It makes sense, then, when attempts to rob people of their language are violent because it is equivalent to trying to take away their identity. It is going to be met with resistance, and “wild tongues can’t be tamed, they can only be cut out” (Anzaldúa 76). The effects that a language has make it similar to a homeland, in that it plays a vital role in shaping who we are. For many Mexican-Americans, language either plays the role of instilling shame when they are embarrassed of being foreign, or it can instill a sense of pride when they use it to acknowledge their Chicano identity.
ReplyDeleteI think you answered the question but you could have analyzed the text more. You focused more on what Anzaldua said instead of what that means for Mexican-Americans. Towards the end you start to do it but i wish it was done throughout the whole paragraph. I would disagree with the comparisons between homeland and language. I would say language is a homeland because that is something that can not be ceased due to colonization, but instead can be preserved regardless of what homeland you are from.
DeleteCassidy, that makes a lot of sense. I'll definitely try to add significance throughout the response instead of just leaving it for the end. It really does make it more effective that way. However, in terms of your last point, while I feel language can technically be preserved, it's important to note that a lot of times it isn't. If a new culture takes control (ex. through colonization), the people who have been colonized may very well assimilate to "blend in" with the dominant culture, utilizing a defense mechanism in an attempt to protect themselves.
DeleteIn “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, Anzaldúa speaks of one’s preservation and protection of language very seriously, considering all restrictions on language to be “a violation of the First Amendment” (Anzaldúa 76). Language serves as the verbal representation and expression of who one is as a person. For this reason, “robbing” someone of their language is violent as it robs them of their identity. While not physically harming, it can be violent mentally as it degrades the person to a state of worthlessness. One must have a language to call their own, and without this the person loses confidence to function successfully in life. Language connects people to one another, and sharing a language allows various individuals to be identified together as a people. It distinguishes the pachucos from the pochos, and the chicanos from the mexicanos. Language is “as diverse linguistically as it is regionally”, with different dialectics and words evolving in different environments (Anzaldúa 81). Anzaldúa refers to language as being a homeland, as language follows a person wherever they go throughout their lives, despite their actual location. The sound of a Tex-Mex accent can bring one a mixture of memories and emotions of life in the borderlands, regardless of where that accent is heard. It also serves as “a secret language” in which only one’s own people can understand, with those people typically being from the same physical homeland/region, as well (Anzaldúa 77).
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the response. You were able to answer the prompt in a subtle way that at the same time had bold points and had equal amount fo textual support to back up the claims. I do have to argue to the extent to which degrading a person only goes as far as the individual. I thought it would be a lot more than that.
DeleteIn "How to Tame a Wild Tongue", Gloria Anzaldua establishes that language allows for the Chicano or Chicana to find their identities. "We needed a language with which we could communicate with ourselves, a secret language" (Anzaldua 77). It provides an establishment for cultural beliefs and defines who a person is. Anzaldua says, "If you want to really hurt me, talk badly about my language" (Anzaldua 81). Robbing someone of their language is taking away their identity and culture this proves to be the same as emitting violence. Without language one cannot identify with others of the same background, and this proves to become disconnected from ones homeland and cultural brothers and sisters. When a peoples language is insulted it diminishes their value as a person. For example, ”If a person...has a low estimation of my native tongue, she also has a low estimation of me" (Anzaldua 80). By attacking how a person is and what they believe in will in the long run, only create violent outbreaks. As the attacked will only choose to defend what is dearest to them.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed your response. I liked the approach you took in focuses on Chicano/as and I think you effectively answered the prompt in a clear and concise manner.
DeleteLanguage is a system of communication, within a culture, different forms of language allows for ideas to be expressed uniquely. In chapter five, "How to Tame a Wild Tongue", Anzaldua argues that language allows for the expression of oneself and thus creates and establishes a unique identity for oneself. The identity that is constructed through the use of language reflects the culture one comes from and allows for a cultural background to display within the established identity. Although, Anzaldua explains that, "Chicanas who grew up speaking Chicano Spanish have internalized the belief that we speak poor Spanish" (Anzaldua 80), due to the way, "[their] language has been used against [them] by the dominant culture..." (Anzaldua 80). Anzaldua expresses that this only results in "[oppressing] each other, trying to out-Chicano each other, vying to be the 'real' Chicanas, to speak like Chicanos" (Anzaldua 80). Ultimately Chicanos must maintain their cultural language in order keep their culturally constructed identity. Anzaldua argues, that "robbing" people of their language becomes violent, as doing so is the equivalence of taking their cultural background and their identity as a whole. It is immensely problematic to rob ones language as it has also been the "homeland" to most cultures. It not only provides people with the source of their cultural identity but it is also what connects the people with their place of origin and gives them a home.
ReplyDeleteLuis,
DeleteI thought your response was thought out and the quotes that you used were relevant to the ideas that you presented. I like what you said about language being the source of their cultural identity, that is something that was present within the chapter
In chapter 5, Ansaldua explains that identity is defined by language. She establishes the idea that language is self and that "ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity- I am my language" (Anzaldua 81). Language reminds us of our cultural pasts, and when a group is “robbed” of that language, they are forced to assimilate to the new culture. This “robbing” of alanguage also attacks the identity of a person. Anzaldua describes how the Chicano language has evolved “after 250 years of Spanish/Anglo colonization" (Anzaldua 79) into something to almost be ashamed of speaking where “If you want to be American than speak American” (anzaldua 75). Language can be a “homeland” because it allows an individual to feel comfortable and confident of their identity no matter what language they speak. Anzaldua explains that in recent times Chicanas to try and "out-Chicano each other" (Anzaldua 80) in order to show that they have not sold out their culture. This is detrimental to the formation of the Chicano/a identity because it pins against Chicanas/as instead of reassuring them that having a hybrid identity is perfectly fine and that “Chicano language is as diverse linguistically as it is regionally” (Anzaldua 81).
ReplyDeleteI agree that language serves as our identity and that our language reminds us of our culture. Language becomes the base of our culture because culture is spread through the tongue. Our values and traditions are spread from generation to generation through the source of language.
DeleteI thought your response explained the concept that language can define ones identity. It flowed pretty well and was also concise.the way you explained your thoughts of the idea that language will always play a huge role in the Chicano identity was well expressed.
DeleteTo understand the violence of robbing ones language, one must understand
ReplyDeletewhat language represents. Anzaldua recognizes that language communicates what we have to say but language is also a staple of identity, it communicates
who we are. Therefore language is experience, culture, and history all put
into spoken form. For example, "Pachuco ( the language of the zoot suiters)"
(78) represents "rebellion, both against Standard Spanish and Standard
English" (78). The rebellion attached to this language exemplifies how
language affects identity and how identity influences language so much so
that the two are intertwined. Language so pertains to identity that the
denial of a language equates to the denial of worth. As long as a language
is not used out of shame then that "tongue will be illegitimate" (81) and
the speaker can never take full pride in themselves without their language.
Anzaldua urges Chicana's not to tame their wild tongues in order to
reconcile their identities.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter five, " How to Tame a Wild Tongue", Gloria Anzaldua argues that to rob a people of their language is a form of oppression as language. Language is a vital part of a chicanos identity," A language which they can connect their identity to, one capable of communicating realities and values true to themselves"(Anzaldua 77). In a society controlled by binaries, where they are told to choose English or Spanish, assimilate or remain in the cycle of poverty, language becomes a way to stress one's duality, "Chicano Spanish sprang out of f the Chicanos' need to identify ourselves as a distinct people,"(Anzaldua 77). Code switching, mixing languages, changing accents, all serve to identify that someone's identity is not to be ignored by either cultures. Restraining one's tongue becomes forced assimilation and," Attacks on one's form of expression with the intent to censor are a violation of the First Amendment"(Anzaldua 76).
ReplyDeleteJuan,
DeleteI agree that language is an important part of identity and I appreciate how you reflect on the cyclical properties of poverty. The last sentence was concise and was nicely supported with your textual reference.
I agree with what you were talking about with having to choose between the bianary divide. You explain that point very well in giving a graphic represenation of it that any reader could relate to.
DeleteAnzaldua states that language is a place where people, "can connect their identity to," and, "communicating the realities and values true to themselves," (Anzaldua 77). She explains that for her language connects a culture even as far as the Midwest. Language is part of that healing process and sense of identity that validates an individual in any sort of surrounding. She also explains that language can sort if tell the story of identity, like Chicano Spanish because it's not English nor Spanish but both and connects two identities and worlds that struggle to meet. Andalua explains that robbing a language creates shame, low self esteem and a sense a self fragmentation. She uses example of how many Chicanas feel low self esteem when talking to other Latinas, Anglos, or fellow Chican@s because they are afraid of the "censure" and shameful of their own language pressured by the two dominant languages. She states that languages looked done upon by other " dominant languages" create an insecure shameful border within an individual. But as language creates violence and borders, it can be a sacred tool to find home. Anxaldua explains that language creates a sense of nostalgia and comfort, like food that further validates their identity and allows the recognition of cultural pride showing that they have not cracked under the dominant pressure.
ReplyDeleteNathan I liked the way you presented how Gloria is connected to worlds other than her own through language. I really enjoyed your inciteful response.
DeleteAnzaldua describes language as having the power to define one’s identity although, when used incorrectly can lead to language being used as a violent weapon against a culture as a whole. Anzaldua describes language as being the base of a culture; through tongue is how stories, values and traditions are carried from generations to generations. Language ends up becoming “homeland closer than the Southwest” (Anzaldua 77) while a Chicano’s home might be miles away he always carries his culture with him. Taken away their language is like robbing away their identity, they aren’t able to speak “American” for the sole that they are not American they are Mexican-American. Instead of using language as a weapon to hold back a culture it should serve as empowerment within the culture. There is shame in speaking Spanish within their own people because their own people “nos quieren poner candados en la boca” (Anzaldua 76). How is it possible for Chicanos to stand up to anyone that’s holding them back when they are being censored by their own people. An accent, Spanglish, or the sole of speaking Spanish in place where they are “not supposed to” are signs of rebellion of demonstrating that our language is not “wrong” (Anzaldua 80). Chicanos will be heard through their own language when they “take pride in my language” (Anzaldua 81).
ReplyDeleteI really like your response because I feel like it flowed nicely. I also like how you mentioned Chicanos standing up for themselves through speaking their language, I didn't really think about that when writing my own response.
DeleteIn chapter 5, "How to Tame a Wild Tongue", Anzaldua speaks upon the power that language holds for the formation of an identity. This is best put into context when she says "I am my language." (Anzaldua 81) Language is the tool that people use to communicate and a tool for expression. To take that away from somebody is to take away their voice, their identity. The title of the chapter alludes to the fact that Wild tongues cannot be tamed, they can only be cut out. Chicanos have the distinction to be caught in between worlds of cultures and dialects both english and spanish. In an attempt to formulate an identity, chicanos created their own dialects for both languages because that is who they are, a fusion of two cultures. Chicano Spanish is "un lenguaje que corresponde a un modo de vivir." (Anzaldua 77) or a language that corresponds to a form of living, that is, the constant evolution of a chicano identity. This language is a product of the duality of chicanos and was born out of the need for chicanos to "identify ourselves as a distinct people." (Anzaldua 77) Language is everything, it is what creates distinctions and identities which transcend into every aspect of life.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed your response. I like how you said, to take away someone's voice is like taking away their identity then elaborated on that idea.
DeleteIn "How to Tame a Wild Tongue", Anzaldua spoke of language as a means to control people. Since language is the foundation of a culture, that culture can be affected through the languages manipulation. The hyphenation of cultures is reflected by the Spanglish spoken not just in border towns, but by Latinos across the nation. Language is a reflection of its people. It's a marker that you are home. Since language is something so dear and essential, it can be used to hurt others. Anzaldua remembers teachers telling her "I want you to speak English". She and other Chicanos were controlled through language, the erasure of ther identity paralled by the suffocation of their language.
ReplyDeleteVioleta, you brought up many interesting concepts, but I think you need to contextualize them a bit better and use some more textual support. For example, what does the hyphenation of cultures mean? Also, include some more examples of Chicano struggles.
DeleteI thought you brought up a lot of interesting ideas I just wished you had expanded a little more. You left most of your ideas hanging a bit and I was interested in what you had to say.
DeleteI enjoyed reading this statement, Violeta, but I would've liked to see more of a voice and power in it. It feels like you end this piece by leaving it hanging and waiting for someone else to say that you are correct. Stand by your statement.
DeleteIn chapter five, "How to Tame a Wild Tounge", Gloria Anzaldua discusses language as a form of identity and the issues surrounding the way people view it. Anzaldua argues that attempting to censor a person on the basis of their language is "a violation of the First Amendment"(76). Attacking language is as good as attacking racial identity in the way that it is used a means to degrade or terrorize another group. Robbing a language is an act of malice and is done as a way to wound and weaken a person's pride in themselves and their culture, making it easier to force a culture on them. If the attack only came from the outside it would be less effective, but the malice seeps through and Latinos attack each other; even those on common ground turn language on each other and "oppress each other each other trying to out-Chicano each other"(80). In an attempt to avoid this even among chicanos who all speak Spanish, english is the language of choice; which, only serves to accom-lish the mission of the outsiders.
ReplyDeleteAnzaldua explains how identifying and understanding her language provides her with her own identity. This self-actualization helps her understand who she is as a whole. Language is the basis for culture; as different forms of a culture are created their language changes as well which validates the hybridity of the entire culture (Anzaldua 79). Anzaldua analyzes the different dialects of spanish speakers in the United States and shows how the pronunciation of certain sounds tells where that person is from. This identification of the dialect helps form a sense of the "homeland" for that individual. Creating their sense of identity is how language, when linked with an individual, can be used.
ReplyDeleteAnzaldúa states in “How to Tame a Wild Tongue,” “ethnic identity is twin skin to my linguistic identity—I am my language,” (81). Language is a form a self-expression; therefore, one’s language is tied to one’s identity. When people are robbed of their language through shaming or even physical violence, their entire identity is shamed. Language is meant to be a figurative place of refuge and communication, but the forced stigma of certain languages causes the fear that if someone “has a low estimation of my native tongue, she also has a low estimation of me” (80). Language can be a comfortable homeland for people who are far from their literal homeland by reminding them of that place. Robbing people of this homeland and sense of identity is “a violation of the First Amendment” (76), causing Anzaldúa to declare “I will no longer be made to feel ashamed of existing. I will have my voice,” (81).
ReplyDeleteI like the use of all of your quotes, particularly your quote in the beginning. It introduces the connection between language and identity in a really clear way. I also like your connection between identity and homeland. Everything flows very nicely and it makes a very strong argument.
DeleteIn chapter five, How to Tame a Wild Tongue, Anzaldua argues that language is, "twin skin to ethnic identity" (81). It is what defines us, our culture, and it is a legitimate form of expression, just as it is a form of communication. Language can also be seen as a homeland for some. For Chicanos, language is a homeland because they "cannot entirely identify with either standard Spanish nor standard English" (Anzaldua 77), they are forced to create their own language--Chicano Spanish. In doing so, Chicanos are able to connect their identities with their language, they are able to feel at home. When people are robbed of their language, however, they are robbed of this home. Their identity is stolen as well, and they become "culturally crucified" (Anzaldua 80). This is the ultimate form of violence.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed how you made clear that language is more than just a form of communication. Good use of textual support. I also liked how you talked about how Chicanos are able to connect their identities to their languages to feel at home.
DeleteGloria Anzaldua in chapter five "How to tame the Wild tongue " she elaborates on the way that language is far beyond simple communication.it represents the link between your roots "the dentist is cleaning out my roots"(75).Speaking it right is the way that an individuals can maintain their culture.However although it is with in out right to have freedom of speech this right has been attacked to deteriorate culture from with in.This from of attack have been instilled in the system and transmitted to the young "I remember being caught speaking Spanish at recesses"(75).The lack of liberty to express themselves create a inner conflict where there is no sense of belonging neither with in ones culture if continue to go along with the status quo of being more american and therefore being titled a poncho.Or not being accepted in your country of birth " If you want to be american ,speak 'American'"(75)Therefore robbing of language is also robbing the culture and identity.
ReplyDeleteYour point on language being beyond communication and a link to a person's roots is pretty incredible and demonstrates the use of language and how it creates the identity for a person. Bringing up the freedom of language is a good point that demonstrates how language can be concealed and destroyed and it must be spoken to survive. Overall great analysis and good explanation of context.
DeleteIn "How to Tame a Wild Tongue," Anzaldua discusses the concept of linguistic terrorism. She describes the disappearing of the Spanish language in the Chicano culture through systematic eradication. "By the end of this century English, not Spanish, will be the mother tongue of most Chicanos and Latinos" (Anzaldua, 81). She brings up the fact that when in school, she was told she needed to lose her accent. As a child, she would get in trouble for speaking Spanish. "I remember being sent to the corner of the classroom for 'talking back' to the Anglo teacher when all I was trying to do was tell her how to pronounce my name" (Anzaldua, 75). To tell someone that the language they speak is wrong, especially to someone as impressionable as a child, can severely cause them to think about their identity as less than perfect. Although I don't speak Spanish, when discussing this book and Anzaldua's work, it bugs me to even use the word "Spanish" rather than using "Espanol". It feels like I'm saying it wrong when I say "Spanish". Anzaldua describes the injustices done to her through her language so fully that they really do feel like acts of terrorism. Especially in a conservative place such as Texas, the Spanish language threatens what it is to be "American". Some do not realize that "American" is not a language, including one of Anzaldua's childhood teachers when they said "'If you want to be American, speak 'American.' If you don't like it, go back to Mexico where you belong,'" (Anzaldua, 75). In the "land of the free," who is one to say that Spanish cannot be an American language? America is a land of wild tongues, and to tell someone else to tame their tongue is to be anti-American. "Wild tongues can't be tamed, they can only be cut out" (Anzaldua, 76).
ReplyDeleteAnzaldúa views language as the center of a person's identity that reflects their culture and experiences that is unique to its people. "Robbing" people of a language is violent because it intrudes upon their identity and is known as "linguistic terrorism" (Anzaldúa 80). As Anzaldúa says "I am my language" and hurting a person can easily be seen in attacking their language by damaging who they are and not allowing them to have something that makes them who they are (Anzaldúa 81). Language can be a "homeland" for a person because certain words or phrases can reflect an experience or certain connotation a person remembers. Anzaldúa gives an example of this with the "my sister Hilda's hot, spicy menudo" the word "menudo" reminds Anzaldúa of her sister and her food, of all the times she ate her menudo and all her experiences with it (Anzaldúa 83). Language is unique to each person and reflects each of their worlds and experiences. The connection between identity and language is that a persons identity is reflected among their language, from their words, connotation, and accent it all displays a certain characteristic from the person that adds up to their entire being.
ReplyDeleteI really liked how you defined the connection between language and identity. It's true that language provides an insight to a person's identity. For example, it's easy to distinguish between an "American" and a British individual just by their accents.
DeleteYour response was extremely fluid and you utilized the quotes well. I specifically liked how you related the definition of language to the individual's culture and experiences and how you furthered this statement with evidence on language becomes rooted into one's identity. Also you answered the points to the question very well.
DeleteIn the chapter “how to tame a wild tongue” from Borderlands by Gloria Anzaldua, Anzaldua demonstrates the importance of language in unifying communities and forming an identity in an environment of border cultures. Language is a form of expression but it also defines and separates groups. For example, many Central American countries speak Spanish but yet their accents are different. It is through these subtle variations in linguistics that separation occurs. This is also case for Chicanos, and other Latinos who live in the United States. Since Chicanos are part of two cultures--the Mexican and the American—it creates confusion because they are unsure on which culture to be loyal too. For this reason, many Chicanos have adopted “Spanglish” as a new language. This third language creates a sense of uniqueness and separates these individuals from the rest. This creates a third race: a hybrid one; therefore for this hybrid race, “language is a homeland closer than the southwest” (Anzaldua 77). When institutions such as schools encourage their students to acculturate to the western life-style and dismiss their culture by only speaking English, it creates a sense of violence and injustice. When a language is established as being more important than the other, it creates a hierarchy, and hierarchies always distinguish between superior and inferior; therefore, “attacks on one’s form of expression with the intent to censor are a violation of the First Amendment” (Anzaldua 76).
ReplyDeleteI liked how you mentioned the regional differences associated with the fusion of language, and even more so on the fact that this can also create as a greater form of separation rather than a fusion of identity that draws both cultures together.
DeleteI agree with Juan. The way you tie everything together is very effective. Your quotes do a great job supporting your ideas.
DeleteIn chapter Five Anzaldua discusses how she has experienced many forms of discrimination not only by white Americans but by her own people. Language being a metaphor for “homeland” can be interpreted as a last piece of what America can force Latinos or Chicanos to change. Language is internal and possess more value than to someone’s behavior. As Anzaldua stats, “…we use our own language differences against us.” (80), she is referring to the concept of the various forms of Spanish speakers ridicule each other encouraging others (Anglos) to join in the discrimination. Your identity is more than what is first appeared, “Ethnic identity is twin to linguistic identity-I am my language.”(81)
ReplyDeleteYour response was short but to the point and answered all questions. good job
DeleteIn Chapter 5 of The Borderlands, Anzaldua views language as her identity,"Ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity-I am my language" (81). She believes that people are defined by their language, which is why English is forced upon inhabitants of the United States in an attempt to , "tame the wild tongue"(75). This "robbing" of the right to the first amendment ( the freedom of speech) is violent because a 'wild' tongue cannot be silenced, it must be cut out. In the relationship of language to the individual, this cutting psychologically splits a person in half; not accepted for the hybrid they are, they most divide to speak English in some spheres and specific Spanish dialect in another, rather than a new mixture of the two which they find the most comfortable. When that new hybrid language is shared between two people, as they can comfortably express themselves, then language can serve as a "homeland", a place of belonging. However, because the dominant white structure "robs" Chicanos of their language, they rob them of their identity and that is felt through the shame of speaking some Chicano Spanish within the Chicano community. Establishing an identity, as mentioned in the Coatlicue State by Anzaldua, requires self-reflection and acceptance. This explains why even Chicanas fear and avoid speaking comfortably to each other because," to be close to another Chicana is like looking into the mirror" (80). Those inhabitants of the Borderlands from Latin/Mexican descent cannot complete their identity unless they fully accept and express themselves in their "homeland" language, unfiltered. In this way they can carve their own space, and mark themselves as legitimate by forcing the English and the Spanish to accommodate them.
ReplyDeleteI agree that in the U.S. their is no acceptance for hybridization of language . it is such a one side or another, their is no middle ground.
DeleteIn chapter five of Borderlands by Gloria Anzaldua she states, "In childhood we are told that our language is wrong. Repeated attacks on our native tongue diminish our sense of self. The attacks continue throughout our lives." (Anzaldua 80) Although physical violence is not occuring, these children who grow into adults are being attacked by their conscious every time they speak in their native tongue. To prevent this attack one must avoid speaking in spanish which begins another attack that comes because they feel as if they are abandoning their culture. For those who have an emotional attachment to their native land, their language is a metaphor for their culture which becomes a home away from home for them, a comfort zone. Anzaldua states, "ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity" (Anzaldua 81) To strip one of their only comfort, the only thing they know, is a worst pain than physical violence can ever cause. "You want to really hurt me? Talk badly about my language." (Anzaldua 81)
ReplyDeleteI like this alot because it so clearly and easily explains Anzaldua's purpose yet hits upon all the point in the prompt. really like how you incorporated that last quote as well. It was impactful.
DeleteShay- I think you did a good job explaining the importance of language to a culture. Good use of quotes!!
DeleteRobbing someone of their language is always a violent act because as Anzaldua says "wild tongue can't be tamed, they can only be cut out"(Anzaldua 76). She is saying that a person or a society cannot simply steal someone's voice, you have to force them to be silent, you have to be their voice out of them. In school Anzaldua was always scolded for speaking spanish, or correcting her teachers for mispronouncing her name. They tried to force Anzaldua to forfeit her culture and submit to theirs. If Anzaldua had stopped speaking spanish she would be forfeiting a large piece of her culture and assimilating into the teacher's culture. Anzaldua speaks Chicano Spanish. A language that is neither entirely spanish nor entirely english. A language rejected by both spanish and english speakers, but she speaks because to her it is home because it is a language for her and for her people. "For a people who are neither spanish nor live in a country where spanish is the first language; for people who live in a country where english is the reigning tongue but are not anglo...A language which they can connect their identity to, one capable of communicating the realities and values true to themselves," (77) In this she is referring to Chicano Spanish, but it applies to all languages. Only the language of what one considers their homeland can communicate the realities of their life.
ReplyDeleteLeo, I agree with your statement that no one can steal ones languge because "the tongue cannot be tamed" Although you mention how language can be a "homeland" I would suggest that you also describe how identity and language are related other than that your response as well as the citations used are very good.
DeleteLeo, I thought you did a great job contextualizing how robbing language is violent. I thought it was really well doe how you showed the unwillingness to lose a language and how it must be forced. That was very well, and powerfully, done. I think the only thing missing from this response was a bit of context on the section of language serving as a homeland. If that context would have been provided then your analysis could have shined through.
DeleteLanguage is a central part of a persons identity and to say to that person that their native tongue is not allowed in a certain space robs identity. Your native tongue is what has been around with you the longest and to have it robbed from you takes away from the person you are. The native tongue will always take you back home and remind you of where you came from. Anzaldua says that "ethinic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity" (81) meaning that her tongue is equally part of her identity.
ReplyDeleteYou had a really good response, with some very insightful ideas. I thought your post could have used some more textual support, though.
DeleteRamon Herrera
DeleteI feel that your response could have been presented in a better way. It seems a bit to unorganized. The first sentence seems to be jumping everywhere.
As Anzaldua writes, her language (Chicano Spanish as she calls it, a border-created hybrid of Spanish and English) is "...a language which [Chicanos] can connect their identity to, one capable of communicating the realities and values true to themselves..." (Anzaldua 77). Anzaldua discusses how she and other Chicanos/as often feel unable to speak "formal English" and "formal Spanish." This is why Chicano Spanish exists--it is a "...border tongue which developed naturally..." (Anzaldua 77). At school as a child, Anzaldua would be punished for speaking Chicano Spanish with her classmates. For one whose language is considered inferior and punishable by the dominant culture, language becomes more than simply a method of communication. It becomes a means of connecting to one's roots, and preserving one's culture. Language takes on an importance it is difficult for one who lives in a land where their tongue is tolerated to understand. For this reason, to rob one of one's language is a violent, destructive act. It can be tantamount to robbing one of one's culture, and can be psychologically damaging.
ReplyDeleteI believe your answer was highly efficient in that it answered all parts of the questions with a fluid and insightful integration of multiple quotes from Borderlands. Good job!
DeleteRamon Herrera
ReplyDeleteIn chapter five, “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, Gloria Anzaldúa writes of how language serves as one’s preservation and protection of culture and helps to establish identities for themselves. Language serves as the verbal representation of who one is as a person. For this reason, “robbing” someone of their language is violent as it robs them of their identity. Anzaldua writes that this “robbing” is “a violation of the First Amendment” (Anzaldúa 76). Not considered either just Mexican or just American, Chicanos created Chicano Spanish which “sprang out of the need to identify [them]selves as a distinct people” (Anzaldúa 77). . Language is “as diverse linguistically as it is regionally”, with different dialectics and words evolving in different environments (Anzaldúa 81). . It distinguishes the pachucos from the pochos, and the chicanos from the mexicanos, and “wild tongues can’t be tamed, they can only be cut out” (Anzaldúa 76).
In chapter 5 of Borderlands, Gloria Anzaldúa shows the role language plays in forming an identity and how it can be manipulated to raise some people up and put other people down. She says, “as long as I have to accommodate the English speakers rather than having them accommodate me, my tongue will be illegitimate,” (Anzaldúa 81). Speaking Spanish will never be enough for her as long as English is around. This language hierarchy indirectly deprives Chicanos from speaking Spanish. It takes away their sense of identity, their sense of a “homeland”, or a place where they belong. English becomes a violent tyrant, ruling over the “wild tongues” that speak Spanish. From the view of the English-speaking world, “wild tongues can’t be tamed, they can only be cut out,” (Anzaldúa 76).
ReplyDeleteThis is great, I really like how you use a tyrant as a metaphor for the English Language that rules the Hierarchy. This is very straight forward but it is sufficient to answer the question. Good job.
DeleteIn chapter 5 of Borderlands by Gloria Anzaldua states that “ethnicity is twin skin to linguistic identity” (Anzaldua 81) or in other words, ethnicity defines as much of who you are as the language you speak. Language provides a sort of connection to ones roots/culture. Robbing people of their language is violent as it is a form of forcing assimilation by conquest. Conquest itself has a connotation of violence but forcing another language and destroying their previous culture is violent in and of itself. Language serves as a homeland since it is one of the defining characteristics of where people deem you are from. Accents are indicative but the language someone speaks primarily can be seen as the strongest connection one has to a specific culture which is why Anzaldua says "If you want to be American, speak 'American'” (75). The use of whatever primary language the person chooses is an extension of their identity as it signifies where they hold their identity to closest.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 5 of Borderlands Anzaldúa uses language as a form of identity. The "robbing" a language is just as violent as war because it requires assimilation to a certain standard. Anzaldúa states, "I remember being caught speaking Spanish in recess- that was good for three good licks on the knuckles with a sharp ruler."(Anzaldúa 75). Anzaldúa was punished physically for speaking Spanish. This is a negative reinforcement by her American teacher in order to assimilate her or to drive her into a regression of her first language in order to obey American customs. A language can be a homeland because it gives a sense of connection and security. Chicanos are caught in the border of language. They do not speak perfect Spanish instead it is a miz of English and Spanish. Chicanos are slandered by both sides so as a way to create a community identity they created they're own language. Anzaldúa says, "Until I can take pride in my language, I cannot take pride in myself."(Anzaldúa 81) This is Anzaldúa’s idealism that language is self. Your language defines who you are. This is a form of expression that shouts you must accommodate me as I do you. The act of changing your language in order for others to hear you is a false sense of identity.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter Five: How to Tame a Wild Tongue, Gloria Anzaldua uses code switching to develop how language is parallel to a person's identity by explaining the effects of silence. Anzaldua starts off with the cure of a wild tongue being silence, if not just cutting it off, and how to overcome that tradition. Especially when it comes to women, "hablar pa 'tras... are all signs of being mal criada" (Anzaldua 76); silence is another way of subjugating women. Words directly translated into either language without context become distorted in meaning. By having to translate her thoughts, Anzaldua argues that the identity of a person is filtered. "Los Chicanos, how patient we seem", using silence as a tool of survival. It is terrorism when a person cannot be themselves in public or when they cannot express themselves how they wish; it is like being censored. The Native tongue becomes a homeland in the way that someone feels comfort. A Chicano that does not speak Spanish or speaks a variation of it is instantly marginalized and label as a "pochos, a cultural traitor, [someone that] is ruining the Spanish Language" (Anzaldua 78). "After 250 yeah of Spanish/Anglo colonization" (Anzaldua 79) more that eight variations of both languages have been created, including combinations of both English and Spanish with regions speaking some more than others. It is not a pocho who ruins it but a chicano that creates their identity.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter 5 of Borderlands, Anzaldua, discusses the evolution of language within Latino communities. Language is the foundation of the Latino community and it has been shaken due to “250 years of Spanish/Anglo colonization” (Anzaldua 79). “Robbing” someone is just as violent as war because to take away their language is taking away their identity and dignity, which shows more repercussions than any form of war. Without a distinct language, an identity that that does not rely on the westernized aspects will not exist. The distinct language need to be preserved regardless of region because “language is a homeland” closer than any border (Anzaldua 77). Migration of Latinos have led to the acculturation into the dominant culture. Regardless of the level of acculturation, or the region they live in, Latinos can be linked to one another by their language. In order to create a space within the english dominated culture, Latinos must “overcome the tradition of silence” and then their culture will truly be imperishable.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 5, "How to Tame the Wild Tongue", Anzaldua quotes Ray Gwyn Smith saying ""Who is to say that robbing a people of its language is less violent"'? In using this quote Anzaldua proves that language stands as a link which the people can identify with. Chicano Spanish is an example of a language established for the " need to identify ourselves[Chicanos] as a distinct people"(77). This illustrates the significance of language when identifying a culture: "language is a homeland"(77). To take language away from a people by forcing another language or oppressing ones native language, is truly violent in that it attempts to separate people from their culture and their identity. "...I can take pride in my language...I cannot take pride in myself". Anzaldua, in saying this, shows that if someone were to rob a language, they would be robbing an identity and a culture.
ReplyDeleteLanguage is the feeling of the moment for Anzaldua. In this chapter, she speaks of the different personae she takes on when around others. At times she can be a Chicana from Texas, or at times she has to be a Northern Mexican. The different words, slang, connotations, slurs, and meanings have a different emotion and reason throughout the various sub groups of being Mexican. The type of language she speaks depends on the comfort she is immersed in, which is subjugated by the different people. Furthermore, robbing people of their language is violent because they are not able to fully express themselves in the manner that they most enjoy. "If you want to be American, speak American" (75) words that stripped Anzaldua and many others of their cultural roots, thus taking a part of them away. The language they speak is their homeland because it is their upbringing. The sayings, slang terms, and transfusion are the cultural past, thus when Anzaldua and many others are able to speak without having barriers of who they are surrounded by, and just be themselves, have the thoughts they did growing up, without having to change, they are at a home. Identity is rooted from language, it allows "aware of our reality and acquired a name and a language...that reflected that reality" (85). This connection allows a Chicana identity that expresses their true culture and language.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter 5 of Anzaldua's Boderlands, the idea of having a language stolen is brought upon with that if their is silence, you take away the only method that the person showed identity because each's voice belongs to a group. Oppress it and it would equate to the shunning of an entire group. A language can be a homeland because the variations of a language belong to different locations that are comfortable to the person. Something that appears to be a "secret language". Mostly because of the "Spanish/ Anglo colonization" that has created extremities. Identity is related to the language. A language is an identity because as Anzaldua explains, there is this 'voluntary (yet forced) alienation makes for psychological conflict, a kind of dual identity" (Anzaldua 85). This makes the Chicano seperated from the Standard languages and be it's own "orphan language".
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter 5, How to Tame a Wild Tongue, Anzaldua makes the connection between one’s language and one’s identity and how closely related they are. She explains that language is one of the largest parts to a culture because over all of the years it was able to exist and last. However if this language is not used it will cease to exist which would result in a loss of a huge fragment of that culture. The way this loss begins to occur is when Latinos begin to see their language as less than or incorrect in comparison to others. When this happens people begin to try and “out Chicano each other” in an effort to show that they have not completely assimilated and disregarded their culture (Anzaldua 80). This becomes violent when people lose sight of all that their language embodies and eventually lose touch with it and losing touch with their culture by extension.
ReplyDeleteGreat response. I liked how you talked about the need for a language to be spoken in order to contine to exist. Also, great choice of textual support.
DeleteGood response and contextualization. However, I do not agree with your conclusion regarding how trying to "out chicano each other" can become violent. The prompt was focusing more on how robbing someone of their language is violent, and I believe that you could have expanded more on that idea.
DeleteIn Chapter 5, "How to Tame a Wild Tongue", Anzaldua describes language as not only a form of communication but also as a way to unite people and find ones identity. Language is closely linked to culture since one cannot define ones identity without accepting their language first, "ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity", (Anzaldua 81). Violence arises from language because the ones with the dominant language try to enforce the use of their language by robbing the others language and with this,their identity with the result to make them assimilate into te American culture and language. Violence begins to happen as a result of those without the dominant language refusing to give in their language. Anzaldua recalls a time when she witnessed this type of violence by being caught speaking spanish in school and being hit with a ruler and told "If you want to be American, speak American",(Anzaldua 75). Chicanos speak chicano spanish because they are not completely from Mexico nor are they American however speaking Chicano spanglish they are connecting their roots to where they are and forming an identity as well as a "homeland".
ReplyDeleteI appreciate how you explained the quote on page 81, as I had a similar thought. I think that you tied your ideas together very well. Good job!
DeleteIn "How to Tame a Wild Tongue," Anzaldua describes the importance of language in the construction of the Chicana identity. Robbing someone of their language in violent in the sense that by doing so, you are robbing them of their identity. Language is a way for similar groups of people to communicate with each other. For people like Anzaldua, who are born of two distinct languages, in order to live between two different worlds (the borderlands) they must create their own language, a language "neither espanol ni ingles, but both" (Anzaldua 77). These hybrid languages, Tex-Mex, calo, bind communities together. Many Chicano's live away from the border and their language serves as "a homeland closer than the Southwest" (Anzaldua 77) by connecting them back to the roots of their culture.
ReplyDeleteI like your inclusion of hybrid languages and your contextualizing of the piece, but how is the stripping of language violent? How does it hurt people.
DeleteI enjoyed reading your take on Anzaldua's theory of linguistic terrorism and how the loss of language is directly related to the loss of identity. Why is that important though? How is the loss of identity a violent effect?
DeleteThe people of any cultural background do not want to give up what their culture entails and what it has left them with. Striping somebody of that culture is often violent yet the act of striping is violent itself. Anzaldua states that "Because we speak with tongues of fire we are culturally crucified. We speak an orphan tongue" (pg. 80) meaning that as she speaks a language that isn’t the normal of the U.S. and that is often associated with undocumented status that she is now violently bombarded with malicious accusations by stereotypical branding and western cultural revolution. Ironically however, Anzaldua says “As a culture, we call ourselves Spanish when referring to ourselves as a linguistic group and when copping out. We call ourselves Hispanic or Spanish-American or Latin America or Latin when linking ourselves to other Spanish-speaking peoples of the Western hemisphere and when copping out.” Inquiring that when stripping the Latin American populous of their language (Spanish) that a western culture is destroying the remains of another western culture thus leaving the Latino populous more in tune with their Native American roots.
ReplyDeleteFabian Ramos
ReplyDeleteMr. Saldivar
Latin American Literature- 4th Period
May 26, 2014
In the fifth chapter of “Borderlands/ La Frontera”, author Gloria Anzaldúa presents language as an integral aspect of culture. Therefore, without a connection to language, an individual lacks a connection to their native culture, as “ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity” (Anzaldúa 81). Anzaldúa establishes the act of robbing an individual of their language as a violent form of linguistic terrorism. As presented in the fifth chapter, linguistic terrorism is the social and political disrespect paid to the non-english speaker, which imposes shame on the individual and results in the acceptance of Spanish as the lesser of the two languages. Acts of linguistic terrorism are violent because they ignite a battle within the non-english speaker, a battle between cultural retention and cultural assimilation. Furthermore, these acts of linguistic terrorism have to potential to eradicate an entire language itself, as they limit the speaking of a language, and a language must be spoken in order for it to survive. In existing as a major aspect of an individual’s cultural identity, language can serve as a connection to the country of origin, or even as the homeland itself. When an individual resides in a country that conflicts with their culture, the native language allows for the intimacy of the native culture to exist beyond borders.
Good analysis of violence against culture. Anzaldua calls Chicano Spanish a living language because of its evolving nature. When an integral piece of culture is called illegitimate it is an attack on those who live with it everyday. Language is definitely necessary for life and especially pride and a sense of self legitimacy.
DeleteRobbing people of a language is one step away from policing thought; it is the zero-point of fascism. Anzaldua says "it is only with another Chicana tejana that I can speak freely." (78) This freedom comes from a language most comfortable to the speaker, many times Anzaldua cant speak freely because she cannot "switch codes freely without having always to translate." (81) Every word comes with connotations in its language that can be lost in translation. When Anzaldua uses Spanish in her book its not only to convey her cultural ties. She uses the language she thinks is best for conveying her thoughts. Anzaldua gives examples of "languages" specific to cultures such as North Mexican dialect, Tex-Mex, Calo. These "languages" harness the feelings of the community that speaks it. When Anzaldua tries to speak to people in their own language she is trying to understand them on a cultural level.
ReplyDeleteAnzaldua believes that language is directly connected to identity when she explains that the Chicano language came from a need to communicate and create an “identity” for themselves (Anzaldua 77). To rob a person of their language, is essentially to rob them of their identity. “Ethnic identity is twin skinned to linguistic identity” (Anzaldua 81). Language serves as a homeland for Anzaldua because similar to “food and certain smells”, it reminds Anzaldua of what home was like and why she is the person that she is today, it reminds her of her roots (Anzaldua 83). Once the root is developed, through language, the history and lineage of your people is able to be created paving the way to discover your future which Anzaldua describes as what you “might eventually become” (Anzaldua 85).
ReplyDeleteIn Anzaldua's How to Tame a Wild Tongue, she talks about how language is used to validate ones identity and how it is used to bring people together. Language can be a very powerful tool and even bring upon violence. People become violent when they are being forced to assimilate to a culture that is not theirs and have their language along with their identity stripped from them. Robbing these people of their language can itself be considered violent because of the sense of identity that is getting taken from them. According to Anzaldua language can be homeland becasue since she was exposed to 2 different languages she needed to find a balance between both. She couldnt live in both the United States and Mexico so her langauge of Chicano spanish served as a homeland for her. the connection between identity and languags is that they both validate each other. In Anzaldua's case her Chicana identity is valivated by her Chicana spanish language.
ReplyDeleteIn "How to Tame a Wild Tongue", Anzaldua describes the importance of language, by arguing that language is key to validating and maintaining the identity of oneself. According to the author, robbing someone of their language is the same as robbing them of their identity, which is viewed as an act of violence. Anzaldua even proclaims, "attacks on one's form of expression with the intent to censor are a violation of the First Amendment" (Anzaldua 76). Aside from providing a sense of identity, language is utilized to unite, and communicate within, one's culture, provoking Anzaldua to consider language a "homeland". For people who have been displaced, language serves a connection to "a homeland closer than the Southwest" (Anzaldua 77). By providing a sense of identity and culture to the inhabitants of the borderland, language is the only tangible force that many can recognize as their "homeland". This is powerful in understanding Anzaldua argument that "robbing" a people of their language is violent, due to the fact that "wild tongues can't be tamed, they can only be cut out" (Anzaldua 76).
ReplyDeleteIn Anzaldu's Borderlands, language is an important part of a persons identity. It allows for communication and a community. When this langue is taken away the connection is broken. It forces people to assimilate as they no longer have a connection to their past and their identify is destroyed. They cannot "return" to their "homeland" as they have lost the ability to communicate with thous who stayed behind,and causes them to have to reshape their identity to function in the United states. In the united state langue cannot be kept strictly internaly. If it is not used it is lost, which destroy the identy of people, but it is a socity that forces people to keep their "toungs" in and cut out.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter five of Borderlands, Gloria Anzaldua talks about the experiences she’s had speaking Spanish in a country where English is “the reigning tongue” (Anzaldua 77). She mentions how her language is “a male discourse” which robs women of their being by “the masculine plural” (Anzaldua 76). Her culture’s language has reserved terms like “hocicona, repelona, chismosa” for women, labeling them “mal criada” (Anzaldua 76). This reflects back to the concept of machismo because it is this sort of ideology that leads to the oppression of women. Language is a “homeland” because it allows us to relate to one another by form on communication. With the variety of languages Chicanos have acquired, they are able to speak with other Chicanos, Mexicans, braceros, etc. Anzaldua claims that she is “[her] language” and when she takes pride in her language, she takes pride in herself (Anzaldua 81).
ReplyDeleteI like how you connected machismo to what Anzaldua spoke about in chapter 5. I enjoyed the fact that you showed that language is another from of oppression for women.
DeleteIn chapter 5 of Borderlands, Anzaldua speaks about how language establishes identity. ""Who is to say that robbing a people of its language is less violent than war? - Ray Gwyn Smith"" (Anzaldua 75) Anzaldua continues by recalling childhood events in which adults in her life induced silence of her native language. She speaks about how cultures use language to find themselves and establish themselves distinctly. When people are "robbed" of their language, they are no longer able to establish themselves as easily. Language can be considered a "homeland" because it is a way for the native people to communicate with each other. It is their "secret language" that allows them to communicate with each other even though there are many languages that are spoken. Through Anzaldua's work, the reader can come to an understanding that language is a form of identity, for it is a way that an individual can express themselves as their true self.
ReplyDeleteIn “How to Tame a Wild Tongue”, Anzaldua describes language as a form of identity and culture. Language allows people to communicate with one another to express themselves. Anzaldua states, "I am my language" (Anzaldua 81). It is a very powerful tool that can bring good but also evil. When you take someone’s language you take their culture from them. Anzaldua says, "If you want to really hurt me, talk badly about my language" (Anzaldua 81). Robbing someone of their language means taking way their culture and identity. It is an internally violent event when you take Spanish away from a Mexican or both Spanish and English away from a Chicano. Language is a homeland because it can be taken anywhere. One always seems to go back to their mother tongue when they are in desperate need of help.
ReplyDeleteI like the ideas presented in your response. I would have liked to seen you expand on the part where Anzaldua states, "I am my language" though.
DeleteIn Chapter five, Gloria Anzaldua explains how language has always created restrictions within her life. That there have always been "attacks on one's form of epression" as whether it be the Anglo trying to tame a wild tongue or her own people saying her ability to speak English is betraying her culture (Anzaldua 76). In class a teacher would hit her for not speaking "American" and in her home she would be called a "Pocho, cultural traitor" (Anzaldua 77). She explains language close to identity because language is something "they can connect their identity to" (Anzaldua 77). A language gives a form of identity for distinct people such as chicanos, which developed as a border toungue. She goes on to explain how robbing a people of their language is violent. Comparing it to war as one side is violently robbed of their language and culture only left to assimilate.
ReplyDeleteLanguage can be used as both a weapon used to strip someone of their identity as well as a tool to connect to one's identity. Anzaldua brings attention to the ways in which language is yet another way in which women are discredited. Stripping someone of their language becomes a violent act because it is an act of dominance and an exercise of power. As communication can create separation, it can also forge a connection to culture and identity. Anzaldua describes language as a way for someone to communicate "realities and values true to themselves" (Anzaldua 77). In this sense, language creates a "homeland" because it entails everything that a homeland has to offer: a sense of belonging, a piece of tradition and a connection to those with similar cultural roots.
ReplyDeleteLanguage can be used as both a weapon used to strip someone of their identity as well as a tool to connect to one's identity. Anzaldua brings attention to the ways in which language is yet another way in which women are discredited. Stripping someone of their language becomes a violent act because it is an act of dominance and an exercise of power. As communication can create separation, it can also forge a connection to culture and identity. Anzaldua describes language as a way for someone to communicate "realities and values true to themselves" (Anzaldua 77). In this sense, language creates a "homeland" because it entails everything that a homeland has to offer: a sense of belonging, a piece of tradition and a connection to those with similar cultural roots.
ReplyDeleteIn this chapter, Anzaldua draws attention to the use of language as a tool to enforce cultural assimilation on the Chicanos, pointing out how the phrase "Speak American", which is ridiculous for a wide variety of reasons, is generally used (intentionally or not) in modern America to rob the Latinos of one of the things that unifies them as a people: their language. By culturally enforcing the supremacy of English, non-English speakers are either forced to the fringes of society where their lack of fluency prevents them from prospering or they are forced to adapt to the dominant culture.
ReplyDeleteI appreciate how you explain the negative effects of forcing your language upon someone. Lack of fluency prevents many Latinos from prospering in this country and discouragement of speaking Spanish continues to separate Latin@s from their homeland. Maybe you could talk a little bit about language as a connection to the homeland?
DeleteIn Gloria Anzaldua's Borderlands, the concept that language is viewed as a possible weapon against others,
ReplyDelete“Chicana’s who grew up speaking Chicano Spanish have internalized the belief that [they] speak poor Spanish. It is illegitimate, a bastard language” (Anzaldua 80). This is because the Chican@s are not speaking the pure, good Spanish that the inhabitants of the motherland speak, yet they also are not speaking good English that the Americans deem acceptable. This makes the culture truly their own but can offend the Americans and the Mexicans due to the fact that the Mexicans see it as a betrayal to their roots and a form of being a "sell-out," and the Americans see it as a way to restrict Chican@s to the bottom of the social pyramid, because they do not speak and ultimately fear it because they themselves do not truly understand it
I remember when I first began learning spanish in 7th Grade. My Spanish teacher, Snra Garcia, who to this day is one of my most inspirational teachers, gave an entire lesson plan on the power of language. She mainly talked about the masculinity of Spanish language as it relates to “ellos, nosotros, etc). This form of masculinity in gender is one of the many ways language is inseparable from self. In “How to Tame a Wild Tongue” Gloria Anzaldua says “Chicanas use nosotros whether we’re male or female. We are robbed of our female being by the masculine plural. Language is a male discourse”.
ReplyDeleteThe entire chapter is focused on explaining the relationship between the identity of a people and the language they speak. Anzaldua drives home this point saying, “Ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity -- I am my language. Until I can take pride in my language, I cannot take pride in myself...as long as I have to accommodate the English speakers rather than having them accommodate me, my tongue will be illegitimate”. This creation of an inseparable relationship between identity and language may appear small on text, but it has huge implications. It means every time a chicano book is outlawed, a group of people are called illegal in school, every time some right wing activist group attempts to make english the national language they are calling a huge percentage of citizens un-American. It is with this relationship that robbing someone of their language is inherently violent. How can denying someone their identity, saying it is wrong, and banning it from school, workplaces, and society as a whole be anything but violent? Every. “This is America, we speak English”, is more painful and more violent to a person's identity than a punch or slap could ever be. Anzaldua says, “So, if you want to really hurt me, talk badly about my language”.
Anzaldua clearly presents hope for this relationship between identity and language. A “homeland” can be created through the creation and acceptance of language. Throughout Chapter 5 Anzaldua talks about the oppression of Chican@s, but says through firm acceptance, both the language and people can be recognized. “Chicanos did not know we were a people until 1965 when Cesar Chavez and the farmworkers united and I am Joaquin was published and la Raza Unida party was formed in Texas”. It was through this forcing of the Chican@ Identity into the mainstream that they became legitimate and accepted. I remember reading a poem in class and hearing it performed at ALAS fest where the chorus was farmers waiting for another Cesar Chavez. However, from this chapter I believe that the rights and recognition for Chicanos will not come from another individual (even one as great as Chavez) but it will come from the collective force of Chican@s rising up and disturbing the mainstream culture enough until they can no longer be ignored and must be recognized.
In How to Tame a Wild Tongue, Anzaldua believes that language is a way to unite people. For her, language is one of the most important things when it comes to being able to identify oneself with a certain group of people. Even though, it is the United States of America, Anzaldua believes that she is not restricted to only speaking English in the US. She exercises her right to speak Spanish because she can. The way in which people can be "robbed" of their language, is when people disapprove of people speaking a different language. In school, Anzaldua was "required to take two speech classes. Their purpose: To get rid of [her] accent" (Anzaldua 76). The institution Anzaldua was attending was basically telling her that they disapproved of her accent when she spoke English and they were making her get rid of it. Even when she was caught speaking Spanish at a younger age, she would get a small beating for it, because the institution did not approve. They were "robbing" her language, her culture. According to Anzaldua, language can be a "homeland" because her language, in a way, lets her know where she does and does not belong. Her language is a way for her to validate herself in a certain setting.
ReplyDeleteGloria Anzaldua says that language is a connection to identity because it can "communicate the realities and values true to themselves." (Anzaldua 77) To force someone to speak your language instead of their own is violent because you are saying that their language is inferior. "Ethnic identity is twin to linguistic identity" so you would also be saying their ethnicity is inferior to your own, that is violence. (Anzaldua 81) Language is so central to one's identity that Anzaldua says language can be a homeland closer than the southwest. This is because many Latin@s live in the Midwest and the East so they are quite far from their home of origin. Language is a way to remain connected to the homeland because every time it is spoken the homeland is remembered. Language is a way to carry your entire history with you no matter where you go.
ReplyDeleteLanguage is a universal way of communication. Ironically it also creates borders among people. The language being spoken creates an identity for an individual, whether its with the language itself, or even with accents when speaking it. Chican@s in particular do not have a single pure language. It becomes a combination of Spanish and English. You are not good enough to be Mexican because your Espanol is not so great, but you are not good enough to be American because your thick accent makes your English not "proper". When this occurs, language no longer becomes something beautiful and inspiring to learn and speak but it brings fear to incorrectly speak the language.
ReplyDeleteIsabella Aimone
ReplyDeleteSaldivar
Latin@ Lit period 4
5/26/14
Anzaldua defines language as a connection to one's identity. It allows them to feel rooted to their past and to their culture. When someone takes that away, or limits their ability to use their native language they are also taking away their ethnicity. Someone's first language is their strongest connection they have to who they are as an individual and by eliminating that, you are forcing them to assimilate. Speaking a different language at home than what is spoken in public also gives a sense of security. If gives a sense of knowing that the people you are with at home come from the same place that you do and that they know what you're going through. Being able to come home to a safe and comfortable environment helps create this "homeland" feeling. The sense that no matter what happened that day, you can return home and feel at peace. speaking a different language than the majority around you also gives a sense of individuality. This individuality often leads to a sense of entitlement and confidence, allowing one to form an identity around how others react to their native tongue.
In How to Tame a Wild Tongue, Anzaldua discusses how language unifies a people. Her background is that of a Spanish speaking country, but she lived in an English speaking country. However, she was forced to adapt to a new language, form one of resistance against the Americans telling her to speak English and the Mexicans telling her to fix her Spanish: A Chicana Language. This created a bond among the chicano people, validating their existence as a legitimate group of people, part of both Mexican and American culture. "If a person, Chicana or Latina, has a low estimation of my native tongue, she also has a low estimation of me." (Anzaldua 80).Language is an important part of identity because it unifies people, and trying to take this away is inherently violent, because it rips people apart and away from their identity.
ReplyDeleteYazmin Caballero
ReplyDeleteMr. Saldivar
Latin@ Lit 2/6B
Anzaldua's definition of language in Chapter 5 of Borderlands, encompasses its relation toward it wielder's identity, homeland and ethnicity , and how language helps build a bridge between the three. Language is an identity to Anzaldua on a conceptual and personal level. She uses los Chicanos as an example; they developed their own language, a sort of borderland language yet they work with their language was rarely noted until recent decades. Anzaldua states, "Chicanos did not know we were people until 1965" (85), they have always heard and spoke their language, but they've never acknowledged it collectively. "Until I can accept as legitimate Chicano Texas Language, I cannot accept the legitimacy of myself," of her heritage, of her identity (Anzaldua 81). Anzaldua further defines language in the connection with its homeland. She recalls her experiences with corridos, vistas, novels, and poems written in her language. As well as the food made by the people who spoke her language. All of which if she recalled she would feel as if she "were home" (Anzaldua 83). Anzaldua takes great pride in her language, in her identity, and in her homeland and in her ethnicity, which is why when her language is "robed" it is an act of "violence," because her tongue has become so entwined with her being the only way to silence it is for it to "be cut out" (76).
Language is a powerful identifier of culture. It is crucial in order to feel a sense of completion within our Latino identity.Just look at the way most Latinos living in America have created a whole new language-Spanglish. It is a mixture of the two languages that we identify with and without either one of them we would feel incomplete. It is a necessity for Latinos to fully express themselves which is why some Latino authors use code switching in their novels. Anzaldua claims that those who wants Latinos to give up their native tongue are "robbing" Latinos of their identity because without language a part of their identity would be lost. Translation into the English-only world would conclude in a lost of ability to express oneself to the fullest. There is no way to lessen the need for the native language because it has become one, a mixture of the Spanish and the English.
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 5, “How to Tame a Wild Tongue” Anzaldúa equates “robbing” a people of their language to “a violation of the First Amendment” (Anzaldúa 76). Language literally is a violation of the first amendment for the reason that it is an innate form of expression. The act of seizing or “robbing” a people of their language is a violent act for the reason that it is done intentionally to harm and degrade a certain culture. Anzaldúa herself even stated that "If you want to really hurt me, talk badly about my language" (Anzaldua 81). Offending one’s language or prohibiting it is so insulting for the reason that language is a reflection of the culture of people who utilize it. Language is a vital aspect of any culture and when that language is “robbed”, ultimately a crucial part of a group of people’s cultural identity is also being “robbed”.
ReplyDeleteThe connection between language and cultural identity is well articulated. It is interesting that you state it is a violent act because it is done expressly to degrade and harm a culture.
DeleteDiscuss Anzaldúa’s view of language. How is it that “robbing” a people of their language is violent? How can language, according to Anzaldúa, be a “homeland”? What is the connection between identity and language? Use specific examples from the text to support your claims and warrants.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter 5, Anzaldua thinks that language is the way Chicano language formed in the need to be able to create the identity of Chicanos themselves (Anzaldua 77). Robbing someone from their language is robbing them from who they are and what they stand for. Language is our voice of opinions. Anzaldua claims that she is “[her] language” and when she takes pride in her language, she takes pride in herself (Anzaldua 81). It is her homeland, as she stated. Language is a part of her roots and once they were formed, the history of people is being formed too and it also creates ones path to discover their future that they will become. (Anzaldua 85).
The "taming of a wild tongue" is established in chapter 5 of Borderlands by Gloria Anzaldúa as an act more violent than war. The Chicano dialect "sprang out of the Chicano's need to identify ourselves"( Anzaldúa,77). The language of the Chicano is a part of their identity, and "until [they] can take pride in [their] language, [they] cannot take pride in [them]self"(Anzaldúa,81). Robbing someone of their language makes one mortified of their language, and that robs them of their identity. Chicanos are forced to learn English, eliminate their accents, and tailor their words to the English language. This oppresses the second half of a Chicano's mestizaje, deconstructing any sense of identity.
ReplyDeleteLanguage and the ability to communicate is inherent in the identity and survival of a species. Without the ability to communicate, actions can be misinterpreted, needs can be misconstrued, and beliefs can be altered. Language is used to “identify ourselves as a distinct people” (Anzaldua 77). The rejection of Spanish in the United States created the space for a hybrid language to form. This hybrid language was necessary in order to “communicate with ourselves” (Anzaldua 77). The new hybrid Chicano Spanish, made from Spanish and English, gave the Chicano’s a distinct “homeland” that could only be claimed by someone who speaks that tongue. Both Spanish and English speakers classify Chicano Spanish as the butchering of both languages; because it can be more closely aligned with one or the other, both reject Chicano Spanish as a related means of communication. This hybrid language allows the speaker to accept and internalize all aspects of themselves; they don’t have to choose one language or the other because they can use a bit of both. However, because the use of Chicano Spanish, and Spanish in general in America, is still frowned upon by the dominant society, Chicanos must decide which language to speak with which person. This can create “a kind of dual identity” from the “voluntary (yet forced) alienation” created by society (Anzaldua 85). This dual identity allows Chicanos to become their own people, their own force to be reckoned with.
ReplyDelete