0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)
23 просмотров3 страницы
This document summarizes and critiques the argument that establishing a universal language would resolve world conflicts. While having a single language could improve communication, the document argues that language differences are not the sole or primary cause of conflicts, which stem more from cultural and religious differences as well as biases and prejudices. Even within the same language, people can interpret messages differently due to individual perspectives. Therefore, a universal language would not eliminate conflicts or misunderstandings between groups.
Исходное описание:
Would a universal language help to eliminate cross-cultural misunderstandings and distrust?
This document summarizes and critiques the argument that establishing a universal language would resolve world conflicts. While having a single language could improve communication, the document argues that language differences are not the sole or primary cause of conflicts, which stem more from cultural and religious differences as well as biases and prejudices. Even within the same language, people can interpret messages differently due to individual perspectives. Therefore, a universal language would not eliminate conflicts or misunderstandings between groups.
This document summarizes and critiques the argument that establishing a universal language would resolve world conflicts. While having a single language could improve communication, the document argues that language differences are not the sole or primary cause of conflicts, which stem more from cultural and religious differences as well as biases and prejudices. Even within the same language, people can interpret messages differently due to individual perspectives. Therefore, a universal language would not eliminate conflicts or misunderstandings between groups.
The most efficient pathway humans can take to resolving world conflicts and uniting the many disparate nations of the world is the establishment of a universal language. (Gramsforth)
This title suggests that world conflicts stem from an inability to communicate efficiently, due to the language barrier that constricts our understanding of the rest of the world. Taking this into account, the conclusion is that establishing a single language, spoken universally, would eliminate conflict, as people would be able to understand each other better. While this idea makes sense in theory, practically, there are too many other factors involved to make it a sensible claim. For instance, the claim implies that language differences are the cause of world conflicts. Language relies heavily on the listeners interpretation of what is being said, especially if it isnt in their native tongue, so is the language difference the true cause of conflict, or just our interpretation? There are other cultural differences that exist between people besides language that affect how we interpret and communicate traditions, cultural practices, religion. Is language more influential in perception of a message than the emotion and intuition that leads to prejudice and discrimination based on these differences, or is it simply diversity that breeds conflict? Either way, conflict will still exist, universal language or not. What we understand from communication in any language ultimately comes from our interpretation of what is said. As such, one person may take away a very different meaning from a message than another person does from the same message. For instance, when my classmates and I were asked after reading the Allegory of the Cave to create the caves with some given materials, we soon realized that we all had very different ideas of what the cave looked like, despite having read the same description. Similarly, in my Spanish class, each student translates a passage slightly differently from everyone else. This goes to show that even after hearing or reading the exact same thing in the same language, people will still have their own understanding of it. Therefore, even if we all spoke the same language, there would still be misunderstandings leading to conflict. Other influences, such as body language or appearance, also affect the way we are perceived. Conflict and discrimination based on these differences are more intuitively and emotionally based- according to one study, kids as young as six months judge others based on skin color because they notice automatically that they are different, and humans as a whole tend to fear that which they do not know (See Baby Discriminate).
Works Cited Bronson, Po and Merryman, Ashley. See Baby Discriminate. Newsweek. 4 September 2009: 53-60. Print.