Posted on Jan 17, 2017
8
8
0
In examining the effects of war I was curious about any possible consequences of “linguistic relativity” when applied to military terminology. While linguistic relativity has been abandoned and criticized by many over the decades some psychologists and anthropologists continue to argue that differences in a language's structure and words may play a role in determining how we think. While terms and acronyms like CoC, IC, and C2 are rather benign and more obscure to the civilian population there are other terms that convey a heavier, more militarized message like rules of engagement. This is actually the title of a TV sit-com that has absolutely nothing to do with war. Due to constant coverage such terms have become common place within our sociolinguistics on a global scale. I’m curious if our language has played a part in either supporting the insurgency narrative as well has had any societal impacts due to the enculturation of military terminology. Are we speaking the language or love or our we speaking the language of war?
https://qz.com/847577/our-casual-use-of-military-jargon-is-normalizing-the-militarization-of-society/
https://qz.com/847577/our-casual-use-of-military-jargon-is-normalizing-the-militarization-of-society/
Warfare
Defense Language Institute (DLI)
Policy
Foreign Policy
Edited 9 y ago
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 9
2
2
0
An interesting concept and I fully understand what you are getting at. IMO I would say there is an effect, but would not say it's to blame.
(2)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
SPC David S. - Whew thats a mouthful lol I think the magnitude is known by how much such language seems into the mainstream and culture of a society.
On the bilinguals... Possibly and most likely as a person does take on some attributes of the gaining culture thru language in a way....and on the relationships... very good question I would have to put more thought into.
On the bilinguals... Possibly and most likely as a person does take on some attributes of the gaining culture thru language in a way....and on the relationships... very good question I would have to put more thought into.
(0)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SGT (Join to see)
To answer concerning relationships I would say as long as its coupled with culture. Morphing all into one is not feasible per se as then it takes away that individuality which makes the difference SPC David S. -
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
The language of not knowing the language and the language of Rebellion and thinking we're going to turn into a police state like the movie 1984 horror The Hunger Games what feeds into some of this lack of understanding. The people should look at police states of Russia China and even turkey as an example of how good we are generally compared to countries that oppress their citizens
(2)
(0)
1
1
0
SPC David S.,
First, for your question of 'Is language to blame for the militarization of society' we would have to believe we are see the 'the militarization of society' and I do not see that at all. I might give you that we are seeing the radicalizing of segments of our society, but that is greatly different than militarization? As a military forum, picture in your own mind how most...all...these radical would do in a military setting?
I think the militarization or radicalizing has very little to with 'military like' language, and this confirmed with realization that the number of veterans within our society continues to plummet reducing the amount of 'military like' language. In regards to language, the lowering of the levels of language standards across the spectrum may be the real problem...but could also just be an example of a total lowering of standards across the culture? People today, in my opinion, have lower grasp of the English language, 'OMG, can U beleave what he just said?', and no regard to the actual consequences and responsibility of what they post in a public forum?
First, for your question of 'Is language to blame for the militarization of society' we would have to believe we are see the 'the militarization of society' and I do not see that at all. I might give you that we are seeing the radicalizing of segments of our society, but that is greatly different than militarization? As a military forum, picture in your own mind how most...all...these radical would do in a military setting?
I think the militarization or radicalizing has very little to with 'military like' language, and this confirmed with realization that the number of veterans within our society continues to plummet reducing the amount of 'military like' language. In regards to language, the lowering of the levels of language standards across the spectrum may be the real problem...but could also just be an example of a total lowering of standards across the culture? People today, in my opinion, have lower grasp of the English language, 'OMG, can U beleave what he just said?', and no regard to the actual consequences and responsibility of what they post in a public forum?
(1)
(0)
SPC David S.
I agree lower standards impacts us all negatively. What I'm trying to suggest is that words help shape our thoughts. When I look at 9/11 I can't help wondering about the impacts of the word jihad had. Would you agree that it helped shape the actions of those that carried out those attacks. Even more provoking would the world be a safer place without just one 5 letter word.
(0)
(0)
MSG Brad Sand
SPC David S.
I do not disagree with the statement that 'words help shape our thoughts' because words are the building blocks of man's communication and communication is foundation of thought, with this said it was not the impact of the word 'jihad' on the morning of September 11th 2001 that was the issues as much as it was the realization of there is evil in the World and how helpless we actually are against such monster when they are left to plan unmolested. We can discuss jihad till we are blue in the face, because we are not a culture of action, but reaction. The place would not be any safer without one, or a dozen, such words because it is not the word that is the problem but the action behind it. The problem with words in our current culture, is that too many think that words, alone, are enough. We have forgotten the rhyme of our childhood, "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" and have a generation that believe that they should be protected from words they do not like...especially those words stating the truth...and that they should be allowed to flee to their safe places when faced with those words.
I do not disagree with the statement that 'words help shape our thoughts' because words are the building blocks of man's communication and communication is foundation of thought, with this said it was not the impact of the word 'jihad' on the morning of September 11th 2001 that was the issues as much as it was the realization of there is evil in the World and how helpless we actually are against such monster when they are left to plan unmolested. We can discuss jihad till we are blue in the face, because we are not a culture of action, but reaction. The place would not be any safer without one, or a dozen, such words because it is not the word that is the problem but the action behind it. The problem with words in our current culture, is that too many think that words, alone, are enough. We have forgotten the rhyme of our childhood, "Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me" and have a generation that believe that they should be protected from words they do not like...especially those words stating the truth...and that they should be allowed to flee to their safe places when faced with those words.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
Military based language or acronyms are used to manipulate or dramatize a condition that may require future caution or additional actions, i.e. the constant public use of "high alert" echoed from school teachers to presidents. Civilians understand very few military phrases, but they understand that things may not be normal if they hear the militarized phrases or acronyms. As far as the militarization of our society; we were attacked multiple times in the 90's and islamic terrorists finally succeeded in killing 3000 of our citizens because they hated us for being us. Terrorism continues and still isn't taken seriously by our citizens. If you compare the movie films produced shortly after WWII, and compare the action of the hated Nazi's checking papers at rail stations, it matches security in American airports in 2017. This behavior was tyranny 60 years ago. Now we live in a militarized society, but very few notice. What happened to us? P.S. Sorry this turned into a rant, but some things irritate me.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
Sadly, everyone is fluent in violence. it's because it is easy. Understanding another person's language or culture takes time and effort. We are currently in a society that wants everything right this minute, not wanting to work for it. This includes accepting another's viewpoint.
(1)
(0)
1
1
0
No Liberals are people who fear militarization are to blame. Getting an mrap having uniforms with sapi plates having militarized clothing that don't have the same color as the military is not a big deal but to Jane Fonda types and those who were paranoid it is a problem. The police had to be protected as you saw police who didn't wear body armor got blown away in one instance by one gunman in 2016. The SWAT teams and special tactical units have a military-style uniforms if it intimidates the populace too bad. The police have to protect themselves intimidation is part of the deterrence to stop crying and to cause Hooligans to disperse. If police walked around with roses in their hands and waving hands at people who want to fight it's not going to work.
(1)
(0)
(0)
(0)
SSgt Christopher Brose
SPC David S. - You are way overthinking this. Basically, you are asking if he, as a gunman, would have behaved the same way and made the same choices if he hadn't had prior military education and experience. The answer is probably not.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Interesting question. Probably not by itself, but I don't think it helps when we use "militarized" speak to describe many things that don't rise to the life-and-death reality and utter destruction unleashed by war. It's especially true in our political / civilian leadership circles - it started with phrases like "a war on poverty" or "a war on drugs" - well intentioned perhaps, they were trying to draw a parallel that connoted how serious this societal problem or that was; but there's the rub: nothing else is really like war. So now, it's used very casually... we're going to "declare war" on trivially things in our lives... meanwhile, we haven't actually declared war in ISIS, for example.
(0)
(0)
SPC David S.
Very astute observation sir on the enculturation of military speak. I think many would be surprised by the military origins of some rather common terms - “Murphy’s Law”, “Blockbuster” and “Run Amok” just to name a few. I would agree that desensitizing words in such a way as well affects our thought process. In you example the term war on drugs reshapes how we think about war as in this case the war is a just cause and would be considered good; very contrary to how many perceived the Vietnam War.
(1)
(0)
0
0
0
Interesting question. I think the US has always had a more fluid language than the UK, for example, because we value history very little and are always seeking the next "cool, edgy, salty" way to express an idea. But overall, I have not seen a one-dimensional morphing toward militaristic speech. It is moving towards new-tech and multiculturalism generally, but then it depends on where you live after that. Do we hear it more because we live in mostly military communities? I know when I visit family in Mpls-St.Paul (not much mil presence), it seems to me that military jargon is used much LESS than it was during the Vietnam era, when body counts were shown on NBC nightly news.
(0)
(0)
SPC David S.
How about during the presidential election sir. The term carpet bombing comes to mind. It seems that a good majority understand this concept to some degree. Might not understand this issues related to how and when but have 10,000 foot perspective none the less. One headline - "Ted Cruz vows to 'utterly destroy ISIS' and 'carpet bomb' terrorists "
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
SPC David S.
What about all the civil unrest as a result of either police shootings and politics. While I agree most if not all of these so called members of these grass roots movements are whiny wimps that couldn't fight their way out of a paper bag they have staged some very organized and disruptive events. One example they were able to squelched a Trump in Chicago as well groups plan to create chaos on the 20th. Just thinking terms like "use of force" may be shaping behavior. As well the news coverage and social media play a big part in all this as well.
(0)
(0)
SPC David S.
Various uses of language precede and support the pursuit of war and the quest for peace. To better understand the effects of the ways we talk and write about war and peace, one needs to recognize that language, as Ferdinand de Saussure established, is one of the most conservative social institutions. As such, language shapes both perception and behavior, influencing our thought and action in three important ways.
1) Words in the lexicon of a language limit one another.
2) Individuals think about their world in the terms provided by their language.
3) Language gives a structure to consciousness which guides action.
Certainly the tons of footage aired nightly over the last decade has had some impact.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/16/iraq4
1) Words in the lexicon of a language limit one another.
2) Individuals think about their world in the terms provided by their language.
3) Language gives a structure to consciousness which guides action.
Certainly the tons of footage aired nightly over the last decade has had some impact.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/mar/16/iraq4
The path to war: a lexicon of conflict
Sunder Katwala on the jargon of modern warfare.
(1)
(0)
SPC David S.
How do you explain gender neutrality in genderless languages? Based own your claim that language is the result of culture it would seem these cultures have a different world view about gender. Could this lack of words shape their behavior in regards to equality regardless of one sex. If it is possible with gender why not war and other societal conditions?
(0)
(0)
SPC David S.
Ok, what about gangster rap - would you agree that the language used in songs like NWA's Cop Killer influenced some individuals' behavior?
http://longnow.org/seminars/02010/oct/26/how-language-shapes-thought/
http://longnow.org/seminars/02010/oct/26/how-language-shapes-thought/
Lera Boroditsky: How Language Shapes Thought - The Long Now
Also available on:
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google