Additional social influence

As Lupyan intended, the discussion of the paradox of triangles provides great insight into the cognitive side of linguistics: how we perceive and abstract words. A triangle is a shape that most people know and recognize, but the word “triangle” can refer to an actually infinite amount of concrete shapes. When we visualize a triangle, we think of a specific triangle, even though nothing about the word itself is directing us to the specific category. Lupyan studied and showed that our specific images of abstract ideas can take on both common properties and anthropomorphist qualities. When people are asked to draw a “triangle” over a “three-sided polygon,” equilateral triangles are far more common. When people are asked to identify the “sexy” or “cute” triangle, again equilateral triangles are one of the most commonly chosen. These studies enumerate how individuals prescribe layered meaning to words, sometimes without even knowing it.

Transitioning to “Unequal Partnership” by Rickford, the conversation shifts to the moral and ethical reciprocation that can be sparse in sociolinguistics. The study of African American Vernacular English (AAVE) specifically has taught linguists about the additional social context of syntactical rules. In a growing sector of sociolinguistics, conversations discuss whether AAVE is diverging from White vernaculars and how lexical items are turning into grammatical items. New abstract concepts are emerging out of the African American speech community. However, the benefits are one-sided. Rickford discusses ways in which to not only stop potential exploitation, but also to give back to these communities that have given so much to linguistics.

I see the issue of reciprocity as one that can be easily glossed over. Linguistic data can take the form of examining reactions to the word “triangle” or studying syntactic rules in the African American speech community. In a way, both can look at the sociological influence on language, but one clearly deals with human subjects. It’s probably easy to focus on what the results of studies tell about larger linguistic concepts. So I am curious, how can continual ethical awareness take place while maintaining focus on not limiting linguistic learning?