Chapter preview

As we saw in Chapter 6, first language acquisition is a complicated but relatively rapid process through which children become competent and proficient users of their communities’ language(s). However, for those of us who start learning a language after childhood – for example, by enrolling in a foreign language course or moving to a new country – the process of learning a non-native language is far more difficult and much less likely to end in complete mastery/fluency. Adult language learners usually take years to reach a level of proficiency that most children attain easily in their first languages before they are three, and few adults achieve complete native-like mastery of languages they have tried to learn after the end of childhood. What can explain these differences? Why do so many people claim the title of “worst language learner in the world” for themselves? Do adults learn second languages in the same way as children learning their first? If not, what kinds of instruction or learning contexts are most effective for them? These questions are central to the field of second language acquisition (SLA) – broadly defined as the formal study of the learning processes and teaching practices related to the acquisition of non-native languages.

For almost half a century the standard English commentary on Tacitus’ Agricola has been that by R. M. Ogilvie and Sir Ian Richmond, which was published in 1967. It began life as a revision of the commentary produced by J. G. C. Anderson in 1922, which itself was a revision of the commentary by H. Furneaux published in 1898, when the United States and Spain were at war with each other and the British fought at Omdurman.

The present commentary differs from that of Ogilvie and Richmond in three principal ways. First, it is not a revision of any predecessor but is an entirely new and independent work. The text, for example, is different from, and considerably more open to conjecture than, others currently available. Second, the commentary lacks the heavy archaeological content which characterised their book and which was in many ways intellectually misleading: Tacitus in his biography of Agricola provides very few specific details of events or localities which can be illustrated by reference to evidence on the ground; for the most part he talks in general terms, designed to portray his father-in-law as an ideal military commander and provincial governor. Readers should therefore not turn to the present book for the latest information on Roman Britain, which is in any case a scholarly field subject to rapid change and revision. Third, and most important, the main aim throughout has been to explain the nature and meaning of Tacitus’ Latin. In keeping with the general principles of the series Cambridge Greek and Latin Classics, an effort has been made to provide ‘all the guidance with grammatical and syntactical matters’ needed by today's undergraduate and graduate students. At the same time, it is hoped that the work will not be deemed negligible by fellow scholars. If there has been no reluctance in quoting parallels, that is partly to illustrate the texture of Tacitus’ language, partly to correct any misleading inferences that may be drawn from the commentary of H. Heubner (1984), who wrote without the benefit of modern computerised search programmes and the like.

Our main goals in this book and its companion volume, Fourier and Wavelet Signal Processing (FWSP) [57], are to enable an understanding of state-of-the-art signal processing methods and techniques, as well as to provide a solid foundation for those hoping to advance the theory and practice of signal processing. We believe that the best way to grasp and internalize the fundamental concepts in signal processing is through the geometry of Hilbert spaces, as this leverages the great innate human capacity for spatial reasoning. While using geometry should ultimately simplify the subject, the connection between signals and geometry is not innate. The reader will have to invest effort to see signals as vectors in Hilbert spaces before reaping the benefits of this view; we believe that effort to be well placed.

Many of the results and techniques presented in the two volumes, while rooted in classic Fourier techniques for signal representation, first appeared during a flurry of activity in the 1980s and 1990s. New constructions of local Fourier transforms and orthonormal wavelet bases during that period were motivated both by theoretical interest and by applications, multimedia communications in particular. New bases with specified time – frequency behavior were found, with impact well beyond the original fields of application. Areas as diverse as computer graphics and numerical analysis embraced some of the new constructions – no surprise given the pervasive role of Fourier analysis in science and engineering.

Chapter preview

As preceding chapters have shown, a fundamental characteristic of language is that it varies; different speech communities develop different languages, and different groups within those speech communities develop their own dialects. Speech communities also vary their use of their language to serve different purposes and different situations. People speak to friends differently than they speak to their bosses. People use different language in a church versus in a bar. Someone giving a report at work speaks differently than that same person telling a joke at a party. And when they write, people use language in different ways than when they speak. Different ways of using language to meet the communicative and social needs of different situations are called registers.

Writing is perhaps the clearest example of the adaptation of language to serve different purposes and situations, so we will examine the different writing systems of the world and how they developed. Describing the different kinds of writing systems with examples from three East Asian languages and Arabic, we’ll show how each system is suited to its spoken language and its culture. Then we’ll trace the history of writing from Egyptian hieroglyphics to the Latin alphabet, a story which demonstrates the two-way relationship between writing and the development of human culture. Finally, we’ll take a look at the role that writing has played in more recent European history.

1 Clarorum uirorum facta moresque posteris tradere, antiquitus usitatum, ne nostris quidem temporibus (quamquam incuriosa suorum) aetas omisit quotiens magna aliqua ac nobilis uirtus uicit ac supergressa est uitium paruis magnisque ciuitatibus commune: ignorantiam recti et inuidiam. 2sed apud priores ut agere digna memoratu pronum magisque in aperto erat, ita celeberrimus quisque ingenio ad prodendam uirtutis memoriam sine gratia aut ambitione bonae tantum conscientiae pretio ducebatur. 3ac plerique suam ipsi uitam narrare fiduciam potius morum quam adrogantiam arbitrati sunt, nec id Rutilio et Scauro citra fidem aut obtrectationi fuit: adeo uirtutes iisdem temporibus optime aestimantur quibus facillime gignuntur. 4at nunc narraturo mihi uitam defuncti hominis uenia opus fuit quam non petissem incusaturus: tam saeua et infesta uirtutibus tempora. 2 legimus, cum Aruleno Rustico Paetus Thrasea, Herennio Senecioni Priscus Heluidius laudati essent, capitale fuisse, neque in ipsos modo auctores sed in libros quoque eorum saeuitum, delegato triumuiris ministerio ut monumenta clarissimorum ingeniorum in comitio ac foro urerentur. 2scilicet illo igne uocem populi Romani et libertatem senatus et conscientiam generis humani aboleri arbitrabantur, expulsis insuper sapientiae professoribus atque omni bona arte in exilium acta, ne quid usquam honestum occurreret. 3dedimus profecto grande patientiae documentum; et, sicut uetus aetas uidit quid ultimum in libertate esset, ita nos quid in seruitute, adempto per inquisitiones etiam loquendi audiendique commercio. memoriam quoque ipsam cum uoce perdidissemus, si tam in nostra potestate esset obliuisci quam tacere.

3 Nunc demum redit animus; et, quamquam primo statim beatissimi saeculi ortu Nerua Caesar res olim dissociabiles miscuerit – principatum ac libertatem – augeatque cotidie felicitatem temporum Nerua Traianus, nec spem modo ac uotum securitas publica, sed ipsius uoti fiduciam ac robur aetas suaserit, natura tamen infirmitatis humanae tardiora sunt remedia quam mala; et, ut corpora nostra lente augescunt, cito extinguuntur, sic ingenia studiaque oppresseris facilius quam reuocaueris: subit quippe etiam ipsius inertiae dulcedo, et inuisa primo desidia postremo amatur. 2quid si per quindecim annos, grande mortalis aeui spatium, multi fortuitis casibus, promptissimus quisque saeuitia principis interciderunt, pauci et (ut ita dixerim) non modo aliorum sed etiam nostri superstites sumus, exemptis e media uita tot annis, quibus iuuenes ad senectutem, senes prope ad ipsos exactae aetatis terminos per silentium uenimus? 3non tamen pigebit uel incondita ac rudi uoce memoriam prioris seruitutis ac testimonium praesentium bonorum composuisse. hic interim liber, honori Agricolae soceri mei destinatus, professione pietatis aut laudatus erit aut excusatus.

THE AUTHOR AND HIS WORK

The Agricola, as it is conventionally known, is described by its author at the start as a biography (1.4 ‘narraturo mihi uitam defuncti hominis’), a form of writing which even today is seen as problematic and hard to define. ‘Is biography a genre?’, begins a recent book on the subject, and, if it is a genre, what are its characteristics? T. says that his purpose in writing is to honour his father-in-law (3.3 ‘liber honori Agricolae soceri mei destinatus’). Some readers have certainly seen a problem here, since in the modern world ‘we expect factual information’ rather than encomium in a biography; but this is to misunderstand the ancient equivalent, since in the classical world ‘biographers were free to be encomiastic’. Cicero makes this point in one of his letters to Atticus, when, discussing various autobiographical accounts of his consulship, he assures his friend in a playful paradox that they are ‘not encomiastic but historical’ (Att. 1.19.10 ‘non ἐγκωμιαστικὰ sunt haec sed ἱστορικά’). Indeed T. himself alludes to the connection between biography and encomium when he chooses ‘criticising’ as the term with which to describe the opposite of ‘biography’ (1.4 narraturo…uitam ~ incusaturus) and ‘admiration and praise’ as an implied description of the Agricola itself (46.2 ‘admiratione…et laudibus’).

Chapter preview

Most subfields of linguistics – like most of the chapters in this book – take a synchronic perspective toward language, trying to describe and explain language as a system at a given point in time (usually, the present). This is a useful simplification that has enabled much of the progress made by modern linguistics, but in reality languages are constantly, incrementally changing. As the chapters on both child and second language acquisition also show, looking at language as a changing, developing system offers valuable insights into its structure and use. Studying language diachronically (over time) also helps us to better understand prehistorical cultures.

This chapter discusses the causes, processes, and mechanisms of language change, which are the concerns of historical linguistics. First, we’ll discuss the causes of language change and describe the four main kinds of language change. Then we’ll discuss in more detail some of the mechanisms of language change. Finally, we will see how linguists use knowledge of these processes to reconstruct languages that are no longer spoken, from evidence in the languages descended from them.

Chapter preview

Language and culture are closely intertwined in complex ways; indeed, many anthropological linguists argue that they are inseparable. The meaning of utterances comes not only from the words spoken but also from culturally agreed-upon conventions for how those words are used and interpreted, as well as from how they have been used in the past within a given culture. This chapter illustrates the relationship between language and culture by examining representative scenarios of conversational interactions between speakers who grew up in different countries speaking different languages, and between Americans of different ethnic and regional backgrounds. An opening scenario of an interaction between an American student and his German counterparts illustrates culturally influenced aspects of language that can cause miscommunication or mutual misjudgment of intentions and abilities. Next, we introduce the concept of framing and explore how differences in framing can exacerbate discrimination and social inequality. This is illustrated with reference to John Gumperz’s studies of interethnic communication. We move then to discussion of politeness strategies and the conversational styles that result from their systematic use of features like overlap, rate of speech, and indirectness. We then consider the ritual nature of conversation. Differences in conversational rituals are illustrated with examples from language and gender. The concept “complementary schismogenesis” accounts for why things often get worse rather than better when people with different styles talk to each other. Finally, we consider the extent to which language shapes thinking and provides a way to order and see coherence in the world, and we suggest that language and culture are better thought of as a single entity: languaculture.

Chapter preview

In incident after incident around the world, controversies arise as governments try to control what languages or forms of languages are allowed to be taught or used for certain purposes. Often the issues involved might seem hardly worth the attention they get, yet what is behind them is actually quite serious. We start by describing a number of such cases. In order to understand them, we take a look at the relationship between language and identity, reviewing some of the concepts introduced by the sociologist of language Joshua Fishman. We then reconsider our introductory cases and see why they are controversial. This leads us to a discussion of how linguists and nonlinguists view language standardization and analyses of nonstandard language varieties, such as Ebonics. One kind of social organization of varieties of a language into more and less formal categories has some unique properties. This phenomenon is called diglossia. Once we’ve looked at disapproved varieties, we discuss the difference between a language and a dialect, and find that the difference is extraordinarily difficult to pin down. In fact, we’ll see that whether what you speak is a language or a dialect is as much a political phenomenon as a linguistic one; some languages have gone from being languages to being dialects and back again, all depending on the political environment. Next, we examine one more case of the politics of language – the effort to make English the official language of the United States. This case is puzzling because English is so thoroughly dominant in American political and social life, so we will examine the political currents behind the movement. Finally, we take up two issues about the content of speech and the political response to them: (1) blasphemy and cursing, and (2) hate speech.