Does language define your identity?

nun es   Fri Jul 21, 2006 9:42 pm GMT
Of course it defines our identity. Our languages re the result of an evolution which are different each others. Why don't we think in terms of ethnicity/races when some others define themselves like that (LAA for example).

That is the proof that our language defines our view of the world which is made (in a big part) by our education at school.

It defines your identity because of your accent (except a few exceptions of people who are abble to speak a 2nd language without any accent).

If we take a baby native from Brazil but who grew up in France. He will have a french accent, and the foreigners will identify him as a french.
viri amaoro   Fri Jul 21, 2006 11:03 pm GMT
If you don't mind that I ask you, you are then an american citizen? Or you are still a Mexican? And how old are you? Thank you.
viri amaoro   Fri Jul 21, 2006 11:06 pm GMT
The message above is for LAA.
Uriel   Sat Jul 22, 2006 12:16 am GMT
He said he was Mexican-American, which is just an American who happens to be of Mexican descent. He was probably never of actual Mexican nationality.

I don't attach much importance to my speaking English, as it is an accident of circumstance -- my various ancestors spoke German, English, and Portuguese before moving to the US. True, my cultural identity is American, but I never thought of it as being predicated on a certain language, just as the seal on the front of my passport.
viri amaoro   Sat Jul 22, 2006 1:48 am GMT
Well, I see differences between those who have multiple ancestries and those who don't.

For me my language is a major part in my identity, together with my nationality (ethnic background). I was born in Portugal, I live in Portugal, speak portuguese, my 2 parents are portuguese, born of my 4 portuguese grandfathers and grandmothers, themselves born of portuguese.

As far as I can establish a record all my ancestors are portuguese, with the exception of a faint family memory, from my father's family, of distant neochristian ancestors (converted jews) as expressed my now-gone folk traditions related to my fathers's aunts.
With that parentesis (a centuries old parentesis) I'm afraid I cannot say I have multiple ancestry.

Like perhaps 85 or 90% of all portuguese I cannot point to any single foreign (non-portuguese) ancestor in my recorded family tree.

I stress "recorded" family tree, as of course no people was ever born out of spontaneous generation. We all know the portuguese have iberian, celt, roman, arab and jewish ancestries, together with a very old and relatively new sprinkling of greek, fenician, crusader english and flemish ancestries (the latter in the Azores, very few).

But, in living has well in recorded memory, the vast majority of the portuguese people cannot point to a foreign ancestor.

I can say with a high degree of certainty that for almost all portuguese their connection is to their land, Portugal (first), to their language (second) and to the shared ancestry with the rest of the 10 million portuguese (third).

This shared ancestry (being descended from about the same ethnic group, as far as you can count generations back in history), the common language and a common patronimic system (I would guess that at least 95% of the population shares the same set of traditional portuguese surnames) is what makes the portuguese portuguese and what makes them identify with the other portuguese.

To me, my broad identity (I'm not talking about the individual personality) is based in my nationality (my people), my land (Portugal), the language I speak (portuguese) and also the surname I carry, which immediately identifies me as portuguese.

Lower than that identity, and much fainter, I find a connection with everyone who happens to speak portuguese (portuguese-speaking peoples) and also, lower still than the portuguese-speaking identity, I find a very, very faint connection with other europeans.

Finally, and I hope I'm not bothering anyone, I'am a human being and a citizen of the world and that's just about the faintest identity I carry.
Uriel   Sat Jul 22, 2006 10:47 am GMT
How funny -- I have a Portuguese last name, and no one here ever recognizes it as such -- they either mistake it for a similar Spanish name or take a closer look at the spelling and decide that I've just screwed up a perfectly good Spanish name!
Benjamin   Sat Jul 22, 2006 5:33 pm GMT
A bit question I see with this is — which language?

Native language?
Primary language?
Most proficient language?
Home language?
Public language?
Academic language?
All languages which one knows fluently?
Favourite language out of those known fluently?

For many people, it's the same language in all of these cases. But for a lot of people, it's not. And if you're from Luxembourg, it's extremely complicated.

I must say, I've never really seen the need for having an 'identity' as such because I am first and foremost and individual person. However, if I were to move to Germany and then proceed to conduct my life almost entirely in Germany, would one say that my 'identity' would have changed from 'anglophone' to 'germanophone'? Or do I have to be identified as firstly 'anglophone' forever since English was my native language?
Presley.   Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:31 pm GMT
I guess this has a little something to do with the above post...

I think and feel in Japanese (even though I tend to swear in Korean), but I use English most proficiently out of the languages I know.

I learned Spanish from my nanny, and I speak it fluently. I've been learning French at school for a loooong time, but it never comes into any use. I use Spanish fairly often because I live in California.
Presley.   Sat Jul 22, 2006 8:32 pm GMT
...none the less, I still consider myself AMERICAN.
LAA   Sat Jul 22, 2006 9:32 pm GMT
To answer your question Viri, I'm a 16 year old Mexican-American, born in a Mexican part of Los Angeles.

I don't really think you can simply identify yourself soley with your language, the way the Francophones on here claim. That just shows an arrogant disdain for reality. Of course you identify with your land, with people who look like you, the land of your ancestors, the land you were raised in.

I can say that I identify with American culture first and foremost, but that could be misleading. Because, I also identify with Mexican culture, or more precisely, "Mexican-American" culture. That doesn't mean I act ignorant like some want to be "cholos", and talk with a cheesy Spanish accent, when I my first language is English.

I often identify with Spain, because that is where most of my forefathers are from, and because I look Spanish. I don't look anything like an Indian, or even like many heavily Indian-mestizos. Most white people don't even believe me when I say I'm Mexican.

In the kitchen, would I feel like a Spaniard, when the women in my family are making tamales, and albondigas, and grinding away in a molcajete? NO.

I am an American. I apspire to work on Wall Street, I invest in the stock market with money from summer jobs and the like, I watch MTV, listen to Sublime, surf, shop at Ambercrombie and Fitch, (when I have money), and I love American football, but I often cuss in Spanish, and I don't go a day without having a tortilla or pinto beans.

So, I'm a Mexican-American. Not just an "American".

I agree with Presley's comment, but as he said, he is not just an "American", but a Japanese/Korean American. But that doesn't mean he is any less American than I am.
fab   Sun Jul 23, 2006 4:40 pm GMT
" A bit question I see with this is — which language?
Native language?
Primary language?
Most proficient language?
Home language?
Public language?
Academic language?
All languages which one knows fluently?
Favourite language out of those known fluently? "


To answer your question Benjamen, in my opinion it is the language in wich you have been raised and educated, wich you use more and with witch one you are more fluent. Of course it is possible to have more than one linguistic-cultural identity.
As you said, for most of the people and most countries the native, primary, most proficient, home, public and academic language are the same. In some specific places and for some people it may differ - in places like Brussels, Luxembourg, Montreal or Miami, the linguistic identity can be double, or even triple. Said that, I think that everyone has, even if he can speak really fluently (that is to say understanding all the cultural subtilities of the languages such as humour) more than one language has a dominant linguistic identity.
My girlfriend for exemple has a french father and a venezuelian mother, she speaks fluently both French and Spanish, we can say that she a french and a hispanic culture, but having been living all time in France, been in french schools with french speaking people, in a french-speaking society (even if she speaks spanish with her mother and sisters), she recognise that she is much more of french culture than hispanic - especially when she returns to her mother's country and realise that a great cultural distance have been created beetween her and her cousins from there, because she can't catch a lot of linguistic subtilities and cultural references that you get only when you live in the country - there she is named "la francesita" by her family.



" I must say, I've never really seen the need for having an 'identity' as such because I am first and foremost and individual person."

I don't think that the identity is a question of choice. having been raised a certain way with a specific language and references a a specific country is something that one's doesn't shoose.
We can not like our culture or our country - and so decide to not recognise in it - But in reality, the fact it is very difficult to change it when we are adults - it should take decades to have an absolute knowledge of the new language and the subtilities, and it is almost impossible to forget all your past, the language of your family, the songs that your mother sang to you, the school education, the language you used with you firends at school, where you learned most of the values of your land, etc. etc. it is in us for ever.


" However, if I were to move to Germany and then proceed to conduct my life almost entirely in Germany, would one say that my 'identity' would have changed from 'anglophone' to 'germanophone'? Or do I have to be identified as firstly 'anglophone' forever since English was my native language? "

As i said above, I think that your native linguistic-cultural identity follows you. you can get parts of german culture and adquire a lot of German culture but it would be difficult to reach the same level of "germaness" than someone who was born and raised in the german culture with german language.








" I don't really think you can simply identify yourself soley with your language, the way the Francophones on here claim. That just shows an arrogant disdain for reality. Of course you identify with your land, with people who look like you, the land of your ancestors, the land you were raised in. "

I tend tio think that there is a difference between having a cultural identity (which is independant of your wanting - and depends of your native language and the culture in wich you have been raised) and beetween to identify with an identity.
I think that, especially in the states, due to specific historical foundations (massive arrival of imigrants from Europe in the 19th century) people were grouping themselves with their country of origin identity. even after having lost most of it culture of origins such as their language, people tend to groups themselves in national sub-groups inside the American identity, based on the english language. This "community culture", is, in my opinion something quite linked with the protestant foundations of the US, where the chureches are independant to each other, and where doesn't exist one unique church that was unifiying all the diverse people as it was the case in latin-America for exemple. In L-A, the population was made of imigrants of differents origins too (not only spaniards, but Italians, Frenchs, Germans, Polish, Jews, Libanese, Japaneses) who melted with the native peoples (themselves of differents groups, Quechuas, Aymara, Incas, Mapuche, Mayas, Aztecs, Arawaks, etc) and melted also with black africans. In a latin-catholic society the populations identify with the melted group - it gives societies where the huge majority of the people is mixed; most of the foods, musics and cultural production are also the fruit of the mixings. it is not so surprising that the word "mestisaje/métissage" doesn't exist in english and that people from a country of anglo-protestant culture tend to have a quite "ethnic identification" and not an identification to the result of the mix (as in the notion of "raza" in Mexico for exemple - "raza" describing the identity bron from the mix of European, amerindian and other people and cultures). That is, in my opinion the reason why lmost latin Americans can identify easly with latinity and hispanicity (despite that fact that a big part of them is not of latin-European ancestry), while people from anglo-american countries have difficulties to define themselves as "anglosaxons".





" I often identify with Spain, because that is where most of my forefathers are from, and because I look Spanish. "

Didn't you said that one of your parents were of Welsh ancestry ?
Do you know really Spain ? and how spanish people look and behave?
Spain is a country with liberal values (legalisation of homosexuality, tolerance of canabis, etc.) - with people being result of mixings of North Africans (Iberians, moors), North European (Wisigoth, Vandals) and central European (celts) and mediterraneans (greeks, phenicians, hebrews). A country were some regions play bagpipes, and others arabo-andaluz music, where the food is very diverse, not only mediterranean. It is a country of montains and high plateaus, the most montanous after switzerland, where it can be very cold in winter (pirineos, sierra de guadarama,sierra nevada) where a lot of northern European go skiing.
It is a country where a lot of languages are officially spoken some of them are not latin (Euskadi), not just castellano. Catalan, spoken on the mediterranean shore is closer to french and Italian. Galician, spoken on the north west is close to Portuguese. A country were the traditional drink is wine (and beer very popular among young)


" I don't look anything like an Indian, or even like many heavily Indian-mestizos. Most white people don't even believe me when I say I'm Mexican. " "

"most whites" ? you are speaking as if you didn't consider yoursef as white ? don't you ?
Maybe if most people don't think you are mexican is because you are have some mestizo herency in one side and welsh on the other; That the result of both look like an average Spanish is not very surprising.




" I am an American. I apspire to work on Wall Street, I invest in the stock market with money from summer jobs and the like, I watch MTV, listen to Sublime, surf, shop at Ambercrombie and Fitch, (when I have money), and I love American football, but I often cuss in Spanish, and I don't go a day without having a tortilla or pinto beans.
So, I'm a Mexican-American. Not just an "American". "

I agree, you are an American. And a lot of things of mexican origin have been integrated in the American habits, such as mexican food. Mexican food is mainly of native origins, so it is very American (in the original meaning).
LAA   Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:15 pm GMT
"Maybe if most people don't think you are mexican is because you are have some mestizo herency in one side and welsh on the other; That the result of both look like an average Spanish is not very surprising."

No, to be completely honest with you Fab, even my mother's side of the family does not look "mestizo". The only thing I inherited from my father in terms of looks, is his lighter color of hair, although mine is far darker, and the shape of our legs from the knee down. That is all.

My mother's side of the family have black hair, while a few have brown hair or auburn-red hair. My family is tall, with several men over 6ft, which is about 2 meters. Some of them have freckles.

The only thing that looks "mestizo" in my family is our lack of much body hair. We don't have much hair on our arms or chest, or back for that matter thank God.

But aside, from that, we just look Southern European. We don't all have black hair and olive skin, but our facial features, (the shape of our nose, eyes, the color of our eyes, etc) look very southern European, just like your typical Spaniard.

Most Americans, especially teenagers, are ignorant of the the variety of phenotypes present in Mexico. They just think that all Mexicans are short, dark, black haired, peasant farmers who come here to work for slave wages. When they see that I'm tall, with medium brown hair, and somewhat light skin, they "classify" me as European. Once they get to know me, and visit my home, and interact with me, they realize that I'm Mexican. They don't realize that Mexicans are a mix of Spanish and Native American, with some leaning more towards Spanish, or even exclusively Spanish, and other leaning toward native, or exclusively native. But people in the U.S. rarely see the "Spanish" Mexicans, because it is usually only the most economically unfortunate people of Mexico who choose to emigrate to the U.S., and they are almost always of Indian and or heavily Indian mestizo descent.
Luis Zalot   Sun Jul 23, 2006 6:52 pm GMT
LAA wrote:


Most Americans, especially teenagers, are ignorant of the the variety of phenotypes present in Mexico. They just think that all Mexicans are short, dark, black haired, peasant farmers who come here to work for slave wages. When they see that I'm tall, with medium brown hair, and somewhat light skin, they "classify" me as European. Once they get to know me, and visit my home, and interact with me, they realize that I'm Mexican. They don't realize that Mexicans are a mix of Spanish and Native American, with some leaning more towards Spanish, or even exclusively Spanish, and other leaning toward native, or exclusively native. But people in the U.S. rarely see the "Spanish" Mexicans, because it is usually only the most economically unfortunate people of Mexico who choose to emigrate to the U.S., and they are almost always of Indian and or heavily Indian mestizo descent.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

I wrote:

I agree 100%.



------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAA,

"The only thing that looks "mestizo" in my family is our lack of much body hair. We don't have much hair on our arms or chest, or back for that matter thank God. "

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I wrote:

you and I have this in common. Although, my dad's family is an exception to some extent.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
LAA,

"But aside, from that, we just look Southern European. We don't all have black hair and olive skin, but our facial features, (the shape of our nose, eyes, the color of our eyes, etc) look very southern European, just like your typical Spaniard."

------------------------------------------------------------------------

I too, have this phenomenon in my family. On my mother's side of the family. My dad's side is blended with "mediterranean" looks along side with mestizo looks.

I am of Italian and Spanish descent, respectively from the regions of "Venezia, Italia and Castilla la Mancha, Spain".

Thanks for your input.
Tiffany   Sun Jul 23, 2006 7:47 pm GMT
LAA,
I find it ironic, that you, who obviously know there are a wealth of phenotypes in places such as Mexico, still stereotype the phenotypes of other countries as you see fit. Anyway, we are getting off the topic of language and into ethnicity as usual.
viri   Sun Jul 23, 2006 11:07 pm GMT
Uriel... you must that pretty girl in the langcafé, right? By the way, can I ask you what your last name is? Is it one of those iberian names Lopes/Lopez, Soares/Suarez, Mendes/Mendez?