A Socio-Cultural Aspect of Anti-language

• Main Author: Monika Piechota
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: University of Bucharest Publishing House 2018-12-01
• Series: Styles of Communication
• Subjects: anti-language; pragmatics; sociolinguistics; stigmatisation; multi-functionality; the negative; symbol; culture; taboo
• Online Access: https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxzdHlsZXNvZmNvbW18Z3g6ZWY5MTY1YTZiMGVlMGJm
• ISSN: 2065-7943; 2067-564X

The article has been devoted to the phenomenon of anti-language and the focal point of the paper refers to the analysis of socio-cultural processes involved in the formation and reception of anti-laguage. The analysis has been aimed at defining the circumstances of the occurrence of anti-laguage as well as determining its role and functions at both individual and collective levels. My general approach to the study of anti-language outlines the social functions which govern the emergence of anti-languages with the explicit reference to language, context and text. Kenneth Burke (1966) defines man as a symbol-using animal. In his “Definition of Man”, Burke draws attention to the concept of negativity when he argues that negatives do not occur in nature and they are solely a product of human symbol systems. According to Burke, “(…) language and the negative ‘invented’ man (…)” (Burke 1966: 9). The study has begun with the premise that anti-language permanently depicts an antagonistic attitude towards the official language, whereas the negative attitude towards anti-language translates directly into stigmatisation of its users. The negativity of the affix anti- in anti-language has been culturally and socially structured as antithetical to language. Nevertheless, language and anti-language do not necessarily forge a typical antithesis in a polar sense. Victor Turner (/1969/ 1975) employs the affix anti- for his term anti-structure and explains that the affix has been used strategically and does not imply radical negation. This paper seeks to revise the one-dimensional attitude towards anti-language and fortify its social significance with a new quality. The basis for the study of anti-language has been its multi-functionality and multifaceted character. A modest corpus of anti-languages has been analysed in order to illustrate a complex and polysemic nature of this phenomenon.