2.2.2 The Need for a Social-Linguistic Perspective...
As reviewed above, identity in different literatures can be defined from different perspectives, such as the neo-Eriksonian’s individual process of identity development versus the social process of social and relational identities.Fewer perspectives actively consider the integration of these theories in explaining identity phenomena.This situation is found in linguistics as well.The literature on identity reviewed in Section 2.2 aims to demonstrate the available variety of the descriptive approaches to and scopes on identity, which provide a prerequisite for considering what can constitute an explanatory and analytical framework suitable for the current discussion on the process of disciplinary identities construction, by emphasising four priority issues, that is, 1) social phenomena, 2) linguistic phenomena, 3) interaction, and 4) context.
Language and identity are mutually constructed as a fundamental element of human experience.Language is a fundamental evidence which reflects what we say and how we speak.We usually use language to convey meaning, to create affiliation or distance in interaction, or to observe others’ internal identities in either direct or indirect ways.It is ourselves and our own direct ways of interpreting each other that prior to language and start the interaction.On the other hand, we sometime use language to indirectly determine how we see others in their minds because our interpretation of identities can also be influenced by the accent or voice we hear, or the appearance we see.Therefore, language and identity co-locate each other.
Yet language sometimes deceives, and as a result, a person may misinterpret others’ identities.When a speaker discursively interacts with others, he or she will consciously and intentionally present his or her identity (or identities) to the listener in the use of language, which may affect the listener’s judgement on the speaker’s identity (or identities).In the current communicative world, it is significant to study how the identities and sets of social practice are corelated with each other and co-located.Identity sometimes deceives as well.If we heard an Asian-looking host reporting English news in a British programme, our interpretation of his identities would be affected by the appearance, English accent, gestures or the ways how he discursively interacts with other hosts or guests.Most often we judge identities based on the salient features of a person that we see but interestingly, we sometimes claim these striking features as the whole true identity of the person, rather than interpreting them from a systematic perspective.
Language indeed is the fundamental toolkit to classify and identify a person, but language per se is not the entire condition to determine our perception about a person.An Asian-looking student may be a British-born Chinese, but with no Chinese cultural background.As Joseph (2004) argues ‘one can hardly pretend to have any deep understanding of the identity issues of people among whom one has not lived and interacted for an extended period of time’ (p.xi).No doubt, the uniqueness of individuals’ own life experience enables them to consciously construct multiple identities in and through linguistic phenomena, comparing between ‘who we are’ and ‘who they are’ (Joseph, 2004).