Swearing has the ability to get someone in a whole load of trouble at the dinner table with their mother but could also be their choice of words when they accidently stub their toe on the coffee table in the living room. Natalie Angier discusses this controversial topic of words that shouldn’t be said in her article feature in The New York Times, “Almost Before We Spoke, We Swore”. Provoked by a recently proposed bill to increase fines for using swear words on television, Angier analyzes not only the impact of swearing, but also where the desire to speak obscene words comes from. She references many credible studies and sources as she unfolds her argument. She uses a diverse slew of studies, experiments, and famous pieces of literature and …show more content…
film to educate readers with a passion for language on the topic of forbidden words but fails to effectively convince the audience of her opinion as it is hidden between the lines. It may seem that cursing is a conscious decision made by someone in an act of passion, but Angier argues that this incident may be more of an emotional urge rather than a logical decision. Angier points out that “Every language, dialect or patois ever studied, living or dead, spoken by millions or by a small tribe, turns out to have its share of forbidden speech…” (Angier 767). By noting that every language ever known has had some form of words that were shamed upon, it proves Angier’s point that swearing is not a new concept made up by heathens, but rather a common idea that many have shared throughout all of time from people all over the world. Angier references the famous George Carlin and his comedic speak “seven dirty words that are not supposed to be uttered on radio or television.” (767). She does not stop there however, and continues to reference Shakespeare and Ben Jonson, detailing how the two of them never wrote a piece without some offensive language peppered in. She uses these two as an example to showcase that it is not strictly one class of people that use swear words, but rather everyone, even famous writers. She also uses these writers to appeal to her upper/middle class audience and to show that anyone, even people considered high class, use the language considered taboo. To continue her argument that swearing truly is universal, Angier also notes that it is not just the human race that feels the desire to speak obscenities and states “chimpanzees engage in what appears to be a kind of cursing match as a means of venting aggression and avoiding a potentially dangerous physical clash.”(770) She then references a mental condition known as coprolalia which causes Tourette’s patients to unwillingly voice vulgar words in inappropriate situations due to a misfire of neural circuits in the brain. These Tourette’s patients have no conscious control over this impulse to speak forbidden words and are often embarrassed by their actions. She uses these points to stress that cursing cannot simply be a vulgar decision if it is so widely spread by different races, species and people of all intellectual ability; it must have a deeper emotional purpose. A study was done in which participants were asked to recall a series of words written in a variety of colors. Angier includes this experiment as a way to analyze how the mind remembers profane words vs neutral words. “The experience of seeing titillating text obviously distracted the participants from the color-coding task at hand. Yet those risqué interpolations left their mark. In subsequent memory quizzes, not only were participants much better at recalling the naughty words than they were the neutrals, but that superior recall is also applied to the tints of the tainted words, as well as to their sense.”(769) Angier chooses to examine this study in attempt to show that curse words do have some sort of emotional meaning in our culture and do have an impact on people. She then moves on to detail another similar study in which the participants were just asked to recall as many words as they can from a list they were briefly shown. Again, they were better at remembering the naughty words over any other words included in the lists. Angier discusses this as well as the physiological response of people when a vulgar word is heard as an attempt to explain why these words are vastly different than the so called “acceptable” words of our language. Angier speaks on how swear words make people feel as she gives voice to researchers who “… have determined that hearing a curse elicits a literal rise out of people. When the electrodermal wires are placed on people’s arms and fingertips to study their skin conductance patterns and the subjects then hear a few obscenities spoken clearly and firmly, participants show signs of instant arousal.”(768) Angier then continues her argument “yet as much as bad language can deliver a jolt, it can help wash away stress and anger. In some settings, the free flow of foul language may signal not hostility or social pathology, but harmony and tranquility.”(769). While attempting to explain when an individual feels most comfortable to let off steam, Angier notes that people are more inclined to swear when around close friends. She then goes beyond the research of when people are most likely to swear and speaks of where exactly these forbidden phrases come from. Angier cites Dr. Deutscher, “In some cultures, swear words are drawn mainly from sex and bodily functions, whereas in others, they’re drawn mainly from the domain of religion,”(770) She continues to reference his findings that some societies whom make importance of purity in The argument is made that depending on the culture, the so called forbidden words are likely made of different origins. Angier cites Dr. Deutscher’s findings for swear word originations. Angier uses this argument to explain that curse words were once regular words that developed a negative connotation associated with them which in turn made them taboo. She uses the example of the word coffin. While this word is not considered a forbidden word in today’s society its meaning has still been altered over time. Angier states: “the word coffin originally meant an ordinary box, but it once became associated with death,” (771). It is no question that Angier clearly has some credibility. After all, since The New York Times has roughly one million copies circulating daily (The New York Times), they do not let just any blogger throw in their two cents. After all, anyone can pick up a copy of The New York Times at almost any news stand in the country. While she does do an excellent job of logically explaining the subject matter using well known writers and scientific studies to the likely middle/upper class educated readers of The New York Times, she fails to add emotional appeals. As a matter of fact, one of the only things likely to strike an emotion from anyone is noting that children pick up swear words long before they understand what they mean. While Angier is not the best at provoking people to feel a deeper meaningful emotional connection, she may, as a matter of fact, be great at making people angry. She openly draws attention to who is likely to swear the most (men) but doesn’t stop there, she continues with “unless said women are in a sorority, and that university provosts swear more than librarians or the staff members of a daycare center.”(769). While the study she chooses to use educates the audience on who curses, it also is likely that it left a group of people wanting to swear at her for singling them out. It is no question that swearing has a negative association in today’s society and by pointing out these specific groups of people it is likely that she lost a few readers over choosing this specific study. Another thing Angier lacks is a proper conclusion.
After discussing the use of swear words amongst Tourette’s patients she begins to discuss the physiological aspects of swearing. She speaks on “higher order linguistic circuits are tapped, to contrive the content of curse. The brain’s impulse control center struggles to short-circuit the collusion between limbic-system urge and the neocortical craft, and it may succeed for a time.” (772). While this is interesting to look at the chemical and physiological processes carried out by the human brain in the urge to swear she does not finish she thought process. She ineffectively ends the article with “Yet the urge still mounts, until at last the speech pathways fire, the verboten is spoken and archaic and refined brains alike must shoulder the blame.” (772). This is in no way a conclusion to the article and is likely to leave the readers with an uneasy feeling of confusion. This ending leaves a lot of loose ends and sparks the question of her own personal opinion on explicit words. By ending it stating that all people, of old fashion ways, or of a higher educational background, should shoulder the blame it makes us question what she actually thought. Perhaps if she feels that swearing should be blamed, then she feels it is a negative impact in our language. She spoke extensively early on in her article on swearing being a natural desire that it is confusing whether she really felt that way or if she feels that we deserve all the blame for the swear
words. Angier does an excellent job on educating readers everywhere on the topic on forbidden words. However, she does a very poor job on making the audience feel emotion from her writing as the vast majority of it only includes scientific evidence and studies. These studies and evidence are very factual and provide a great basis for an argument but, unfortunately, her argument is the one thing that’s lacking. Angier’s opinion is almost undetectable in this paper and leaves it solely up to the audience to decide how to feel with providing almost no direction or insight. The only opinion found in this paper could be that swearing is actually no big deal. However if Angier’s opinion is that swearing is not an issue at all, why would she write an extensive article on it after reviewing numerous studies? And as if the readers were not confused enough, she failed to conclude the article in a way that gave closure. Overall, this piece was mildly effective, but failed extensively on convincing anyone on anything.
In the modern society, millions of people realize that several offensive words with insulting taboo meanings heavily disturb their daily lives and break some special groups of people’s respect to push them to feel like outsiders of the whole society. As a result, more and more people join some underway movements to eliminate the use of these offensive words in people’s everyday speech and writing. However, these offensive words themselves are not the culprit, the bad meanings people attach are the problems and some other functions of the words are useful in the society. Christopher M. Fairman the author of “ Saying It Is Hurtful, Banning It Is Worse” also argues that although
In 1997 Vilayanur Ramachandran and his colleagues from the University of California at San Diego headed a research study. The team studied patients of temporal lobe epilepsy measuring galvanic skin response on the left hands of the patients (11). This measurement allowed the research team to monitor arousal (specific autonomic nervous system response) and indirectly surmise the communication between the inferior temporal lobe and the amygdala, both important in response related to fear and arousal (9). In addition to two control groups a religious control group and a non-religious control group, each group was shown forty words, including violent words, sexual words, and simple words (like "wheel"), and finally, religious-related words. The results of the study showed a greater arousal in the temporal lobe epilepsy sufferers to religious words in comparison to the non-religious, whom were aroused by sexual words, and religious control groups, whom were aroused by religious and sexual words (10).
In 1978 a radio station owned by Pacifica Foundation Broadcasting out of New York City was doing a program on contemporary attitudes toward the use of language. This broadcast took place on a mid-afternoon weekday. Immediately before the broadcast the station announced a disclaimer telling listeners that the program would include "sensitive language which might be regarded as offensive to some."(Gunther, 1991) Pacifica believed that this was enough warning to give people who would be offended, but placing a warning in front of something is like placing chocolate cake in front of a fat guy. Humans thirst for the unknown, and at this time, sexual perversion was a big unknown.
If a person was to take a closer look at Jesmyn Ward’s Men We Reaped, they could clearly relate to the tragedies that occurred in Delise, Mississippi. Thus, Jesmyn Ward’s novel is completely genuine and the title of the novel gives reverence to the black lives that were lost during the struggle for equality, acceptance and justice. Although the deaths in Men We Reaped occurred during a modern era, the tragedies are similar to the ones that Harriet Tubman witnessed throughout her lifetime. The events that occurred in Jesmyn Ward’s memoir have an undeniable connection to the incidents of the past.
I chose “Here We Aren’t, So Quickly” by Johnathan Sofran Foer, and “Wake Up Call” by Megan McGuire. They have similar underlying themes and will be an interesting comparison. “Here We Aren’t, So Quickly” is about what seems to be a daydream about the future relationship between two lovers and how it evolves over the course of their adults lives. “Wake Up Call” is about the relationship between a girl and her parents as she grows up from adolescence in to young adulthood. .
Differentiating one’s identity from one’s abnormalities is often difficult for individuals with mental and physical disorders. In “Witty Ticcy Ray” by Oliver Sacks, Ray struggles to create an identity separate from his Tourette’s. Affecting each individual differently, Tourette’s syndrome “is characterised by an excess of nervous energy, and a great production and extravagance of strange motions and notions” (Sacks, 1981, p. ????). In 1971, following the popularization of Tourette’s syndrome, Sacks met with an individual, Ray, who had suffered from this disorder since childhood. Oliver Sacks and Ray worked to control Ray’s Tourette’s through different treatment techniques like using psychoanalytic drugs and performing deep analysis. Throughout
There are still people that go to church and don't cuss and cares about there family vale and try to keep that away from their kids as long as they can.they want the censor stuff for there kids.Cursing
The English language or any language for that matter is made up of just a cluster of words, but when those words are used inappropriately they can trigger emotions such as guilt, despair, and sorrow. Language is inappropriately used when Jana was referring to Tapka as “shithead”, “Gaylord” and “mental case” and Mark can be seen reflecting on her words when he thought, “I couldn’t help thinking, Poor
When many individuals think of a dangerous word their minds automatically think of the words that they chose to omit when in the presence of children or words that are thought instead of spoken in formal places, but what about the words that sit along the fine line between appropriate and inappropriate? For example, the term redneck has a different meaning to those inside community versus that of those outside. This word is the most dangerous because it is looked down upon and praised at the same time. The term redneck should be socially acceptable in everyday language, because those who it describes take pride using it to describe themselves.
“I ain’t gonna let you two jokers get some free education and leave me on the streets to sell pencils.” The reality was for most boys living in the tough Newark streets, pencils were the best thing they could have sold. We Beat the Street is a true story that follows three young men, Sampson Davis, George Jenkins, and Rameck Hunt, as they grow up trying to escape the roads of drugs, guns, and incarceration. The Three Doctors, as they call themselves today, admit that the challenge of succeeding was daunting, but they wanted to tell their story to inspire all young people that they can achieve through all obstacles. The story is told through the eyes of the young men and through reflections from the grown men today, which immerses the reader
...es not turn our society toward violence. There are other possible solutions though, like making a list of words that are indecent, meaning offensive to community standards. This would illiminate harmful curse words that are derogatory.
The biological perspective examines how brain processes and other bodily functions regulate behaviour. It emphasizes that the brain and nervous system are central to understanding behaviour, thought, and emotion. It is believed that thoughts and emotions have a physical basis in the brain. Electrical impulses zoom throughout the brain’s cells, releasing chemical substances that enable us to think, feel, and behave. René Descartes (1596–1650) wrote an influential book (De Homine [On Man]) in which he tried to explain how the behaviour of animals, and to some extent the behaviour of humans, could be like t...
In the Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire case, the courts assumption was, “that some words are so very bad that on hearing them, an ordinary person must strike out (as reflexively as, when the doctor taps your knee with a hammer, you have to j...
Poulisse, N. (2000), Slips of the tongue in first and second language production. Studia Linguistica, 54 (2) 136–149. doi: 10.1111/1467-9582.00055
Television violence is also a cause of both violent and aggressive behavior in teenage boys. According to the evidence in a study done by Turner, Hesse, and Peterson-Lewis, it was concluded that watching television violence had a long-term increase in aggression in boys (Hough 1). In addition to this study, Dr. William A. Belson evaluated fifteen hundred boys, aged thirteen to sixteen years, and he determined that boys with heavy television exposure are more likely to commit violent acts than other boys (Langone 51). In Belson’s study, he discovered that the effect of each violent act on television was collective, and over time, Belson discovered that the boys engaged in many aggressive acts, including painting graffiti, breaking windows, aggressive play, swearing, and threatening other boys with violence (Kinnear 26).