Defining Characteristics Of Language

1.         Language as human Criterion

Man is a social being, who always needs company in his life. It can hardly be imagined that he should life all alone by himself without anyone to accompany him. Only in old stories do we read about human beings who live in isolation like helmits, deep in the forests and cut off from all human relation. In reality they always live together in groups since they need each other’s help and company. There is indeed some truth in what an old greek scholar once said that man is a zoon politicon or political being, who has to live in a community.

In order to facilitate their efforts to provide themselves with the necessities of life, human beings have to cooperate with one another, which can only be carried out in a community. When someone needs rice for his daily food for instance he does not need to grow it himself in his field. It will be enough for farmers to do it, while he can get the rice by buying it from them. He probably has a special skill in making such tools as a hoe or a plough, which he can sell to farmers who need them to cultivate the land. It is clear from this example that members of a community need one another and should, therefore, work together for their own benefits.  It is for the purpose of this cooperation that members of a social group need a means of communication, which is called Language. With language man can express his ideas and wishes to other people such as when he needs their help so that close operation among members of the group can be carried out. The three elements mentioned above, namely human beings, comunity, and language as very closely related an not easily divisible. Where there are human beings in any part of this globe, there is always social community, and in that community a particular language is used as a means of communication by the same members of the group. It can also be said that language is something that only human being possess in the world, and is a special characteristic of homo sapiens, since only human beings speak a language, where as other animals do not. Thus, language is considered as a criterion which is used to identify human beings.

Human beings may not be the only species that can communicate among themselves. It is sometimes said that animals can also do the same thing; for instance, a hen will cackle in certain way when she wants to call her chickens to give them food. However, she will produce a different kind of cackling sounds if she wants to warn them of a coming danger such as when a bird of prey is flting low to catch them. The difference in the cackling sounds produced by the hen can only be understood by the chickens, and also communication takes place only between them. Besides hens, others animals such as dogs, cats, monkeys, and elephants are also said have to a means of communication, which is only elephants are also said to have a means of communication, which is only understood by the animals concerened.

The question now arises whether the means of communication used by animals can also be called language as used by humans beings. There is a similarity between the two in that a sounds produced by both human beings and animals are intended to convey message. However, there is beg difference between the two in their varieties and their possible combination. Furthermore, the message imparted by animals is limited to their biological needs like eating, or protecting themselves again danger for the preservation of their lives as species. On the other hand, with language man can communication not only about things conected with his boilogical needs, but also about any otherthing which he may deem necessary. He may not only communicate about object which are in his immediate surroundings, but he can also talk about things which are remote in space and time. For instance he can speak about somethings which is many miles away from him, and also about something which took place a long time ago or will take palace many years ahead. This is what Bloomfield calls displaced speech or Hockett calls displacement an ability which is only found among human beings, but not among animals.

Except in the conten of message, human language differs from animals means of communication in the medium. Both use for their medium of communication sounds that are produced in their mouth,but the sounds produced by man are more varied than those produced by animals. In animals the sounds produced for their communication are always the same and remain unchanged. A hen can only produce two or three kinds of cackling sounds to suit the purpose. However, the kind of sounds produced by man is rich in variation, because he can pronounce such as a vowel as /a, i, u, e, o / or consonants like /b, p,d, m, n,v, f, z, s / etc. In addition to their varieties, human speech sounds can also be combined in various ways in order to form an utterance.

On the basic of the differences mentioned above it can be concluded that only the means of communication used by man should be called language, while the one used by animals should be excluded from the concept of language. Accordingly, only human beings own and use language which is then regarded as a human criterion, whereas animals or any other species do not.

2.         Characteristics of Human Language

As has been stated above, human language differs in many ways from animals means of communication, the various possible waysof combining speech sounds employed for communication, the various possible ways of combining speech sounds to form utterences and the contents or message that may be conveyed through language. In short, the formers is more complex than the latter in both form and content.

The defining characteristics of human language can be easily deduced from the following definition made by an American linguist, John B. Carrol in his book entilted “ The Study of Language “

Language is an arbitrary system of speech sounds or sequences of speech sounds which is used or can be used in interpersonal communicatio by an aggregation of human beings, and which rather exhaustively catalogs things, processes, and events in the human environment.

From the definition of language quoted above one can draw some basic characteristis of human language, among others that language is systematic, arbitraty, social and complete.

Since language is a system of speech sounds, it is systematic: this means that it implies orderly arragement of signalling units used by language. Thse are not put together at random, but they have to be organized according to certain definite patterns. Such as signalling unit as sounds and words in English, for instance have o be arranged according to the patterns of language concerned, if the utterance is to be intelligible. An arragement of words like “ My Father will come home tomorrow “ will certainly make sense, but a random accumulation of words like “ father my come tomorrow will home’ will not. The latter does not make sense because the signalling units of words here are not arranged according to the characteristic patterns of English.

The idea of systematicness of language such as found inthe arrragement of words or sounds implies the idea of predictabability. In an English sentence s noun is usually preceded by a determiner and so when someone hears a determiner, he can anticipates a noun following it, this noun, whiah may function as subject of a sentence, will be followed by a verb as the main part of the predicate: this verb will take a person singular actor but the verb does not takes the suffixs when the preceding subject is other than third person singular actor.

Sounds are also arranged to form word in accordane with the patterning of the individual language. English has its own sound pattern, which differs in some respects form, say, Indonesian sound pattern. By way illustration it can be mentioned here that the number of consonants in post vocalic position of English words, which are calledcoda may be one two three of four such as in the words can only have one coda in postvocalic position like in “ obor, asap, kapal, usang “.

Language said to be arbitrary which means that is based on social arragement. There is no logical explanation or no reasoning, for instance why a certain domestic four footed animal called dog in English, asu in Javanese, or anjing in Indonesian. That just what English javanese and Indonesian people agree among themselves to name the animal in their own respective languages. So there is not logical or necessary relation between ameaningful element in language or word and its denotation is independent of any physical or geometrical resemblance between the two. This is because thereis nothing in the animal that suggests the uses of certain sounds to name it.

In addition to the arbitrariness in the meaning of words, language is also arbitrariness in the meaning of words, language is also arbitraty in its grammatical system. Words in English have to be.

Arranged in a certain order to form an acceptable sentence, for example ‘All sees me’ and not ‘Ali me sees’. There is no reasonable argument as to why English people use the former order of arranging words and not the letter. The only possible explanation that can be given is that all English native speakers arrange the words in that way and not in any other way; and that is the way they speak the language. Word order is, therefore, arbitrary

Tihs arbitrariness also applies to another grammatical device, used in the sentence above, that is the inflectional suffix-s after the verb she to indicate that the subject of the verb is third person singular actor. Why the suffix is used in such a sentence, no one can tell, even English people themselves. An English child who begins to study the mother tongue will have to learn it from the people arround him. If he does not use an s-ending, after a verb with third person singular subject, he will certainly be corrected and asked to produce the generally accepted form of the verb. As we know, this grammatical point is used in English but not in Indonesian or Javaneses, in which a verb form remains unchanged, irrespective of the subject of the verb. Speakers of language simply have to learn how it is used or spoken by the native speakers of the language without asking for logical explanation why something is said in such and such a way. Language, like any other cultural item, is handed down from generation to generation without questioning and this is the reason why language is always taken for granted.

Another characteristic of language is that it is always spoken. All people the world over, regardless of their race or ethnic group, always speak language. This means that they always have away of communicating ideas by manipulating sounds that are produced by their vocal organs. Up to now there has been no evidence of a non-speaking human being, of course provided that he has normal organs of speech. Even in the deepest jungles of Afrika it has been reported that the most primitive tribe always speak a language of their own, even if they sometimes make use of other means to convey message such as gestures, signs, or drum beating. With other literate or more technologically advanced people there is another means of communicating ideas, that is the use of printed or written symbols, which is more prevailing and more often used in daily life. They are more exposed to the so-called ‘written language’ as found in newspapers, magazine or letters. Consequently they often confuse written language and the actual language, which is spoken.

It has to bee admitted that the spoken form of a language is primary, whereas the written form is secondary, since it is only a representation of what is actually spoken. The primacy of speech over writing is supported by the following proofs : all human beings, wherever they live, always speak a language, although they do not have any writing system to record their language such as the primitive tribes mentioned before; writing was only a recent human invention, dating back to several thousand years ago, while language is regarded as old as man himself; a human child always speaks a language first before he is acquainted with the writing systems in the world, it appears that there is a tendency of using alphabetic writing instead of picture or ideographic writing; in their daily activities  it is said that people uses the spoken language more than its written representation.

The explanation above does not imply that writing or written language is of less importance than the spoken one. The more cultivated and more technologically advanced man is, the more use he will make of the written language. This means that writing plays a very important role in a modern society. It can even be said that it is indispensable for the advancement of human civilization.

Although writing is sometimes considered a poor and inconsistent representation of language, writing is in fact of great utility to man. It not only records spoken language, but it can also be used to preserve ideas of great thinkers in the past. Writing can also be used to convey messages over longdistances, though nowadays this function is superseded by the uses of a telegraph or radio. Writing is also indispensable in counting or solving arithmetical problems since it can be used to record memories. However important writing is in a modern society, it should not be forgotten that is it is only a way of recording spoken language so that if language is a system of symbols, and writing is a representation or symbol of language, it naturally means that writing is a symbol of symbols.

Since language is system of symbols, dualism is implied here, taht is from and meaning. Form refers to the sounds, while meaning refers to the thing or idea refferd to by the sound or sounds. When language is used to talk about objects found in the immediate environment of the speaker, so that they can be pointed to at any time, this is called the ‘sign’, use of language. Conversely, when language is used to talk about objects that are not found in the immediate environment, this called the ‘symbol’ use of language or displaced speech as mentioned before. It is the latter use language which distinguishes man from animal.

Language is said to be social, because it is only used in a social  group which involves at least two person, the speaker and the hearer. As mentioned before, the used of language enabless the member of a social group to cooperate with one another for their own benefits. Language has to be learned and used in a social community, without which the existence of language is beyond understanding. In this Connection Nelson Francis says in his book ‘The Structure of American English’ that language is in origin and largerly in use a social phenomenon, a part of the complex of modes of behaviour that antropologists call culture.

It may be true that according to transformationalists like Chomsky, the ability to speak a language is an inborn or innate skill, something which is  transmitted from generation to generation of man. However, this innate ability is like a potential seed which has to be developed and nurtured in an appropriate place, that is a social community. If it is not properly developed, such as when a child is taken away from society and is cut off from all human relations, he will not be able to learn to speak any language.

However, what language a child is going to speak depends on the social community in which he is brought up. An English child brought up in an Indonesian circle will certainly speak Indonesian, a language which is spoken by all the people in his surrounding, to which he is constantly exposed from day the day. This is to show that even if the ability to speak a language is innate and genetically transmitted, the particular language a child learns as a mother tongue is culturally determined.

Although not much is known about the actual proses of learning a language,  there is a universal similiarity among all children throughout the world in that they normally acquire teh skill of speaking their mother child has the ability to manipulate his native language in their daily communication activities. It appears that the first six years of human life is the most ideal and sensitive period for a child to learn a language. When this has passed without being made use of by a child to learn his native tongue, he will never be able to speak any language at all. We have heard and read so much about children who lost their change to leran a language because they were taken away from society, and eventually never spoke any language at all.

Here again is the different between man and animal. If man’s language must be learned  by a young child with or without the conscious help of the older people in this surrounding, a young animal does not have to learn its ‘language’ that can be used for communication. A young dog will in due time be able to bark or whine, although the older dogs never teach it how to do it, and this is another proof to support the statement that dogs or other animals produce the same kind of sounds without ever learning it from the older animals. So unlike language which has to be learned by young children, the ability to produce sounds in animals is an instinct, which is acquired automatically by the animal. On the other hand, language spoken by human beings throughout the world can never be the same, because, as mentioned before, the particular language a child learns to speak depends on where and in what speech community he is brought  up.

There is indeed a kind of paradox here. Language is a special characteristic of human  or it can also be regarded as a human criterion, because only human beings speak a language. Nevertheless, the ability to speak a language, though innate in nature, should be developed in a social group. It is not automatically acquired, like the instinct of an animal.

Language is said to be complete, not like animal’s means of communication. As has been previously stated, animals can only ‘communicate’ about things that are related to their biological needs, like eating or the preservation of life. However, the use of human language is not limited to biological needs. It is more complete in that it can always be used to communicate about the culture of its native speakers. As a consequence, there are no such things as good or bad language. Every language or dialect is good for its own speakers just as each menu is also good for those who have been brought up to eat it. Each language is an equally effective means to communicate about its own culture. The fact that, for instance, a vocabulary item is found in one language but lacking in another, does not mean that the former is a complete language and the letter is not. It only means that the two language are used in different social environments, and both are equally complete in that they can be effectively used to communicate about their respective cultures.

Eskimoes, who live near the North Pole, have different words for different kinds of snow, since the situation requires them to make such distinctions. People who live closer to the equator, like Indonesians, do not feel the need to make such distinctions, so that they have only one word for snow. On the other hand, English people do not find it necessary to distinguish various Javanese words like ‘pari’, ‘gabah’, ‘beras’, and ‘sega’; they use just one word, i.e. ‘rice’ to refer to those four different things. Thus vocabularry is closely related to the cultural context in which a language is used, but apart from it each language is complete in itself and can be used as an effective means of communication.