The Language War and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle. Learn more

Vous voulez voir cette page en français ? Cliquez ici.


or
Sign in to turn on 1-Click ordering.
or
Amazon Prime Free Trial required. Sign up when you check out. Learn More
More Buying Choices
Have one to sell? Sell yours here
Start reading The Language War on your Kindle in under a minute.

Don't have a Kindle? Get your Kindle here, or download a FREE Kindle Reading App.

The Language War [Paperback]

Robin Tolmach Lakoff
2.7 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (6 customer reviews)
Price: CDN$ 28.53 & this item ships for FREE with Super Saver Shipping. Details
o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o
Only 1 left in stock (more on the way).
Ships from and sold by Amazon.ca. Gift-wrap available.
Want it delivered Thursday, May 23? Choose One-Day Shipping at checkout.

Formats

Amazon Price New from Used from
Kindle Edition CDN $15.52  
Hardcover --  
Paperback CDN $28.53  

Book Description

Aug 17 2001 0520232070 978-0520232075
Robin Lakoff gets to the heart of one of the most fascinating and pressing issues in American society today: who holds power and how they use it, keep it, or lose it. In a brilliant and vastly entertaining discussion of news events that have occupied an enormous amount of media space--political correctness, the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas hearings, Hillary Rodham Clinton as First Lady, O. J. Simpson's murder trial, the Ebonics controversy, and the Clinton sex scandal--Lakoff shows that the struggle for power and status at the end of the century is being played out as a war over language. Controlling language is a basis for all power, she says, and therefore it is worth fighting for. As a result, newly emergent groups, especially blacks and women, are contending with middle- to upper-class white men for a share in "language rights."
Lakoff's introduction to linguistic theories and the philosophy of language lays the groundwork for an exploration of news stories that meet what she calls the UAT (Undue Attention Test). As the stories became the subject of talk-show debates, late-night comedy routines, Web sites, and magazine articles, they were embroidered with additional meanings, depending on who was telling the story. Race, gender, or both are at the heart of these stories, and each one is about the right to construct meanings from languagein short, to possess power. Because language tells us how we are connected to one another, who has power and who does not, the stories reflect the language war.
We use language to analyze what we call "reality," the author argues, but we mistrust how language is used today--witness the "politics of personal destruction" following the Clinton impeachment. Yet Lakoff sees in the struggle over language a positive goal: equality in the creation of our national discourse. Her writing is accessible and witty, and her excerpts from the media are used to great effect.

Customers Who Bought This Item Also Bought


Product Details


Product Description

From Publishers Weekly

In a series of provocative, dazzlingly argued essays, Lakoff charts how the media's use of language shapes both public attitudes and social policies on current events, including the "political correctness" debate, the Anita Hill/Clarence Thomas hearings, the O.J. Simpson trial and the debate over "ebonics." A professor of linguistics at the University of California-Berkeley, she discusses how specific words and linguistic constructs have adopted political meaning--such as George Will's use of an unidentified "we" in his columns, with the presumption that all readers share his ideas and values. Lakoff shines in her careful reading of how declarative sentences paraded as questions in the Hill/Thomas hearings or of how jokes about "Hebonics" (the Jewish-American language) underlined the unspoken racism in the media's attack on ebonics. She is also especially adept in her investigation of the language used in the media to "construct" the public image of Hillary Rodham Clinton, in which she exposes how subtle changes in word usage, grammatical construction and tone have helped create multiple personas for the First Lady--from a sexually predatory monster to a contemporary Eleanor Roosevelt--to suit the emotional and psychological needs of different constituencies. Witty and illuminating, Lakoff's analysis is an important addition to both linguistic and political studies. (June)
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal

Offering a linguist's view of big 1990s news stories, Lakoff (linguistics, Univ. of California, Berkeley) gives general readers insight into recent changes regarding language. She covers a range of topics (from politically correct phrases to the way news media influence events) to connect linguistics with politicsDcontributing to a trend in popular linguistics books that includes cognitive scientist Steven Pinker's latest, Words and Rules (LJ 12/99). Analyzing six news subjects (from Ebonics to the Clinton sex scandal), Lakoff applies linguistic theories and examines issues from a sociological/ political viewpoint. Overall, she successfully illustrates the importance of free speech in a democracy. Her tone is casual, and the prose is frequently laced with humor, anecdotes, and quotes from the media. For a related, more specialized treatment, look to John M. Conley and William M. O'Barr's examination of language in the operation of law in Just Words: Law, Language and Power (Univ. of Chicago, 2000). Recommended for larger public libraries.DMarianne Orme, West Lafayette, IN
Copyright 2000 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

Inside This Book (Learn More)
First Sentence
Some of the stories in the news over the last few years: The fight over Political Corretness Read the first page
Explore More
Concordance
Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
Search inside this book:

Customer Reviews

Most helpful customer reviews
By A Customer
Format:Paperback
Question: How many feminists does it take to drive a car forward?
Answer: Feminists have such backwards politics that they can't drive forward. They can only drive in reverse.
I was assigned this book in class and it gave me a lot of insight into the moldy mind of my professor. I am 21. She is 58. She is an intellectual relic from another age and I think her mind has not grown since she began to teach.
1) there isn't any, I repeat, ANY research in this book. This is a set of opinions. The author did no surveys, no studies, no experiments. It is one LONG editorial. This might work in a humanities department where everyone is making a living by pointlessly dissecting Sylvia Plath for the millionth time but it deserves absolutely no respect from anyone else in the world. Hint: GET SOME SCIENCE BACKGROUND!!!! DON'T IMAGINE WHAT PEOPLE THINK ABOUT SOMETHING, GO OUT AND GATHER DATA!!! This annoys me because older feminists are always assuming they know what women want and what they think. HELLO!!!?? Did anyone ask any women what they thought or felt? I mean women under the age of 35, not the old bags who run women's studies departments. Of course not!! If they did, every one of their assumptions would be destroyed. Most of the women I know are sexually active, career oriented AND politically right of center on most issues except child care and abortion. Stop electing yourselves as spokesbitches for us younger women. OK??
Also, stop with the tired tropes from a generation ago. I am sick of this nonsense with the tired language and terminology. I have news for you: AS SOON AS YOU USE DECONSTRUCTIONIST CLICHES MY EYELIDS START DROOPING. Speak in plain english.
I am not really sure what is and isn't politically correct but I do know this: I know a lazy intellectual avoiding mental exertion with cliches when I see one and THIS AUTHOR IS ONE!!!!
Was this review helpful to you?
3.0 out of 5 stars A Linguist Takes a Stroll Through the Newspaper! Jun 23 2004
Format:Paperback
A deconstructionist I am not. I get uncomfortable around such phrases as "interpretive framework" and "language community." While this book is deconstructionist in style, it didn't feel as akward as, say, reading Derrida. Much of her thesis, in fact, seemed quite the domain of common sense - almost as if the author was trying to say radically what might have been explained better non-radically.

In "Language War," Dr. Lakoff presents her thesis that much more of public policy (than we realize) is not a war of ideas or policy-solutions, but of WORDS; more than we think, language drives our perception of the state of national debate in the policy arena. She goes on to explore, for instance, how a term like "politically correct" originally used sardonically by the left, has become a word used by the right to demonize the same left. Dr. Lakoff "deconstructs" how language and how it was used played a huge part in the Thomas/Hill affair, has helped shape Hilary Clinton's (then) negative image, and the ebonics scandal in Oakland.

In a sense, Dr. Lakoff makes many decent (I hesitate to say 'good') points. A key idea of hers (that most examples attempt to back) is that she who is first to define how a term is used - the sardonic uses of "communist," "politically correct," and, yes, "deconstructionist" - is she who sets the 'ground rules' for the debate. Dr. Lakoff also sensitizes us to exactly how many seemingly trivial language tricks are NOT trivial, but highly effective - the use of "we" in political pundit's articles to connote the illusion of audience solidarity, or the political 'apology' that is not: "I'm sorry the media took me out of context."

But did we not know this on some level? Was it not obvious, to some degree, that elections are run more by rhetoric than ideational concerns? Did we not realize that much of what political pundits and spin-doctors do is play a "war of language" with eachother? (After all, founders like Thomas Paine, Patrick Henry, and Thomas Jefferson were quite brilliant at it.)

I guess on some level we certainly DID know these things. But Mrs. Lakoff provides an enlightening 'stroll through the newspaper' driving the point home that how we use language - even the details - have a huge effect on public discourse.

While one star is subtracted for the sheer silliness of some of these essays (does anyone CARE how language was used in the O.J. trial, or the Thomas/Hill scandal?) the other was for the authors extreme left bias. In fairness, she admits this right in the introduction - she comes out and says it: "I'm a lefty." But sometimes this forces her to engage in language games of her own. At one point, even, when talking of Clarence Thomas's history on the bench, she talks of the republicans having been "forced" to bring on black judges - yes, the word she used is 'forced.' Forced by whom? (Answer: it was rhetorical!) Other times, she simply applies her theory unevenly: conservatives demonization of the word 'politically correct' was attrocious, but liberals demonizing of the word 'reactionary' was simply...well...justified. So much for trying to argue honestly. While I am no republican, I was quite struck by some of her more gauche moments of bias.

Anyway, read the book anyway; if anything, it will ensure that you never look at language (whether you want to include ebonics or not) again.

Was this review helpful to you?
2.0 out of 5 stars A P.C. tome Feb 23 2004
By A Customer
Format:Paperback
I read linguistics books in order to keep up with research in the field and to learn about theories that may impact on my own work as a speech-language pathologist. I do not read them in order to subject myself to a long, politically correct, "here's my opinion and it is important because I say it is" essay about absolutely nothing but what the author's pet peeves are. Who cares? And more importantly, if you are going to be so predictably feminist and P.C., there is no reason to read anything you have to say. All I have to do is remember the rules of PC discourse and I can write a book myself. Professor, no one cares what you think. How about some facts? How about some research so we know what IS, not what you like or don't like? And if you are going to do some thinking, please have someone check to see that it is original before flinging the manuscript at the public. We have all heard this before - and it is sheer ignorance to think that anything you have to say is an original contribution. All it is is more hot air - and very stale air at that.
Was this review helpful to you?
Want to see more reviews on this item?

Listmania!

Create a Listmania! list

Look for similar items by category


Feedback


Amazon.ca Privacy Statement Amazon.ca Shipping Information Amazon.ca Returns & Exchanges