The language of the people was of course one of the first things I had to learn in order to make myself understood. When I first came to the islands I thought I did not understand many concepts because at that time I did not speak their language and so I thought that it was the language barrier which separated my understanding of the underlying concepts of their lives.
To my mind they spoke in metaphors always giving examples of pictures I was not able to understand. I was constantly reminded of the famous quotation of Ludwig Wittgenstein who stated “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world. And to be honest, in the first couple of months my world was very limited to basic sign- and body language.
According to Wittgenstein’s citation language creates one’s world and therefore one’s reality. Although I am convinced of the fact that linguistic concepts determine our worldview and our lives, having experienced living in a country of which I did not understand the underlying semantic rules made me considering the connection between reality and language.
Because when assuming that language is a human construct and that we create our world according to our language, what does this state about our reality? According to the assumption of language being the defining element of our lives this would mean that reality is a fictional construct as well.
The conclusion therefore is that before defining our language (and so being able to articulate oneself) would mean that nothing is real before it is spoken out loud. I am really not sure about this. I definitely had the feeling of living in a certain form of ‘reality’ even if it was a reality I did not fully understand (which by the way also happens when I am living in a world of its language I have a good command).
Besides, words are very rarely considered absolutely and entirely true which in turn means that grasping the concept of reality through language, the only truth we can anticipate is the one we can articulate.
• Click on download for the complete and text • This is a sharing plattform for papers • Upload your paper and receive this one for free • Or you can buy simply this text
So I believe that not the words (themselves) are creating reality but the concepts we have in our minds (i.e. the signified- according to Saussure’s concept of meaning)? Following the theories of Saussure (langue + parole) as well as Lévi-Strauss’ theories on the binary oppositions, language receives its meaning through its difference from every other sign.
So, I very much agree with the structuralists’ approach that the ‘real meaning’ rises rather from the functional differences between the elements (signs) within the system (langue) than from the actual words uttered.
So there has to be some kind of a deeper-underlying structure of language because otherwise I would not have been able to understand a word of what people were trying to tell me (and literally I did not understand a ‘word’) Initially I thought my problem of understanding what happened around me was that I had a different concept of living, speaking and celebrating.
This conceptual system helped me control my everyday functioning. The concepts structure I perceived, how I got along in the world, and how I relate certain patterns to certain people. Looking back, I now understand why I was sometimes so frustrated because even after a few weeks I did not understand a word the people were talking in slang because I just could not create meaning (because I had nothing to compare with).
I am now aware of this just because we have discussed this in class and I therefore I totally agree with Derrida that “the specification of meaning is an infinite and endless process!”
Admittedly it was easier for me to learn the language of today’s inhabitants of the Canaries today, because now they speak Spanish. But I have also experienced that some of the people I met still can ‘speak’ the old Guanchean whistling language called ‘el silbo’.
Now that I now that the shepherds of the Guanches had to somehow transport information even if they were located on two far away mountain tops I now understand that the ancient people developed a language which perfectly fit their needs. Some people even told me – and I am not sure whether I can believe this or not – they say that you can ‘talk’ in ‘silbo’ over a distance of 8km.
Today ‘el silbo’ is even taught in the schools of Gomera because the UNESCO considers the language as one which is threatened to die out therefore since the year 1999 pupils have tolearn ‘silbo’ as a compulsory subject in school. (Williams: 245) What I considered interesting because for me it was hard to comprehend is that this language even possesses consonants and vowels (as I would not be able to create so many different whistling sounds.
However, the Guanches used next to ‚silbo’ and written and spoken language which origin is as mysterious as their origin. According to José Luis Concepción (2006) there were many different accents all spoken slightly different on the particular islands.
As I mentioned above are a couple of words which are similar to the language used by the Berbers. Some examples are:
There are only few words left in 'Guanche' but still there are many toponyms and pre-names remained in ‘Guanche’ (e.g. main square of Gran Canaria: Galdar). These are some examples of the relicts of ‘Guanche’.
José Luis Concepción (2006: 19)
Because the ‘Guanches’ were almost completely isolated from Africa and Europe, their language is said to provide a sort of "fossil proof" of how the first (or at least very ancient) form of language looked like which must have been spoken by many immigrating populations settling in Western Africa and Europe.