How does language influence our perception and assessment of power and relations?
Have you ever thought of why you use a certain word in a certain context? Have you ever thought of what information this word entails and what it conceals? Let me show you one example, where looking into semantics actually matters, shaping how you feel within society.
In Germany, the term “Regierung” (government) is commonly used to refer to the decision-makers and political actors who govern a country. However, behind this seemingly neutral term lies a linguistic deception that obscures the actual power structure. The use of the term “Regierung” masks the agency of those in power and distorts reality. A closer examination of the origin of this term reveals that it is not actually used in accordance to prevailing grammar rules: The word “Regierung” is derived from the verb “regieren” (to govern), which comes from the Latin word “regere.” Grammatically, “Regierung” is the noun form of the action of governing. It describes the process of ruling, rather than the actors themselves. By using the word “Regierung,” we imply the existence of an abstract entity that exists independently of the individuals who actually govern.
This linguistic obfuscation has far-reaching implications for our perception and evaluation of political power. By speaking of the “Regierung,” we perceive the decision-makers as a homogeneous group and neglect their individual responsibility and agency. It becomes easy to accept the decisions of those in power as inevitable outcomes of an anonymous institution, rather than viewing them as the result of conscious individual choices.
Imagine if, instead of using “Regierung,” we read about “regierende Personen” (ruling individuals) in the media. This term emphasizes the agency and individual actors who have the power of making governmental decisions. Even the use of words that highlight more agency, such as “Politiker” (politician), mainly focuses on the occupation and actions of the person as a policy-maker, not the distinction in power between ruling and ruled. “Die Regierenden” (the rulers) reminds us that these decisions are made by people who are accountable and responsible for their actions. And it implies that if there are “the ruling people”, then there must also be “the ruled ones”.
Picture yourself reading the news - How would you feel being grouped into either the ruling or the ruled group? Of course, within democracies a certain power is given to the individual, but if we were to be reminded all the time, that we are not part of the decision-makers - would that change your perception of the policies? By using more precise language, we can better understand the complexity of political processes and make more accurate assessments of those in power.
The concept of agency is particularly relevant here. Agency refers to the ability of individuals to act, make decisions, and take responsibility for their actions. By using the term “Regierung,” the individual agency of political actors is obscured and their role in political decision-making processes is made invisible. By obscuring the agency of those in power, we deprive ourselves of the ability to perceive them as independent actors and to pass judgement on their actions.
Language not only shapes our thoughts but also our reality. The words we use influence how we perceive and assess the world around us. By concealing the individual agency of those in power, we impair our understanding of political power structures and our ability to demand accountability.
It is important to note that the concealment of agency is not limited to the German language alone. In many other languages, similar terms are used that obscure the individual agency of political decision-makers. For example, in English, the term “government” is often used, which, like “Regierung” in German, focuses on the institution and relegates the individual agency of decision-makers to the background. Similar linguistic phenomena exist in other cultures and languages as well. The recognition and exploration of these linguistic and cultural constructions contribute to the field of Transcultural Studies, which investigates the interplay between language, culture, and power structures. By analyzing the significance of language and culture in political processes, Transcultural Studies help expose existing power structures and develop alternative narratives.
Recognizing the individual agency of those in power is crucial in fostering a critical attitude toward political power. By using language more consciously and emphasizing the individual agency of political actors, we can achieve a more nuanced and differentiated understanding of political processes. Precise language enables us to demand accountability and critically question political decisions.
Did you think of a word in your language that is not used correctly while reading? What does it entail and what does it conceal? Why is it being used wrongly in this specific context? Would your perception of the agency of people change if the word would be replaced? Perhaps it’s time to reconsider the use of some linguistic terms to become more aware of the agencies that are otherwise not being acknowledged.
Resources:
Friedrich Kluge (Begr.), Elmar Seebold: Etymologisches Wörterbuch der deutschen Sprache. 24. Auflage. Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 2002, ISBN 3-11-017473-1.
Carl Ratner: Agency and Culture. Journal of the Theory of Social Behaviour. Blackwell Publishers, Oxford 2001. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-5914.00138.