No by Don Kulick and Language, Race, and White Public Space by Jane Hill – Literature review Example

  The paper “No by Don Kulick and Language, Race, and White Public Space by Jane Hill" is an outstanding example of a literature review on social science. The text “No” by Don Kulick briefly discusses the manner in which sexuality and language matters have mostly been studied in terms of identity and language. In the text, it is noted that this viewpoint has not considered sexuality as a set of practices or dynamics that are animated by the power and repression, desire and fantasy, but rather, as an identity that is either concealed or revealed by completely intentional subjects. However, this focus on the identity has pointlessly restrained the scope of the inquiry, thus rendering research in the area ineffective and not in a position of addressing the wider semiotic process that produces sexuality, and disseminating it in language. Nevertheless, one of the essay’s major points is to suggest that what is seen as the differentiating performance from performativity, and how those two perspectives relate to language. Moreover, the focus of this critical study is on the fact that the ‘no’ of a woman is restrained by the cultural demands and expectations of femininity (Kullick 494).
The writer states that at several points in time, he noted where he thought that there are differences between a performance perspective and a performativity perspective. He, however, claims that there is a difference, which in his view is a critical one, which brings us back to the identity question. The difference is that while studies considered in a framework of performance have a tendency to regard the language in relation to identity, research designed as performative will focus more on identification. According to the writer, we find that the difference is in identity that in linguistic and sociolinguistic anthropology work is traditionally presented as a more or less cognizant claim-staking of a specific sociological position, and the identification that is concerned with the operations that constitute the subject. The text is not so much fundamental to the production of the sexual case, but for the materialization of a certain type of sexual instance whereby the sexual subjects produced are empowered and gendered differentially (Kullick 498).
The writer states that a psychoanalytic platitude about the identifications is that they don’t make up a consistent relational system. Furthermore, they are not absolutely conscious. In contrast, identifications are merely as much structured by refusals, rejections as well as disavowals as their structuring is done by affirmations. It is essential not to fall the identification into an identity as they are not the same thing. More so, a performative linguistic phenomena approach does not begin or even end with identity. But instead, we find that a performative approach would review the process, by which some types of identifications are permitted, unmarked and legitimate, and others are not permitted, marked and not legitimate.
Language, Race and White Public Space by Jane Hill
The text “Language, Race and White Public Space,” is all about the issues of language and race in various societies. The construction of the story is done extensive review of the speech of racialized communities like the African Americans, Latinos and the Chicanos for linguistic disorder’s signs, and the invisibility of nearly similar signs in the White’s speeches, whereby the mixing of language that is essential for the expression of a highly rated kind of colloquial persona, takes many forms. An example of such forms is Mock Spanish, which shows complex semiotics. However, by direct indexicality, speakers are presented by the Mock Spanish as having desirable individual qualities. And by indirect indexicality, it produces racializing stereotypes of the Latinos and Chicanos that are highly negative (Hill 683). Furthermore, it also explores the question of the propensity for such usages to be redesigned to undermine the racial practices’ order in discourse.
According to the writer, anthropologists share contradictory heritage whereby our intellectual forefathers consist of both scientific racism founders and significant antiracist movement pioneers. However, despite this, it is only present that they have started turning their focus on matters pertaining to racism as an object of cultural analysis after several years of neglect and focusing on the sister disciplines. According to the writer, racism should be given similar weight in research in the field of cultural anthropology as a race has been given in the study of biological anthropology.
According to the author, one question that has been disturbing several individuals is whether mock forms can be in a position subverting the order of racial practices. She states that several individuals have claimed that the usages that in some frameworks are vilely racist appear to consist of a significant parodic perspective that can be turned or changed to the anti-racist deconstruction of the racist definite essentializing (Hill 685). The author has tried to demonstrate how the attention of linguistic-anthropology to the uses, forms, and history of the While language mixing can greatly help people toward such an understanding.