Favoritism in the workplace and its Effect On the Organization

March 2014

Introduction

Often time management falls into the trap of doing favors to a certain person or certain group and ignoring other group without necessarily being aware of its consequences. Such management behaviour is common everywhere in any organization. Everywhere favoritism and nepotism can be found and in an organization, such a preferential group does exist. Often time they call it the “circle of influence”. They are called the circle of influence because those persons who are treated special and considered close to the top management can also influence the management's decisions and other people's behavior. Because of their closeness to the top and their influence on the management,  other people call this group “the untouchable". They are called untouchable because of their closeness and influence on the top management. Another group has to be careful dealing with such groups because it can cause their employment. Unfortunately, oftentimes, the management is undermining its consequences to the other employees and the organization. Undeniably such preference creates jealousy and may lead to conflict. Not only does it cause conflict, it may affect the performance of other employees and the performance of the organization. In this simple article, we will explain different kinds of favoritism, the effects of favoritism, and how to handle favoritism.

Favoritism in the workplace

Favoritism in the workplace refers to a practice in which a person is treated differently better than others, not necessarily because the person has the qualification in terms of skill requirements but sometimes other aspects that are not related to job performance. The management is giving preferential treatment to one or more employees. Sometimes such preferential treatment can be intentional; for example, an employer could assign the choicest responsibilities to the most veteran worker or hotshot upstart by explaining that his abilities justify the extra attention and tasks. Preferential treatment can also be subconscious; for example, employees might notice that an older male supervisor seems to treat young female workers with friendly smiles and encouragement while benignly ignoring male workers in the hallways even though they are performing a good job. Problems happen when attention and appreciation or recognition are not given equally to all employees. It is worse when recognition is given to those who do not deserve it.

Definitely, favoritism in the workplace is counter-productive and, in some cases, unethical and illegal. When management assigns responsibility or gives promotions based on favoritism, not based on performance, the company will not be able to attract the most qualified person for a job. It discourages excellent performance and encourages mediocrity. Hard work is not recognized but laziness. Promotion is not based on merit but based on certain favours. Such practices, sooner or later, can damage the company. Favoritism compromises performance and quality. Promotion is given to the one who has offered sexual services to the boss, while those who deserve are ignored. Soliciting sexual favors for job advancement, is clearly immoral, not only illegal. Soliciting gifts from certain groups or individuals in return for promotion is immoral. Giving promotion to the whites but not to the blacks is clearly discrimination. Many kinds of practices indicate the existence of favouritism in the workplace. Thus, employees should be vigilant to those practices and prevent it from getting rooted in the organization. Those who are responsible for the top management should be familiar with the types of favoritism that are being practiced so that the company can develop effective policies to combat them. Eradicating favoritism is not difficult if the management has the determination to clean the organization from immoral activities and has a political will to exempt no one whether it is a family or friend.  

Favouritism is considered discrimination and discrimination is illegal and immoral. Discrimination happens when employers make job decisions based on employees' protected characteristics -- traits that state, governments have decided should not be the basis of employment actions. Under employment laws or labour laws, for example, it's illegal for employers not to hire someone because of his race, to refuse to promote women, to relegate employees with disabilities to low-paying positions, or to lay off employees based on age. If workplace favoritism is based on protected characteristics, then it is illegal discrimination. For example, if a manager promotes only men or gives the best assignments and shifts to employees who share his religious beliefs, that would be discrimination. 

Favouritism is poison to employee morale. It creates terrible feelings toward the management and towards the employees who are treated special. Hatred can cause not only sickness but also the mood of employees in carrying out their duties and responsibilities every day. Certainly, such emotional condition affects the performance of their duties. Thus favoritism does not benefit anyone in the organization but it destroys everything. Employees might be professional, qualified, and experienced, but they’re still human and still susceptible to emotions better left outside the workplace. Jealousy, anger, fear, sullenness, and worry can occur in business environments at any time, but these negative emotions are exacerbated when favoritism takes place. Therefore management should be careful in playing favoritism.  Before indulging in workplace favouritism, consider how your actions might affect other workers. 

Employee Favoritism and Nepotism are considered employee morale Cancer (Chris Young, 2008). It is considered cancer because it causes the sickness of the workplace environment and finally seriously erodes the competitive position of a company or at worst - literally destroys the potential of companies. The cure for cancer can only happen if the root of the cancer is removed totally.  

Different Kinds of Favoritism in the Workplace

George N. Root (2014) identified several kinds of favoritism in the workplace and these are nepotism, cronyism, sexual favors, and patronage. He explained that nepotism is the practice of hiring family members regardless of their qualifications. In some cases, a relative of a company executive may be qualified to perform the job for which she is hired. The fact that she is an executive's relative gives her an advantage over the other applicants. According to him, hiring should always be based on the qualifications and the needs of the particular job. In this case, even though the person or the newly hired employee is related to the executive if her/his qualification is very much needed, then nepotism can enhance the company’s performance. However, if the hiring is just because of family relationships and ignoring the qualifications, then nepotism can cause the decline of the company.     

Cronyism is the other side of nepotism. It is the act of hiring friends regardless of qualifications. One of the main problems with cronyism is the feeling of entitlement that employees hired under these circumstances feel. Because of their close relationship with the top executive, they feel they deserve raises and promotions that should be reserved for more qualified staff members. Besides the feeling of entitlement, these groups feel powerful and can influence other people in the organization and top executives. These groups are feared by other groups and may create conflict in the workplace and can result in losing qualified personnel.

Favoritism may be caused by sexual favor. Sexual favour forces the executive to prioritize the person for career advancement even though the person is not qualified for the promotion. The person who is favoured may claim anything she wants and the executive has no choice but to grant her request. Such treatment can cause discrimination against other employees. The employees who are denied promotions and raises instead of sexual favours being exchanged between a manager and employee can claim that they were discriminated against. Companies should discourage inter-office relationships and should consider a policy that makes relationships between managers and subordinates grounds for termination.

Another form of favouritism is patronage. Patronage becomes a practice in which an executive or manager engages in nepotism or cronyism. An executive promotes employees he trusts into positions of management and then asks those managers to hire their friends and family members. This kind of favoritism has the potential to spread throughout the company as the executive brings more of her favorite employees into positions of authority.

To add to the list offered by George N. Root, Christ Young (2008) based on his experience working with certain companies offers several forms of favoritism and nepotism: relative nepotism, friend nepotism, connection nepotism, contribution nepotism, referral nepotism, they were with us through thick and thin" nepotism, "credential nepotism.

Relative nepotism is a common practice everywhere to hire, save, prioritize, and promote the relative first before anyone else. While friend nepotism is a management behaviour that gives special attention to friends. They are considered the “inner circle of influence” to the management and they are the priority of the management. Connection nepotism is the practice of giving special treatment to persons who have a connection with the management, be it political connection, sports activity/hobby connection, and many others. It may seem to be unimportant but often time such connection influences management for special treatment. Contribution nepotism refers to the practice in which management gives special treatment to persons who have contributed something to the achievement of the management. While this practice may not be totally bad it should always consider the total whole. The performance of the management is a contribution of all people working for the organization because all works are interrelated. Thus evaluation of the level of contribution must be done to determine how much each one has contributed to the organization. Referral nepotism is a practice in which management asks asking top performer if he/she knows someone to fill up the position. This may be considered an ordinary recruitment strategy but there is a tendency of management to prioritize more on these persons over others. “They were with us through thick and thin" nepotism” This form of nepotism is particularly perverse.  A team member who has been with the company since it started 15 years ago can wreak a lot of havoc if they are poor performers.  The havoc comes from new performers who realize the "lifer" is "special" and is not being held to the same employee accountability standard that they are.  The next question new hires have is, "Why am I not special."  The downward spiral begins - employee morale goes into the tank. Lastly, credential nepotism is This form of nepotism is often hidden but dangerous.  Ever seen someone get more credit than they deserve because they have a certification?  I have.  When people are given more credit because they attended a class and passed it but cannot apply what they learned - we call that "Credential Nepotism.

All of the above forms of nepotism result in a hideous employee morale killer called "favoritism. This form of favouritism cause the life of the organization in danger. Therefore, such favouritism must be avoided at all costs.    

The Effect of Favoritism

Favoritism is considered negative because of its effect not only on the organization but also on the other employees. The following are considered to be the effects of favouritism in the workplace. 

1.      Decline company performance

When the employees are hired because of family relationships, or friendship and not because of certain skill qualifications and then not being able to perform the job, then nepotism becomes counter-productive. If the executive staff begins hiring family members because they need jobs, not because of their qualifications and ability, then such practices can affect the company's profitability or performance. Therefore, the top management should consider skill qualifications in hiring and not favoritism.    

2.      Resentment and demoralization.

Favouritism is not going to rest well with other employees. One of the primary effects of workplace favouritism on employees is resentment. Workers feel that, no matter how hard they work, it won’t matter because preferred employees will always get better benefits, more attention and greater opportunities. Such a situation can demotivate other employees to do their jobs to the best they can. They feel not recognized and appreciated. They feel bad and discouraged. Not only that, employees often resent the special worker, treating her with unkindness and gossiping about reasons for preferential treatment. Workers also resent their employers, becoming less willing to participate actively in the company mission. If employees feel that they’re being passed over for new responsibilities or promotions because all goodies are funneled toward their favorite workers, lower motivation results. Employees slack off, taking less care with assigned duties and being more reluctant to volunteer for additional tasks. This results in lower productivity missed deadlines and lower overall morale.

3.      Organizational Conflict

When employees perceive favoritism to be widespread, such a situation may lead to organizational conflict. It would not only be a conflict between other employees and favored employees but also between the executive or management and employees. If such a situation happens, then the working environment becomes not conducive for other people to work.    The situation may lead to some employees taking legal action against employers who engage in egregious favouritism, citing preferential treatment based on gender or ethnicity. If workplace favoritism is widespread, for example, an employer offers preferential treatment to workers based on sexual favors, employees could cite a hostile work environment. This can lead to serious repercussions, including court fees, restitution awards, and loss of professional reputation.

Avoiding favoritism

As we see the effect of favouritism, it is obvious that favouritism does not bring any good to the organization. Therefore, there is no way of perpetuating it but it should be stopped by all means. Displays of favouritism, or even its perception, can destroy relationships, initiative and trust. We must always be alert to its presence and suppress it. Therefore we should always avoid promoting favouritism by all means such as  spending extra time with preferred workers, overlooking mistakes made by favorite employees, and assigning perks to employees because you like them. If you’re an employee working in an environment where a boss is practising favouritism, double-check your impressions by looking for specific examples of preferred treatment. Once you’ve confirmed that this is a problem in your workplace, visit the personnel department with your examples. Explaining the situation in a concise, professional way gives you more credibility; be careful not to make rash accusations.

It is recommended that the organization should introduce or establish a policy prohibiting favouritism in the workplace. The organization should specify practices that are considered favoritism and indicate punishment related to favoritism practices. 

Handling Favoritism at Work

The question here is how we react to favoritism in the workplace. Since favoritism is committed by the executive, this question is addressed to the employees. How do co-employees handle favouritism? How do you keep your career humming along while you're stuck in the shadow of the boss's pet?  Eileen P. Gunn (2008) gives some tips on how to handle favoritism as he cited from Birkel (2008). It would be nice to follow those advice.

1. Don't try to shoot down the favorite, no matter how tempting it might be to correct him in meetings or point out to the boss when he's way underqualified for that project you wanted, Birkel advises. At best, you're picking on the boss's buddy; at worst, you're questioning the boss's judgment about people. Neither one is going to gain you any ground.

2. Sit down with that boss as soon as possible and agree to a clear job description for you, Birkel says. To make the boss's job easier, have one ready for him or her to give feedback on.

3. Agree on some goals for you to accomplish over the next quarter or six months or year (or a combination of time frames). Make sure at least a few of them can be measured objectively—hitting sales or profit or cost-cutting targets, landing certain clients, or getting trained in particular new skills.

Hitting these goals gives you material you can use should you need to campaign for a promotion, project, or raise you want that you believe the boss is inclined to hand to one of the in-crowd.  It also gives you the means with which to defend yourself should one of the inner circles try to undermine you someday (if, say, he really wants that same promotion, project, or raise).

4. Find a champion who's at the same or higher level than your fickle manager and who can talk you up and suggest you for that plum assignment or title you want. If other people in the organization think highly of you, then it makes your boss look good to put you to good use in a visible way.

5. Get involved in the company beyond your immediate group by joining corporate committees or employee groups or lending your experience to colleagues in other departments when they ask for it. This will help you find that champion you need, boost your credibility beyond your boss's purview, and maybe lead to new opportunities with a better boss.

6. Buddy up to the boss where you can (taking care to keep your self-respect in the process). If you're at all interested in his or her favorite sport or hobby, give it a try so that you have something other than work to talk about when you find yourself sharing an elevator with the boss.

And when that boss does occasionally extend an invitation to lunch or drinks or Saturday golf to colleagues beyond a little clique, by all means, go! It's an opportunity to help the boss get to know you and see possibilities beyond the usual safe fallback people

Of course, despite your best efforts, your career progress could slow down or flat-out stall during this manager's tenure. If you can't live with that, even for a short spell, then polish up your résumé and start looking for a new job, inside your company or elsewhere.

But if you do decide to sit tight and bide your time, take it to heart. "It's not a question of if but when that manager will be moved along or pushed out in the next reshuffling," Birkel says. "Then those favorites are back on equal footing with everyone else." If they can't settle in and thrive on their merits, they'll either follow their benefactor yet again or move on in some other way.

Favoritism is an Ethical Issue/Moral Issue.

Favouritism is a moral issue. It is a moral issue because it violates basic moral standards which are justice and fairness. Moral standards dictate to do justice and to be fair to all. Definitely, favouritism violates such principles. Aristotle argued that “equals should be treated equally and unequals unequally. About employment practices, it tells us that employees who possess the same qualifications and perform the same or similar responsibilities should be treated the same. Favouritism, cronyism, and nepotism all interfere with fairness because they give undue advantage to someone who does not necessarily merit this treatment (Judy Nadler and Miriam Schulman, 2006).

Favouritism, cronyism, and nepotism also undermine the common good. Under utilitarian ethics, the rule is that you can act only on the act that promotes the happiness of the greater majority or the common good. The message of individual sacrifice is emphasized. Each person should promote only those acts that will contribute to the common good but not to individual interests. The practice of favoritism is against such a principle. When someone is granted a position because of connections rather than because he or she has the best credentials and experience, it is considered individual preferential treatment which will lead to the disadvantage of the organization or common good.  

 Conclusion

Favouritism is the preferential treatment of certain employees or groups of employees. Such a definition is a clear indication of discrimination. It destroys the morale and motivation of employees to work. Definitely, favoritism is bad and immoral. The effect of favoritism is devastating, not only to the life of individual employees but to the life of the organization. It loses its competitive power against other competitors and it will lead to its bankruptcy. Thus it must be avoided at all costs.    

References

George N. Root III. 2014. Demand Media.  (http://smallbusiness.chron.com/types-favoritism-workplace-11537.html), date retrieved, Feb 21, 2014

 Eileen P. Gunn  2008. Handling Favoritism http://money.usnews.com/money/careers/articles/2008/04/17/handling-favoritism-at-work

Chris Young. 2008. Employee Favoritism and Nepotism. http://www.therainmakergroupinc.com/human-capital-strategy-blog/bid/91330/Employee-Favoritism-and-Nepotism-Employee-Morale-Cancer

Judy Nadler and Miriam Schulman.  2006. Favouritism, Cronyism, and Nepotism. Santa Clara University. http://www.scu.edu/ethics/practicing/focusareas/government_ethics/introduction/cronyism.html

Function of language in human society

Felibert R. Salvador, AB BSC MBA

Ph.D. Student – Development Management

Divine World College of Laoag

Laoag City, Philippines

“If you talk to a man in a language he understands, that goes to his head.

 If you talk to him in his language, that goes to his heart.”
    

                                                                                                           - Nelson Mandela

Abstract

What role does language play in our lives? Investigation of language functions is important on its own terms; in addition it is impossible to make progress on the topic of language evolution without a clear sense -- however speculative-- on the adaptive aspect of functionality of language in human society. Charles Darwin, for example, suggested the following: "As the voice was used more and more, the vocal organs would have been strengthened and perfected through the principle of the inherited effects of use...but the relation between the continued use of language and development of the brain, has no doubt been far more important....we may confidently believe that the continued use and advancement of this power would have reacted on the mind itself, by enabling it and encouraging it to carry on long trains of thought." Christian Butler has this to say, “I believe that all human functions the gift of speech is the most miraculous and that if speech were to stop all civilized living would suddenly vanish”. Speech is the precursor of language, therefore, if there is no speech there is no language.

 Keywords: Language, evolution, vocal organs, brain, thought, human functions, 

                  gift of speech,

 

Introduction

A distinguishing characteristic of man is his ability to communicate through the use of language. This means that language has no counterpart in the animal worldview. As the name goes, language is described as organized system of symbols that is used to express and receive meanings (Cropper, 2003). Unique to Homo sapiens, language appears inseparable to human nature and a feature of human intelligence. Contrary to the above is the acquisition, comprehension, or expression of spoken or written language by man. Adopting Darwinian perspective, language offers a bold synthesis of human and natural sciences. This is the more reason why Philosophers, Psychologists, Counselors, social workers, medical practitioners, scientists, researchers, administrators, CEO’s and clerical workers all perform their task through the power of the word. The power of the word classically called “phonetic competence” reflects a social pressure for vocal imitation, learning, and other forms of social interaction and transmission.

 

Language Defined

Language may refer either to the specifically human capacity for acquiring and using complex systems of communication or to a specific instance of such a system of complex communication. The scientific study of language in any of its senses is called linguistic. The approximately 3000–6000 languages that are spoken by humans today are the most salient examples, but natural languages can also be based on visual rather than auditory stimuli, for example in sign languages and written languages. Codes and other kinds of artificially constructed communication system such as those used for computer programming  can also be called languages. A language in this sense is a system of signs for encoding and   decoding information. The English word derives ultimately from Latin lingua, "language, tongue", via Old French. This metaphoric relation between language and the tongue exists in many languages and testifies to the historical prominence of spoken languages.[1] When used as a general concept, "language" refers to the cognitive  faculty that enables humans to learn and use systems of complex communication. (Wikipedia)   The human language faculty is thought to be fundamentally different from and of much higher complexity than those of other species. Human language is highly complex in that it is based on a set of rules relating symbols to their meanings, thereby forming an infinite number of possible innovative utterances from a finite number of elements.   Humans acquire language through social interaction in early childhood, and children generally speak fluently when they are around three years old. The use of language has become deeply entrenched in human culture and, apart from being used to communicate and share information, it also has social and cultural uses, such as signifying group identity,   social stratification and for social grooming and entertainment. The word "language" can also be used to describe the set of rules that makes this possible, or the set of utterances that can be produced from those rules.   Language is the most important aspect in the life of all beings. We use language to express inner thoughts and emotions, make sense of complex and abstract thought, to learn to communicate with others, to fulfill our wants and needs, as well as to establish rules and maintain our culture.   Language can be defined as verbal, physical, biologically innate, and a basic form of communication. Behaviorists often define language as a learned behavior involving a stimulus and a response. (Ormrod,1995) Often times they will refer to language as verbal behaviour, which is language that includes gestures and body movements as well as spoken word. (Pierce & Eplin,1999) When we define language we have to be careful not to exclude symbols, gestures or motions. This is because if we exclude these from our definition, we will be denying the language of the deaf community. All human languages share basic characteristics, some of which are organizational rules and infinite generativity - is the ability to produce an infinite number of sentences using a limited set of rules and words. (Santrock & Mitterer, 2001)

Language Is More than Communication

While Darwin believed language evolved from the calls and cries of animals, it is clear in the above passage that Darwin suggests it was the enabling of "thought" that drove the evolution of language.

We know that all animals engage in some form of social communication. Humans, as well as other primates, share in these basic functions in addition to whatever advantages human language itself provides. Jane Goodall notes that human language is the single most important difference between humans and chimpanzees. That chimpanzees have been as successful as they have been for several million years indicates human language is hardly necessary for creatures sharing many of our human characteristics.

 There are five subsystems for language: Phonology (sound), Morphology (word forms), Syntax (word order and sentence structure), Semantics (word and sentence meaning) and finally Pragmatics (social use of language). Phonology is the sound system of language and the linguistic rules that governs sound combinations. The ability of a child to have phonological awareness of likeness and differences in sounds is necessary for the development of speech patterns. This may be related to later reading and writing skills. Morphology is the linguistic system that governs the structure of words and the construction of word forms from the basic element of meaning. Children with problems in this area will experience difficulty in understanding or producing morphological inflections. The power and function of language is rooted in the understanding and use of suffixes and prefixes. Both can be described as major form of oral and written communication. Also Syntax is a philosophical and linguistic rule system governing the order and combination of words to form sentence (Cropper, 2003). On one hand Semantics is the psycholinguistic system that patterns the content of an utterance, intent, and meaning of words. The philosophy underplaying semantics require an individual who speaks to understand what has been said, to comprehend the meaning of what has been said, and express their intended meaning. Finally, Pragmatics is a sociolinguistic system that patterns the use of language in communication, which maybe expressed motorically, vocally or verbally (Copper, 2003). It is basically the use of social situations or settings which express one’s intention. In most instances when a person has difficulty with one subsystem, other subsystems may be affected. When children have a language disorder, generally one of the subsystems is substantially affected. A language disorder is the impairment or deviant development of comprehension and/or other symbol system.

Purpose and Functionality of Language

The role and functionality of language is manifold. The discourse of reason is the function and meaning of Greek logos. The primary meaning of word is language which attempts to communicate feelings or intention since communication of all realities are expressed in the here and now. The structuring of words most often becomes equivalent to the conferring of meaning and expressions. Man who is logos has the capacity to enhance the functionality of his expressions. Language gives reference to the expression of man; language purposefully communicates expressions; Language gives meaning and offers intelligibility-letting human feelings and emotions appear; letting be; meaningfulness becomes identified with the totality of reference. But constitutionally man who is logos is inescapably time-bound, historical, contextual, linguistic and relative. Therefore man’s ultimate interpretation, his philosophy is necessarily historical and culture-bound, relatively to his environment and worldview. His environment often prescribes the terminology, provoke the questions and predetermine the answer (Okere, 1983). Based on the above argument, one can make a clear distinction between man and animals. When objects perceived by animals are pleasant or painful, they make a sort of affirmation or negation and then pursue or avoid the object. This experience is so with human beings. True to all linguistic understanding, to feel pain or pleasure is to act towards what is good or bad. Man who is logos always asserts or denies a thing to be good or bad and avoids or pursues it. Above all, Man who is logos can speak and express his view or opinion. He can make what is not present manifest through words so that another can see, hear or perceive it. Through communication man expresses what he meant or what affects him. Through language man communicates rational words which build, praise or destroys another. Gossip is conveyed through the medium of word or language. That is why there exists in man common meaning and concepts.

 In the human world, language and communication is unique because of its rational nature. The rational nature of language distinguishes human language from animal whispering or signals. In the animal world language is expressive in signs. Although human language on one hand takes place in signs, they are not rigid. Human language is variable both in the sense that there are different languages and in the sense that within the same language, the same expression can designate different things or different expressions at the same time.

 We use language to express what we know and understand. We use language to express ourselves before another in our families, schools, neighborhood, churches and communities. We use language to teach and receive response from our students. We use language to engage is a dialogue with our physicians. We use language to engage in counseling. We chat in one language by voicing our feelings and making our anxieties felt. We use language to facilitate in group and therapies. The world and human persona are always there as the subject matter of a particular language community. The world without a language community is non-existent. Therefore, every language community has a peculiar ways of expressing itself which is not easily translatable into other languages. Every culture has a language through which they communicate meaning, symbols and emotion. English, German, French, Italian, Spanish, Greek and Hebrew are major international languages that are distinguished from national dialects. All these languages have social and significant functions to those who use them as a medium of conveying thoughts. But no one has the capacity to know everything in his own language. This is the reason why any claim to know a particular language in totality as it is in itself would be a contradiction as much as it would amount to a claim to know something as it cannot be known. All languages have one thing in common; they are real. They are not repugnant to one another; there realities always arise from one source or an ultimate support or reality.

 Merton (1949, 1967) admitted that social function refers to observable consequences and not subjective disposition (aim, motives, purpose). And the failure to distinguish between the objective sociological consequences and the subjective dispositions inevitably leads to confusion of functional analysis. Therefore the social function of language is to communicate meaning in a thought without room for confusion in functional meaning. Often times this thought is packaged in a word with significant cultural meaning.

At this juncture, it should be clear that language is not simply an instrument or a tool. Rather, language has its true being in conversation in the exercise and promotion and understanding between peoples. The process of communication should not be understood as a mere action, a purposeful activity, a setting-up of signs. Language should not be a means to impose or transmit my will to another. Above all, language is a living process in which a community of life is lived out.  It should be thought that human language as a special and unique living process, in that in linguistic communication, word and human worldview is disclosed. This disclosure, this function of language means that language does not draw attention to itself but transparent to the realities that are manifested through it. Invented systems of artificial technological inventions of communication are not considered to be languages. They have no basis in the community of language or social life. Technological medium of language and expression contradicts the neo-functionalist movement in sociology that was adopted as tradition rather than as method (Alexander, 1985). The essential function of language is in its lessons/messages. To speak means to say what some other person understands. If this is the case, whoever speaks a language that no one else understands does not speak. To speak means to speak to someone who understands. To that extent, speaking does not belong in the sphere of the “I” but in the sphere of the “We.”(Gadamar, 1976)

Conclusion

Language is a universal medium of understanding. Understanding therefore is essentially linguistic, but to be properly so, it must transcend the limits of any particular language. There is therefore mediation between the familiar and the alien. It is a fact that no language is a world in itself. That means that language should not close itself against what is foreign to it, rather every language ought to be porous, and open to absorption of new ideas and contents. In this regard, the understanding of man’s linguistic community and his use of language ought to promote the relationship between him and others from other linguistic communities. No linguistic community is a world in itself. No linguistic culture is superior to another. It is only through openness to the other that every linguistic community can develops the dynamism that is inevitable in human development. Such openness contributes to authentic development of man who belongs to such linguistic communities. We must submit that the universality and meditative power of language can help promote proper understanding among the various cultures of the world. Admittedly, this type of understanding though radical is inevitable for peace, harmony and tranquility.

References:

Alexander, J (1985). Neo-functionalism, Beverly Hills: Sage

Aristotle, De Anima Book 111 (1985) in Jordan Bames (Ed), The complete works of Aristotle, Princeton University Press

 Chris K, Kennedy M, Hartford, J (2000). The evolutionary emergence of language: Social function and origin of linguistic form, Cambridge University press.

 Cropper, C (2003) Preparation Manual for the Texas Examination of Educator Standards, www.texasstudy.com

Gadamar, H, G (1979). Truth and method, London; Sheed and Ward

 Gadamer, H.G (1968) Wahrheit Und Methode p.380 Und P.416; Kleine Schriften

 Gadamar, H.G (1976), the philosophical Hermeneutics, Trans & Ed by David. F. Lange, Berkley University of Californian Press.

 Goodall, J. (1986). The Chimpanzees of Gombe. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Publishing.

 Heidegger, M., Kant (1965) und das problem der metaphysike. V. Klostermann, Frankfurt am main, p.41

 Kleine S (1981) Functionality of language p.67

 Merton, C (1949, 1967). Manifest and latent function pp.73-138 in Muller, R.L (1968) The linguistic Relativity and Humboldtain Ethno linguistics, Janua Ling arum, Nr. 67, Mouton the Hague Paris

Okere T. (1983), African Philosophy-A Historico-Hermeneutical Investigation of the conditions of its possibility, University Press of America.

Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia