FINAL POST: What are some relationships between language and social groups? How can language use contribute to exclusion and inclusion?

Whew, it's been a while since the last post. To say that my answer to this question has changed would be incorrect, it's really been deepened:

First off, I now really have more knowledge regarding the specific techniques that can be used in linguistic inclusion/exclusion, mainly the latter.  The two main things to note here are Grice's Maxims and positive/negative politeness. I think that types of utterances contribute much less to the topic of inclusion/exclusion than the aforementioned two things. Following Grice's Maxims is a crucial part of maintaining a good conversational face. Following the Maxim of Quantity helps, as my mom says it, 'ping-pong', ie it makes sure that the conversation is relatively two-sided and nobody really hogs the floor. Following the Maxim of Quality makes sure that nobody is lying, stretching the truth, or not telling the full truth, all of which could be deemed offensive in many cases. Maintaining the Maxim of Relevance makes sure that the conversation stays on track - when it's violated, some people in the conversation may feel very confused, or like the people flouting the Maxim of Relevance are trying to hide potentially important information. Finally, maintaining the Maxim of Manner ensures that everyone in the conversation feels that they are treated politely and kindly - flouting this maxim would create a very bad time for certain people in the conversation for sure. Additionally, it's also very important to use the techniques of positive and negative politeness because being blunt or threatening conversational face could ruin conversations and even long-term relationships. Sometimes adding or subtracting certain unimportant-seeming words from a statement can make a huge difference.

Secondly, I now realize how many groups of people have been linguistically abused in society. This doesn't just include Muslims - the group that I researched. Certain classes of people in old European societies, specific religions, some people just based on the color of their skin. I had limited knowledge of these types of things before this unit, but now it brings a much bigger question into focus: Racism is still prevalent in today's society, so how can we combat it? Based on what was mentioned as solutions in the other presentations, the two main solutions are, in order of desirability, fighting the power and waiting it out. When people have fought the power in the past, like Mandela and MLK, there have been some devastating results. Things like the usage of the 'N' word and other offensive slurs and stereotypes attributed to minorities. But, with Mandela and MLK, a member of the oppressed party was able to rally by making their fellow oppressed people (and some non-oppressed ones) feel included. People like Mandela and MLK pleaded politely for equality, staying as peaceful and benevolent as possible. That's maintaining maxims as well as being polite being used to perfection.

Finally, I'm not sure whether you'll groan at this or enjoy it, but I can relate rejection with my own life a lot more clearly now. Since the last post, I've received the following notes:

 #1

#2

 #3

I want to elaborate on specific terms in each of these letters that I believe contribute further to this exclusion. In rejection letter #1, I believe that the third paragraph contributes heavily to making rejects like me feel more excluded. Saying that "decisions are made with conviction and clarity" makes me believe that they were 100% sure they wanted to reject me and found that I was, far and away, less qualified than other applicants. Additionally, the phrase "we bring the highest level of consideration to our decisions" feels very unneeded to me and just feels like letter #1's institution is trying to one-up itself, sort of like a braggy friend when you receive a bad grade.

Rejection letter #2 is probably the best-phrased of the three, in my opinion. It does include some examples of negative politeness that I think help alleviate the pain, such as "Among those who aren't receiving a Semifinalist interview are... students like you with... wide-open futures before them." I know that this message was probably auto-generated, but it does feel very legitimate, and I like how they emphasize that this rejection really isn't 'the end'. However, mentioning statistics (ie "only 9 percent of applicants were named semifinalists") feels unnecessary and almost braggy. It's an ok letter, though.

Rejection letter #3 isn't even really a rejection letter. I was very offended by this one because I was not even acknowledged. Additionally, listing out the winners of a competition only further kindles jealousy in my mind, which isn't a smart thing for a rejection letter to do. I believe that this is easily the worst of the rejection letters, based on a lack of effort above anything else.

Sorry for venting, I feel like evaluating the potentially offensive language in these letters would be a valuable addition to this post. Anyways, I'm over all of this and am happy :D (Here's my map by the way)