Ingroups are defined as groups with which people identify with strongly. I liked how this article referenced the concept of intersectionality on page 143 because it emphasizes that a large number of factors determine the ingroup, that aspects of a person’s identity contribute to one another versus overpowering one another. I also thought that that the link between language and ingroup vs. outgroup was very interesting because we talk more about race, religion, gender, sexuality and don’t tend to consider language a large factor. However, looking at examples from our class, it makes more sense. MLK was praised for his ability to “code switch,” and communicate in a way that reached both white and black people. While not every single white person listened to his message, his ability to permeate the ingroup even slightly is unique and made his more well known.
In my own personal experiences, I did not realize that I use language to hang onto my Midwestern identity. At home, I did not think about how I spoke because everyone spoke in the same way. In fact, I didn’t think about it at all until I came home fall break of freshman year and my mom told me sadly that my accent was faded. This is an example of what Giles says on page 145: “the importance of language as a component of a person’s social identity can change over the lifespan.” Now at a school where the Midwestern population is low and the majority of my friends have never actually been there, I find that I value my Midwestern accent more and even lean into it at times. I use my language as a tie to home and my home ingroup.
As a fellow Midwestern, I also find myself running into the same situation. I subconsciously use language, among other things, to remind others of my Midwest roots. I also enjoyed how you brought up intersectionality because it’s hard for a person to fit into all the labels of one specific group.
I like that you pointed out MLK’s ability to influence both whites and blacks with his speeches. Overall, I believe that any effective leader must be able to permeate every ingroup in their audience, which is why the link between language and ingroup vs. outgroup is crucial.
Also, a Midwesterner, I was thinking the same thing in that I emphasize my accent more in certain words and contexts to prove that I’m part of something at home and how much I value being a part of that group. But I also have started incorporating aspects of speech from here like y’all to fit in more, demonstrating somewhat the idea of code switch to be more appealing to other groups and converging towards other groups.
I thought it was interesting that the article talked about the language you speak and also how you speak that language, meaning more like vernacular. I agree that this does a lot to explain how MLK was so successful. Being able to communicate with multiple different groups is important for an ideology change.
As a fellow midwesterner, I completely agree with what you are saying. When I was a freshman, people would make fun of me for my accent, but I strangely found it comforting. Now looking back, I was happy they saw my roots, and I was proud with what I identified with. Additionally, whenever I get back to school on breaks, I would have a thicker accent, and that was probably due to the fact I wanted to associate with the midwest.
I think it is very interesting how MLK’s speeches could impact both white and black people. I think having this unique way to communicate is very effective.
I like your point about your personal experiences with language. It is for sure a way people identify themselves. Being from Memphis, our way of talking is much different than people in Richmond do.