A note on language differentiation and group identity

Hebrew and the linguistic diversity of Papua New Guinea

Because of its focus upon individualism, the American civil religion encourages group identity to be seen, if not purely as an accident of history reflecting nothing of significance, a misfortune imposed upon individuals by oppressors who refused to treat those individuals as individuals. The oppressors instead stigmatized the individuals for harboring superficial or wholly invented group-level traits. This misfortune forced the individuals to band together for self-protection and thereby form a group, the definition of which just so happens to cover the superficial or wholly invented group-level traits, along with superior or unique cultural qualities created by virtue of the group’s struggle against the misfortune.

A peculiar language that allows group members to operate in secrecy or with prestige relative to a larger outsider population is one such group distinction tolerated by our civil religion. In the United States, African American Vernacular English, Gullah, and Native American languages are authorized by the civil religion for these purposes.

There’s often some truth in these group origin stories. However, because of their civil-religious significance, such stories are given outsized prominence which unfortunately obscure other forces behind group identity and differentiation, such as group narcissism or the striving to maintain the omnipotence of an abstract group concept against threats to its omnipotence.

I’ll give two examples of group linguistic differentiation that could be used as evidence of additional non-persecutory forces animating group identity.

The first example is the linguistic differentiation that occurred between Judaeans and Christians, culminating in widespread adoption of Hebrew as a liturgical language throughout the Judaean diaspora by the the 6th century A.D.. The second example is the astonishing linguistic diversity of Papua New Guinea.