HOUSES BECOMING HOMES AND HOMELESS BECOMING UNHOUSED

By Kristen di Gennaro

Readers who grew up in the 1980s might be familiar with the classic R&B song A House is not a Home, made famous by the late singer Luther Vandross. The song was initially recorded almost two decades earlier by East Orange native and Grammy award-winning singer Dionne Warwick, who is a South Orange resident. As the song’s title illustrates, the words “house” and “home,” though often used interchangeably, are not completely synonymous, as we aim to “turn this house into a home.”

Speakers and learners of languages besides English note that some languages (such as Italian, Russian and Urdu) use one word for both concepts, generally translated simply as “house” in English. Does that mean that speakers of “homeless” languages lack the emotional connotations we attach to the word “home?” According to the theory of linguistic determinism, yes: if a language lacks a word for a certain concept, then that concept remains outside the realm of thought. Proponents of this theory argue that language does not just reflect what we’re thinking but shapes our thoughts and the words available to us guide or even restrict our thoughts. A common counterexample to linguistic determinism is to note that English lacks a word for the concept “pleasure derived from another person’s misfortune,” or what the Germans call Schadenfreude, yet I’m sure many of us are familiar with that feeling.

Few (if any) linguists today adhere to the theory of linguistic determinism. Instead, many adopt the notion of linguistic relativity. In this weaker version, our language influences how we perceive the world but does not prohibit us from thinking outside our language boxes. As another example, many languages (such as Italian, Russian and Greek) have two separate words distinguishing light blue from dark blue, but English just has one (until we modify it with “light” or “dark”). Does this mean that we don’t see a difference between light blue and dark blue? No, but it does suggest that we don’t see a strong enough difference to create separate concepts. (Interior designers, fashionistas and others who work with colors, of course, have many words to describe the blue family.)

Connections between language and thought might seem trivial, but efforts to control, or at least modify, our thoughts through language surround us. Have you noticed the shift from “used car” to “pre-owned vehicle”? When my daughter was in elementary school, the “gym teacher” corrected me – she was the “P.E. teacher.” Years ago when we lived in England for a year, the person who installed my cable TV was a “cable engineer.” Such examples, illustrating attempts to rebrand items or professions in more positive terms, appear innocent enough. But what about when “layoffs” are labeled “headcount reduction.” Or, as Tracy Chapman sings, “why are the missiles called Peacekeepers when they’re aimed to kill?” And, of course, we have “alternative facts.”

These are all examples of attempts to control our thoughts through word choices, which brings us back to “house” and “home.” You may have noticed a shift in terms from “homeless” to “unhoused” or “person experiencing homelessness.” Such phrases are attempts to shift our attention from a very unfortunate personal situation to a lack of housing or an individual’s temporary status. What do you think? More importantly, do you think people without a house or home care about word choice?

Please share your thoughts on these and other language matters with your local linguist at languagematters@mattersmagazine.com.

---

Kristen di Gennaro is an associate professor of English at Pace University, where she teaches courses in linguistics.