Language is widely regarded as one of few uniquely human traits.

It has become nearly ubiquitous to human life, invading almost every aspect of what it means to be human. The uses and functions of language are nearly limitless, and it is difficult to imagine human life without language of some sort. Language allows people to communicate, solve disputes, maintain relationships, and express themselves. But what, of all the options, is the most important trait of language? Of all the things language accomplishes, what is most vital to humankind? What could not be accomplished without language? In The Origin of Speech, Charles Hockett outlines 13 traits of human language, highlighting the differences between humans and other animals (Hockett 1960:26). Languages most important facet, however, is none of these listed. I believe that languages most important trait lies with one of the only other traits that is uniquely human: culture. Culture is not only uniquely human, it is so innately and universally human that it has become nearly synonymous with what it means to be human: it is reasonable to say that a large-brained, language-capable, intelligent bipedal species without the capacity for culture is not entirely human. Without culture, we are not human, and without language, there may be no culture. In light of this, the most important thing about language is the intimate relationship it has with culture. Although culture in its most basic sense may not be dependent on language, I would argue that the complexities of culture, as well as its preservation, are. Culture is a dynamic and complex entity, and because it is so integral to humanity, it must be spread, with all its intricacies, both spatially and temporally. While simple observation and memory may be enough to display and learn some of the crude aspects of culture, this is neither detailed enough nor sustainable. Language is required to produce detailed accounts of cultural events and specifics. Furthermore, language enhances culture, through things like literature, performance, and communication. Even the language itself can be inherently tied to culture: the language of a particular area can add to or be a reflection of the people who speak it. According to some experts, language and culture form a symbiotic relationship, with each reflecting and affecting the other (Whorf 1939:52). In his writing, Benjamin Whorf showed, through a comparative analysis of Standard American English and Hopi, that interpretations of time and space can differ depending on the language that is used to describe them. Whether or not a specific language reflects its respective culture, however, languages can become a large part of the culture for many people: the way they choose to express themselves says a great deal about their cultures and who they consider themselves to be. Examples of this can be clearly seen in the Creoles and Pidgins of New Orleans, Haiti, and Hawaii (Webb 2012:301). Some may argue that culture can exist independent of language, and, though culture is important, the linguistic aspect of culture is less so. However, this is not the case. Language and culture are certainly intimately tied to one another. Not only could our knowledge of past cultures, which certainly affects our culture today, not exist as it does now, culture itself would be innately changed. Language affects business, religion, leisure, and academia, all of which are vital parts of human culture. While culture in some form may be possible without language, human

culture as we know it, and humanity as we know it, certainly is not. Furthermore, many may say that, in all these cases, the use of language is closely tied to communication, making languages communicative properties its most important traits. Certainly, language as it relates to culture is highly tied to communication, but it accomplishes many other objectives as well. Language is a record-keeper, but most importantly, it is also a form of personal expression. Personal culture is a part of and affects culture on the whole, and language often acts as an outlet for personal expression, whether it is communicative or not. In Lewis Carrolls poem, Jabberwocky, he expresses himself and contributes to his personal culture and the larger human culture through his work of art, even though much of the language is incomprehensible, and surely not meant to be communicative (Carroll 1871). Language has become overwhelmingly entrenched in human life. So too has culture, and, in light of the evidence presented above, the effects that language has on culture, and culture on language, have made languages most important trait its close relationship with the preservation and enhancement of culture. Culture and language are so integral to what it means to be human that it is nearly impossible to imagine a human civilization without either of these aspects. Much of what we know as culture and language today is due to the symbiotic relationship the two have formed: language and culture are in a constant interaction that has created no less than humanity as we know it. As Benjamin Lee Whorf wrote, Which was first, the language patterns or the cultural norms? In main they have grown up together, constantly influencing each other (Whorf 1939:52). And this, without a doubt, shows languages most vital function. Carroll, Lewis. 1871. Through the Looking-Glass. Accessed through Indiana University databases, <http://www.cs.indiana.edu/metastuff/looking/lookingdir.html>. Hockett, Charles. The Origin of Speech. In Making Sense of Language: Readings in Culture and Communication, edited by Susan D. Blum. Oxford University Press, pp. 22-29. Webb, Eric Russell. 2012. Pidgins and Creoles. In Oxford Handbook of Sociolinguistics, edited by Robert Bayley, Richard Cameron, and Ceil Lucas. Oxford University Press, pp. 301-320. Whorf, Benjamin Lee. 1939. The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior to Language. In Making Sense of Language: Readings in Culture and Communication, edited by Susan D. Blum. Oxford University Press, pp. 43-54.