Family Language and Property

[NigelW]

I would like to explore the language around family and hopefully flush out an idea that I have.

 

So, I grew up seeing and hearing my parents communicate. They used words and phrases specific to their relationship.

 

Phrases like:

 

“…my wife.”

“…my husband.”

“…my son.”

 

The above phrases are not accurate in describing relationships because by saying “my” I am defining someone outside of myself as my property.

 

It can be confusing to a child to hear people defining each other as each others property.

 

Voluntary relationships are different because you are responsible for choosing to be in them. You have far more choice.

 

A dependent child is in the relationship involuntarily. The inaccurate use of the concept of property is misleading in the phrase “my son” because it says by definition, that “I own you.”

 

I am comparing this to using language that is individuating. Instead of saying "my son", saying Nigel.

 

Has anyone else had similar thoughts?

 

[SamuelS]

Yup. When I was married I said "my wife", and frankly I meant it. I'm not sure when I first became consciously aware of it, but I do remember thinking it was very strange and disturbing.

[NigelW]

I don't mean to pry too much as I don't know you personally.

Why do you think it was strange and disturbing?

[Pepin]

I would disagree and instead propose that the language is used to differentiate between your own set of relationships with another's set of relationships, and to give information about the particular relationship involved.

 

A use for stating a relationship is in implying the implications of a relationship. A sibling bond is different from a friendship bond, just as those are different from a parent child bond. To say "friend" carries a lot of information about a relationship, just as: "best friend"; "girlfriend"; and "wife" does. Using such terms is a method of communicating high level information about a relationship in a few syllables.

 

Though you focus more parental relationships, it might be useful to consider the case of "my friend". The value in the phrase is in establishing that the person is related to you through friendship, but that this relationship is not shared by the other party.

 

Note that when you have a friend in common with another, you simple call them by name as opposed to establishing that he is your friend. When a friend is not shared and the other party does not know who you are about the speak of, you say "my friend" to establish a person who you in particular are related to through friendship. If you are to speak of "Jim's friend", you do this to specify the relationship Jim has to this person, but to also clarify that the both of you do not share this relationship.

 

In this case of a child and their father, when one child talks to a child from another family, they will use the phrase "my dad" to clarify that they are speaking about their father and not of the other child's. This is because not doing so can be slightly confusing as the term "father" by itself tends to sound like the relationship is mutual, that both children share the same father. This is why siblings will talk to each other in terms of "dad said X", but when talking to others will say "my dad said X".

 

Another slight clarification that is made through the "my" specification is in making it clear that your are talking about a particular person as opposed to a general concept. If I were to say "girlfriend won't stop nagging", though it may be easy to figure out that I speaking about my girlfriend, there is an initial confusion and clumsiness in that it somewhat sounds like I am talking about girlfriends in general, or I may be talking about someone else's girlfriend.

 

I would argue that the use of the term "my X" does not at all imply ownership. It is a method of conveying a relationship while also specifying the members in that relationship. The "my" is interchangeable with "your", "our", and "Jim's". The X, who is the subject, simply establishes the relation between the point of reference: "Jim", to the subject.

[SamuelS]

I don't mean to pry too much as I don't know you personally.

Why do you think it was strange and disturbing?

Well, it seemed, like your OP suggested, that I owned her in some way, that she was "mine", not just "my wife" but "the wife that belongs to me"... It was disturbing because I noticed that particular relationship had the element of owning another that I didn't like when I put it together, yet that was what I felt...like she wasn't an autonomous being, but a part of me...I'm not sure I'm explaining it very well. It may be useful to note that it was rather disfunctional.

 

No worries about prying, I'm pretty open about it, and I've been divorced twice as long as I was married so its not a "fresh wound."

[NigelW]

Consider parenting as a verb. If Patrick is the person responsible for my well being he would be called a parent. In the act of parenting, he would be parenting me. It was difficult to actually write those sentences, I must admit, as I am used to saying my father etc.

 

Can you please define bond?

 

I can accurately describe a bond with a lover. Rachel and I are in love.

 

Can you define a high level of information?

 

You would agree that the value in “my friend” would be considerably less if children who were conceptually illiterate took on that phrase without knowledge of what it means. Would you?

 

I think it would be more valuable to accurately say that person’s name. If I have a friend would snowboards with me, then I can say that Bob and I are going snowboarding. I do not have to say “my friend.”

 

If a child is talking to another child about who they live with, they can simply say Bob parents me.

“Also, Bob who parents me said this.”  

 

I am not sure how the word “my” is specific compared to a persons name. You can replace girlfriend with Rachel(nothing against Rachels). “Rachel won’t stop nagging.”

 

You would argue that “my X” does not at all imply ownership? My car, my watch, my post are all examples of establishing ownership with that phrase.

 

@SamuelS

Did she ever call you "her husband"?

[SamuelS]

@SamuelS

Did she ever call you "her husband"?

sure she did...as you and Pepin are discussing, it's just how these things are worded, yeah? I don't know that she ever connected the "my" to "mine" as in property the way I did...just her wife status was a description of her relationship to me. language is a funny thing.

 

along the same lines as the relationship/property thing -- when a family member is ostracized, its common to say they've been "disowned"

[NigelW]

Come to think of it, as a teenager,I remember talking about the people responsible for raising me as "my parents". I wonder if there was a certain level of misdirected emotion because of it. If I think a person is "mine" I may become frustrated when they don't act like my property. Like a car, computer, etc.

 

I am disowned, like "I am property and no one wants to own me" I wonder how the language can be put most accurately to show self ownership.

[WorBlux]

You can say things like "My childhood home was just renovated" without implying a literal ownership. The possessive grammar merely denotes a unique relationship of its subject with its object. Ownership is just one such relation, as such, "my wife", does not imply that she is not her own autonomous person, just that she and I have a unique relationship to each other. I think people are amply able to make these fine distinctions in their language, and that the desire to control comes from somewhere else. (fear, anxiety, insecurity...)

[Pepin]

Consider parenting as a verb. If Patrick is the person responsible for my well being he would be called a parent. In the act of parenting, he would be parenting me. It was difficult to actually write those sentences, I must admit, as I am used to saying my father etc.

 

Parenting is a verb, but it also describes a genetic relationship. Language is confusing and complex in this way, as words often have many meanings depending on the context, just as the word "my" can indicate possession or relation.

 

 

 

Can you please define bond?

 

A positive relationship between two or more people. Metaphorically, the term often is used to show that these people stick together.

 

 

 

I can accurately describe a bond with a lover. Rachel and I are in love.

 

If you tell someone "Rachel and I are in love", what someone is likely to ask is "is she your girlfriend?". Though someone can somewhat assume that you are implying that you are dating, the question that beckons in the mind is "who is Rachel and how does she relate to this person?". As argued in my previous post, the use of the term is to convey relational information quickly, and to avoid confusion and clumsiness.

 

Of course there are others ways to ask such as "are you two dating?", but I am arguing that there is nothing wrong saying "my X", or "your X", or "Jim's X".

 

 

Can you define a high level of information?

 

Not important in context to the argument, but high level information is information which is heavily abstracted. It is far easier to say "daughter" than to describe what a daughter is.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-_and_low-level

 

 

You would agree that the value in “my friend” would be considerably less if children who were conceptually illiterate took on that phrase without knowledge of what it means. Would you?

 

This doesn't happen. If it does, the child only needs a quick correction. Children are very adaptive in learning completely confusing and backward language. If a word or term does not make sense with their experience, they are more likely to ask about it than to assume that they understood correctly.

 

 

I think it would be more valuable to accurately say that person’s name. If I have a friend would snowboards with me, then I can say that Bob and I are going snowboarding. I do not have to say “my friend.”

 

You: "Bob and I are going snowboarding"

Me: "Who's Bob? Your brother? Your friend? Your boyfriend? Your instructor? Some guy you met recently? A long lost friend? Your enemy?" and so on.

 

The statement works if I know who Bob is in relation to you, but as I argued in the previous post, we introduce people with these terms to establish a relationship. Once someone knows the relationship, that Bob is your brother, you will stop saying that he is your brother.

 

 

If a child is talking to another child about who they live with, they can simply say Bob parents me.

“Also, Bob who parents me said this.”

 

You: "Also, Bob who parents me said this"

Me: "I didn't know you were adopted"

 

 

I am not sure how the word “my” is specific compared to a persons name. You can replace girlfriend with Rachel(nothing against Rachels). “Rachel won’t stop nagging.”

 

The my pertains to the reference point. If you say "my aunt", we know that we are talking about your relationships. When you say "aunt", you are specifying how she is related to you. This pattern is essential in conveying relationships and is still there without the term "my".

 

You: "Rachel won't stop nagging me".

Me: "Who is Rachel?"

You: "The girl who I am dating"

 

Note that the bolded terms establish a relationship in the same way, that you are relate to the girl Rachel through dating.

 

 

You would argue that “my X” does not at all imply ownership? My car, my watch, my post are all examples of establishing ownership with that phrase.

 

My entire post was dedicated to showing that the term "my" in these contexts is not the same in these others contexts and providing the use of the term. If this is something you think I was not aware of, then I must of done an absolutely dreadful job in writing my post.

[NigelW]

I accept that the word "my" is used to describe unique relationships.

 

So saying that someone is my friend can be accurate. As opposed to saying my country. Which is not accurate.

 

Can it also be true that by using "my friend" one can exploit you?

 

Erg, I feel embarrassed. Questions I never felt safe to ask when I was a child are coming up now.

 

I may just be dense, Pepin.

[Pepin]

The term can also be used in a negative possessive way. A parent might brag "my child is the star qb on the football team" and go on to take any accomplishment of their child as their own. A creepy girlfriend might overemphasize that her boyfriend is hers and hers alone. Some parents seem to see their children as temporary slaves, in which case the term is usually used in more a possessive sense. This is the minority though.

 

What questions are coming up exactly?

[SamuelS]

I thought about it a bit today, it's been so long that it took some reflection to get it...I think the "my wife" ownership thing bothered me because it was coming from jealousy, and I don't want to be jealous. Not jealous of another man, maybe jealous isn't the right word...not happy with her finding happiness outside of our interaction...one of those "I don't want to feel this way, but it appears I do" sort of things.

 

I really think your OP was onto something...language is important, and even using typical language can pack a lot of stuff into a simple expression that we may not want in there.

[NigelW]

@Pipin

I remember consciously making the decision in high school to portray myself as a less than I am. I remember being fascinated with the 100 years war and other topics in history and art. That all faded when I decided to fade into the crowd. Drug abuse soon followed.

 

I am behaving the same way at work. Reading through 400 page architectural specifications with contradictions and misused products can be a fun challenge, but I can’t stop thinking about actually learning how to think. To top it off, I think I may be reproducing the feelings I feel at work in other people in this board.

 

I don’t fully understand why I did what I did in high school and I don't know how to move past it. The question that is killing me is, why didn't anyone help me to understand?

 

@SamuelS

I may very well be onto something. Perhaps if I chose to have kids I can raise my kid(s) using first names only. Language is tribal, right? I don't know, I would just prefer not to have my child potentially confuse ownership and parental bond. I do agree with Pipin that it is the current state of things, though.