For my term paper I would like to discuss the evolution of language focusing on the constant redefinition of words from generation to generation, group to group, and individual to individual. I would like to discuss what words “illegal” immigrants are now using to describe themselves and their fight for justice. They wish to no longer accept the term illegal and all it implies, as I never did, but rather claim their legality and human rights by replacing it with terms like “undocumented unafraid and unapologetic” to further the movement and change the debate on the undocumented. In not agreeing with the negative imperialistic and unfair nature of the word and its place in the legal system, will replacing it with these words help eradicate the negative idea behind the word and change the law by changing the language itself? Can the death of a word be the death of an idea and an injustice?
Dear Weronika,
This is a brilliant and extremely timely topic, and I’m delighted you’ve chosen it. As you’re probably aware, only last week, the Associated Press news agency decided to stop using the term “illegal immigrant” in its news articles. See, among a huge spate of articles:
http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/04/no-more-illegal-immigrants/
Your fundamental question — does changing the way in which certain classes of people are named by mainstream media and the majority of people — effect any change in the way they are actually viewed — is key. You’ve hit the nail on the head. There’s a 2003 book by Harvard professor Randall Kennedy titled “N—–: The Strange Career of a Troublesome Word” that might be useful to you as a point of comparison to your study of the evolution of terms used to describe the undocumented (a term itself unacceptable to many, as you know).