Really interesting piece. I wouldn't say that to choose to write in a second language is to reject your first. But I haven't been in that position or wrestled with the dilemma that Achebe and Kundera did.
The part I find most interesting is considering what language carries beyond meaning, as Elif Shafak pondered. For me, what's spoken or voiced contains extra traces of a person's character and being. Almost impossible to translate or rather transmit through copy.
That's a great response, thank you. I agree that it's not binary, and riches are in adding languages, not choosing, though there are interesting studies on "first-language attrition."
On the second point, those traces are indeed inseparable from a person. I mentioned languages in general, but so much comes from the local dialect, slang, and "having a way with words" that imprints a unique texture and personality to each individual's expression.
Really interesting piece. I wouldn't say that to choose to write in a second language is to reject your first. But I haven't been in that position or wrestled with the dilemma that Achebe and Kundera did.
The part I find most interesting is considering what language carries beyond meaning, as Elif Shafak pondered. For me, what's spoken or voiced contains extra traces of a person's character and being. Almost impossible to translate or rather transmit through copy.
That's a great response, thank you. I agree that it's not binary, and riches are in adding languages, not choosing, though there are interesting studies on "first-language attrition."
On the second point, those traces are indeed inseparable from a person. I mentioned languages in general, but so much comes from the local dialect, slang, and "having a way with words" that imprints a unique texture and personality to each individual's expression.
The slang, yes! I could read or watch a whole global study on this.