Language fouls in teaching ecology: why traditional metaphors undermine conservation literacy.

We believe that the language commonly used in teaching actually hinders the creation of conservation literacy. We examined four frequently used ecology and environmental studies textbooks and considered the ways in which commonly used language can obscure or enhance an understanding of ecology and conservation. Specifically, we used the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis (a.k.a. linguistic relativity) and framing theory to examine the approaches reflected in three elements of the texts: introductions and treatment of two key ecological concepts (matter cycling and energy). Language used in the texts contained implicit metaphors that portrayed nature as a resource; resisted ecological realities, such as the finite nature of matter and the loss of energy with each transformation; and fundamentally served to separate humans from nature. Although the basis of conservation literacy is understanding of the complexity of ecological systems, culturally based communication as exemplified in these texts does not encourage students or educators to recognize the feedback loops that clarify human membership in the ecosystem. Consequently, the language used to teach ecology perpetuates the idea that humans exist outside of its laws. With this paper, we hope to initiate a dialogue about how to retool the language used in teaching and communicating about ecology such that it resonates with, rather than undermines, conservation.