Essay On Linguistic Relativity

Linguistic Relativity Essay

Introduction:
Linguistic relativity is the notion that language can affect our thought processes, and is often referred to as the ‘Sapir-Whorf hypothesis’, after the two linguists who brought the idea into the spotlight. Whorf writes how “Language is not merely a reproducing instrument for voicing ideas but rather is itself the shaper of ideas, the program and guide for the individual’s mental activity” (1956:212), and I will explain how it is able to do so. In this essay I will argue that certain ways of mental categorization, spatial cognition and reality interpretation, based on the characteristics of our specific variety of language, influence our perception of the world. I will discuss how languages divide up nature differently, and the cognitive repercussions of doing so, before identifying contrasting methods of thinking about space and location, and then will finish by looking at how grammatical differences have the power to predispose a particular vision of reality.
Categorisation varies across different language groups
One noticeable difference between some languages is the different ways in which they categorise the various aspects of their environment. Whorf believed that cross-linguistically there is “divergence in the analysis of the world”, and that “languages dissect nature in many different ways” (1956:214), allocating objects and actions to sets of categories which may be different to other varieties.
Setting out to test this claim, Choi and Bowerman (1991) asked both Korean and English-speaking children to separate a set of actions, including “joining two Lego pieces”, and “putting toys in container” (1991:96), into two groups. The English children classified the scenes as either belonging to an ‘on’ group (e.g. the Lego pieces) or an ‘in’ group (e.g. the toys), whereas their Korean counterparts distinguished between actions where there was a resultant tight fitting relationship between the participants, and those where it was loose. Dirven and Verspoor note how the English differentiation is “entirely forced on these children by the contrast between the English prepositions in and on” (1998:140), whereas in Korean, “Kkita (glossable loosely as “fit”…) is indifferent to whether the Figure goes into, onto, over, or together with the Ground, as long as it leads to a tight fit” (Choi and Bowerman 1991:90).
The fact that the tested children grouped the actions in accordance with the grammatical structure of their respective language is evidence for linguistic relativity, as “both groups of children construe(d) the relations between objects in the world on the basis of their language specific categories, and not on the basis of some universal, conceptual categories” (Dirven and Verspoor 1998:140-141). This suggests that the children from the two linguistic communities will partly see the world in a different way, being inclined to categorise the things they see in contrasting fashions.
Certain features are deemed important enough...

Loading: Checking Spelling

0%

Read more

The Problems of Sociolinguistic Studies of Gender Differences

2418 words - 10 pages The Problems of Sociolinguistic Studies of Gender Differences Introduction It has long been assumed that women and men differ in their use of language. These differences are supposed to represent (and perpetuate) the social divisions between women and men. Few researchers will disagree that women and men’s speech styles are different, though they may disagree as to what extent or as to what these differences may mean. ...

Chuang Tzu & Mencius. Essay

1400 words - 6 pages Chuang Tzu, and Mencius were two of the most important figures in Chinese philosophy and literature. Chuang Tzu was of the Taoist tradition; his works are eloquent and full of wonderful imagery. Mencius was a Confucian philosopher; as such his writings are more practical, and less colourful then Chuang Tzu's.The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast,...

Pygmalion

1678 words - 7 pages Pygmalion An interpretation of Class Relations in Pygmalion In Bernard Shaw’s Pygmalion, there is a distinct variance in class relations and the way that early 20th century Britains were perceived as being different by their speech, money, wealth, style, manners, and appearance. Being a lady or a gentleman was an acquired status desirable among most of London’s society. However, in Pygmalion, Shaw tells a story about the transition of a...

Linguistic Domination of English by the United States

2282 words - 9 pages The Tongue of Dominion It is inherent in the nature of any living organism to procreate, multiply, and expand, thus furthering the species. But what happens when one species inhabits every corner of the earth? Where, now, will they go when that insatiable desire for conquest has left them bereft of any untrodden tract of land around which to urinate? Imperialism is "the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence"...

Barthes' argument in The Death of the Author

2177 words - 9 pages The Function of Subject as Signified Barthes’ argument in The Death of the Author, as it is clarified by the structuralist approach of Ferdinand de Saussure and the manifestations of his linguistic system adapted by Jacques Lacan and Jacques Derrida, is composed of an ultimate dismissal of the signification of a text in favor of the ratification of the function of the subject. Once this function is ascertained, Barthes shifts his impetus...

The Origin Of Language

1514 words - 6 pages There has been considerable historical discourse over the nature of language. Most contend that thought and language are two interrelated criteria. Just how these criteria relate to the controversy over whether animals have language capabilities and even more specifically to the Sapir-Whorf human language thought debate, however, is not always clear. From a human context we know that language is a skill which allows us to communicate our...

What Is Anthropology? How Is It Done?

2359 words - 9 pages What Is Anthropology? How Is It Done? People enter the field of anthropology for a variety of reasons. Some people enter the field by accident. This means that they did not intend on becoming an anthropologist. Some people were interested in the field from the start. One person married a social anthropologist; and, after living with a group of people for two years wrote an ethnography about the people. The first story is about Adrienne...

Social Conflict in the Media

2091 words - 8 pages The problem of social conflict is very general upon introduction. However, upon the addition of examples, the essence of this problem becomes clarified. The evidence that it exists is in everyday life and in the popular media, to include news periodicals, radio broadcasts, and television programs of various types. The movie category of the media is also heavy...

Gilead's Language System in Margaret Atwood's "The Handmaid's Tale"

1057 words - 4 pages The Handmaid's Tale, a dystopian futuristic novel by Margaret Atwood recounts the story of...

How is meaning generated? Illustrate your answer by presenting and explaining your 'reading' of an advertisement selected from a recent newspaper or magazine.

1063 words - 4 pages The notion of generating 'meaning' is indicative of the referent of a sign, the mental representation of an object or a word which is contained in our conceptual maps. They are the meanings which act at as a function of the denotations and connotations of subsequent signs, that is, they are subjective to concepts of myth and ideology . Though, the generation of meaning is most closely bound by the social constructs of language and culture as...

Communication: The Difference bewtween Men and Women

1108 words - 4 pages Communication is the basic way for human beings to connect with each other. In our daily lives tons of information are exchanging from one another. If you have notice, there are some differences during communication between men and women. Because of these differences, a nature-versus-nurture debate on the cause of these communicate differences had been occurred. In my point of view, both sides can cause these differences. Some expects propose...

Shortly after New Year's Eve, I sat in a Berlin airport, clutching my head. Around me a few other English EasyJetters waited, too, listening vaguely to the German voice coming over the loudspeaker. One of my bleary countrymen turned to another and said: "They sound like they're angry all the time, don't they? Speaking that language all day must do something to your brain."

The idea that the language you speak affects the way that you think sounds sort of obvious, one of those things you just assume. Speak French all day and you'll start thinking stylishly; speak Swedish all the time and start feeling really good about taxation. But what exactly is the relationship between what goes on in your head and the words you use? If, say, the Swedish didn't have a word for taxation (they do; it's beskattning), would they be able to conceive of it?

The principle of linguistic relativity is sometimes called the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, or Whorfianism, after the linguist who made it famous, Benjamin Lee Whorf. Put simply, Whorf believed that language influences thought. In his 1940 essay, Science and Linguistics, influenced by Einsteinian physics, Whorf described his "new principle of relativity, which holds that all observers are not led by the same physical evidence to the same picture of the universe, unless their linguistic backgrounds are similar". His research appeared to show that speakers of different kinds of language were, as a result of those language differences, cognitively different from one another.

Whorf's hypothesis is one of those slices of 20th-century thought that embedded itself right away in the culture and then underwent an interesting trajectory, falling in and out of academic favour ever since. Ever heard the one about the people who have "no concept of time"? Inuit words for snow? All Whorf.

The time-less people were the Hopi, a Native American tribe who live in north-eastern Arizona. Whorf claimed that they didn't have any words for time – no direct translation for the noun time itself, no grammatical constructions indicating the past or future – and therefore could not conceive of it. They experienced reality in a fundamentally different way. The idea fascinated people: Whorf's work became popular "knowledge" but his credibility waned from the 60s onward. By the mid-80s, linguist Ekkehart Milotki had published two enormous books in two languages discrediting the "time-less Hopi" idea.

Now, pronouncements like those made by Whorf and my airport companions make me instantly suspicious. If Whorf's theory sounds a little odd to you, a little politically incorrect, perhaps you're an anxious liberal like me; if you subscribe to it wholesale (sometimes called the "strong" version of the hypothesis), you are consigning people from different speaking communities to totally different inner lives. Which sounds, well, racist. The idea that people who speak some particular language are incapable of certain kinds of thought is instinctively distasteful.

From the very first, scientific testing of Whorf's hypothesis seemed to prove him wrong. His idea that people cannot conceive of realities for which they have no words just doesn't make sense: how would we ever learn anything if that were true? We aren't born with words for everything that we understand.

Whorf was of a different time: his research came out of older traditions of thinking about language that have lost cultural traction. In the 18th and 19th centuries, writers such as Wilhelm von Humboldt believed that a culture's language encapsulated its identity, to the extent that different languages represented totally distinct worldviews. The late 19th century was the heyday for the idea that white culture was objectively the best, so you can see how this kind of theory really caught on.

However, if you see Whorf as both coming out of but also very different from that kind of thought, he turns out to be a real progressive. As part of a wider American group of thinkers (alongside anthropologist Franz Boas and others) in the early 20th century, Whorf opposed the idea of biological difference between peoples. In emphasising cultural relativism, however, they emphasised the conditioned differences between them. Nowadays, it is hard to read any emphasis on human difference without a little side-eye – and quite right, too.

As linguists such as Noam Chomsky began to redefine what it meant to study human language, linguistics generally swung from Whorf-style relativist positions to a more universalist approach, in which scholars tried to discover the general principles of language. Since the 80s, however, investigations into linguistic relativity have flourished anew, but in a much more careful, subtle way.

The study of the relationship between language and colour perception is one of the most striking areas of this research, not least because human beings are all of the same species and thus see with the same eyes – differences in defining colour must be something else. In 1969, Brent Berlin and Paul Kay published their book, Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution, in which they argued that there were rules for how all people label colours: there are 11 basic colour categories and if there are fewer, they are added in a particular order (black and white, then black, white, and red, then black, white, red, and green or yellow).

Research supporting a relativist view includes studies of the way in which the Namibian Himba people label colour according to only five categories. The categories would be difficult for you to understand fully or reconstruct, in all probability: both zuzu and buru contain shades of blue, for example. This splitting up of shades into groups seems to affect how long it takes for a Himba person to tell the difference between colours that might look very different to you but that are labelled the same for them. (You can read more about the Himba in this study.)

The universalist and relativist schools of thought are no longer so clearly split from or opposed to each other and, we can but hope, ideology permeates academic research less and less. My bias against the principle of linguistic relativity is personal, influenced by my other general beliefs about the world. Linguistics is a subtle field growing ever subtler and it never does any good to assume.

Linguistic relativity is a subject that people will always be interested in, because it strikes right at the way we process the world and communicate with each other. I see people all the time on the subway in New York reading Guy Deutscher's lively book, Through the Language Glass: Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages. If you are looking for a more in-depth introduction to this topic than a Guardian article can provide, start there. If you are those guys who sat by me in the airport on the second of January, however, you need to take a hint from the Himba – you're seeing things in black and white.

0 thoughts on “Essay On Linguistic Relativity”

    -->

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *