Topic 3.
Language Thought Meaning Reality
Topic 3. Language Thought
Topic 3. Language
Meaning Reality Thought
Meaning Reality
Linguistic Relativity
Presentation prepared by Volha Hapeyeva
volha.hapeyeva@ehu.lt
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Historical overview
3. Definition
4. Empirical research. The case of color
5. Conclusion
6. Further reading
7. Bibliography
1. Introduction
One of the most debatable and controversial topics of Linguistics
is
how language relates to thought and reality.
CAN you ANSWER these QUESTIONS?
1) Are language and thinking independent processes?
2) Does the language you speak influence the way you
behave in your everyday life?
3) Or does it even determine your actions?
4) But what if we all share the same common language
patterns?
2. Historical Overview All cultures and
languages are equally
I see the
worth and must be
I question the primacy language and
preserved and learnt.
of thought to language thinking as
related
Johann Gottfried
Wilhelm von Franz Boas
von Herder
Humboldt (18581942)
(17441803)
(17671835)
2. Historical Overview
Language shapes the
The language is a symbolic
way we think, and
key to behavior, as human
determines what we
experience is interpreted
can think about.
mainly through the prism of a
certain language and is
revealed in the interrelation
of language and thought.
Edward Sapir Benjamin Lee Whorf
(18841939) (18971941)
3. Definition
though strictly
Thus we came to Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis speaking neither E.
Sapir nor B. Whorf
formulated it as such.
also known as the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis has two versions:
a weak version a strong version
the language influences the non- the language determines the non-
linguistic behavior and/or thoughts linguistic behavior and/or thoughts
4. Empirical research. The case of color
Empirical testing of the hypothesis was started by Brown and
Lennebergs study on colors in 1954.
Do the colors that exist in a language dictate
our perception of colors themselves?
The assumption was that easily named colors are more
memorable than the colors that have no names in a language.
Conclusion
The term Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis generally states that the way we speak (our
language) influences the way we think.
The idea of Linguistic Relativity is rather new, as it appeared in the Romantic period (the
end of 18thbeginning of the 19th cc.).
The main problem of linguistic relativity is that it was not stated in certain wording as a
theory, which makes it vulnerable to opponents. Nonetheless it provoked the debates that
promoted our understanding of language and thinking processes. It had a great impact on
other disciplines and served a foundation for creating new ones like feministic critique of
language and gender linguistics.
Further reading
1. Salzmann, Z. Language, Culture, and Society: An Introduction to Linguistic
Anthropology. - Westview Press; Fifth Edition, 2011, pp. 225-232, 251-256.
2.Duranti A. Linguistic Anthropology Cambridge Textbooks in Linguistics, 1997, pp. 62-
64.
3. Jourdan, C. Language, Culture, and Society. Key Topics in Linguistic Anthropology. -
Cambridge University Press, 2006. pp. 50-53.
Video
..., . - - http://www.
youtube.com/watch?v=vGfIIVDyiGQ (in Russian)
Bibliography
1.Boroditsky, L. (2001) Does Language Shape Thought?: Mandarin and English Speakers
Conceptions of Time. Cognitive Psychology 43(1): 122.
2. Carroll, John B. (ed.) (1956). "Introduction". Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected
Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, Mass.: Technology Press of Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. p 252.
3. Deutscher, G. (2011). Through the language glass. Why the world looks different in
other languages. Arrow books.
4. , (1996).
( . . . . - ., 1996. . 231291).
