4,336
edits
Changes
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (view source)
Revision as of 16:05, February 26, 2009
, 16:05, February 26, 2009no edit summary
The '''Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis''' states that [[language]] is not merely a way of expressing ideas, but it is the mechanism that gives shape those ideas.
The '''Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis''' states that [[language]] is not merely a way of expressing ideas, but it is the mechanism that gives shape those ideas.
It is a [[linguistic]] theory also known as the "Whorfian hypothesis" and the "linguistic relativity hypothesis").
It is a [[linguistic]] theory also known as the "Whorfian hypothesis" and the "linguistic relativity hypothesis").
Although it is named for Edward Sapir and Benjiman Whorf, it is unclear whether either man had anything to do with its formulation. Some sources said it was named after them incorrectly.
Although it is named for Edward Sapir and Benjiman Whorf, it is unclear whether either man had anything to do with its formulation. Some sources said it was named after them incorrectly. Edward Sapir studied the research of Wilhelm von Humboldt, whose own linguistic theories, published in "Über das vergleichende Sprachstudium" ("On the comparative study of languages") in 1836, focussed on a strong version of linguistic determinism, saying "Man lives in the world about him principally, indeed exclusively, as language presents it to him." Sapir took this idea and built on it to a lesser degree, clearly stating that there is clearly a connection between language and thought. The trail of influence could, however, be traced back to [[Franz Boaz]], considered to be the founder of anthropology in the United States, and under whom Sapir was an outstanding student.
Whorf wrote:
Whorf wrote:
Hopi verbs are always expressed within terms of these two tenses. In this way, the Hopi do include some aspect of time, but in a different way than a native English speaker would recognize. The biggest limitation of Whorf's research was that he focussed on the language of one individual, outside of his native environment, rather than studying the entire Hopi community.<ref>http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural/language/whorf.html</ref>
Hopi verbs are always expressed within terms of these two tenses. In this way, the Hopi do include some aspect of time, but in a different way than a native English speaker would recognize. The biggest limitation of Whorf's research was that he focussed on the language of one individual, outside of his native environment, rather than studying the entire Hopi community.<ref>http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural/language/whorf.html</ref>
Few linguists today would accept the pure form of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, yet may find some resonance in a more moderate take on the theory. The "pure" and "moderate" forms differ in that the pure form places the emphasis on the potential for thinking to be influenced rather than determined by language and that it is a two-way process, in other words, "the kind of language we use is also influenced by the way we see the world."
There is some middle ground to be found in moderate form of both. For example, there are languages with words for things that other languages do not have. A good example is the Neuer people of [[Sudan]], who have more than 400 words to describe cattle. Each word indicates differences in colour, size, body shape and the shape of the horns. Just because we do not have a word with the same meaning, does not imply that we cannot comprehend what the word is - and it can be counter-argued against Sapir-Whorf that simply by being able to comprehend the word, we can indeed the see world through that speaker's eyes. <ref>http://www.psy.dmu.ac.uk/cgi-bin/412/9900psyc1011.pl?read=42</ref>
==References==
==References==