Difference between revisions of "Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis"
(Quotations from other sources cannot simply disappear into the text) |
(Trying to get closer to what Whorf actually said) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The '''Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis''' (also known as the "Whorfian hypothesis" and the "linguistic relativity hypothesis") is a [[linguistic]] theory that 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''' (also known as the "Whorfian hypothesis" and the "linguistic relativity hypothesis") is a [[linguistic]] theory that states that [[language]] is not merely a way of expressing ideas, but it is the mechanism that gives shape those ideas. | ||
| − | * "Whorf [was] appealing to the general educated audience of his day to become linguistically aware -- to realize to what extent the language you speak influences what and how you think." | + | Whorf wrote: |
| + | * ... observers are not led by the same physical evidence to the same picture of the universe, unless their linguistic backgrounds are similar ... | ||
| + | * From this fact proceeds what I have called the "linguistic relativity principle," which means, in informal terms, that users of markedly different grammars are pointed by their grammars toward different types of observations and different evaluations of externally similar acts of observation, and hence are not equivalent as observers but must arrive at somewhat different views of the world.<ref name=great>[http://www.enformy.com/dma-Chap7.htm The Great Whorf Hypothesis Hoax]</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | Others said: | ||
| + | |||
| + | * "Whorf [was] appealing to the general educated audience of his day to become linguistically aware -- to realize to what extent the language you speak influences what and how you think."<ref name=great /> | ||
* "In truth, it is widely accepted by ethnolinguists that culture affects language, but it is controversial as to whether or not language affects culture."<ref>"Benjamin Whorf," New World Encyclopedia, http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Benjamin_Whorf?oldid=795326 (accessed February 25, 2009). </ref> | * "In truth, it is widely accepted by ethnolinguists that culture affects language, but it is controversial as to whether or not language affects culture."<ref>"Benjamin Whorf," New World Encyclopedia, http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Benjamin_Whorf?oldid=795326 (accessed February 25, 2009). </ref> | ||
Revision as of 13:28, February 26, 2009
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (also known as the "Whorfian hypothesis" and the "linguistic relativity hypothesis") is a linguistic theory that states that language is not merely a way of expressing ideas, but it is the mechanism that gives shape those ideas.
Whorf wrote:
- ... observers are not led by the same physical evidence to the same picture of the universe, unless their linguistic backgrounds are similar ...
- From this fact proceeds what I have called the "linguistic relativity principle," which means, in informal terms, that users of markedly different grammars are pointed by their grammars toward different types of observations and different evaluations of externally similar acts of observation, and hence are not equivalent as observers but must arrive at somewhat different views of the world.[1]
Others said:
- "Whorf [was] appealing to the general educated audience of his day to become linguistically aware -- to realize to what extent the language you speak influences what and how you think."[1]
- "In truth, it is widely accepted by ethnolinguists that culture affects language, but it is controversial as to whether or not language affects culture."[2]
It was formulated by Benjamin Lee Whorf, a student - and later colleague of - Edward Sapir, who stated during the 1930's that:[3]
| “ | We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages. The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds - and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds. We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way - an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language. The agreement is, of course, an implicit and unstated one, but its terms are absolutely obligatory; we cannot talk at all except by subscribing to the organization and classification of data which the agreement decrees. (Emphasis the author's own) | ” |
"Sapir believed that language shapes human perception and directs human behavior. From his view, understanding a culture was impossible without understanding the historical development of that culture’s language."[4] An example of Sapir's beliefs can be found in George Orwell's book "1984". Here, "Newspeak" has been created to alter the way people thought about the government. The new vocabulary was a method of mind control, since the population could not think of things that were not included in the vocabulary. In essence, they were prisoners of their own language.
Theories
There are two opposing theories regarding the the relationship between language and thought. These are referred to as "mould theories" and "cloak theories". Mould theories see language as a "mould", used to cast various thought categories. Cloak theories, by contrast, represent the view that language is a "cloak" that conforms to the customary thought categories of a language's speakers. However, behaviourists believe that language and thought are identical and that thinking is entirely linguistic. Non-verbal thought does not exist and there is no translation from thought to language.[5]
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis is a mould theory of language and consists of two associated principles. These are "linguistic determinism", which states that our language determines our thinking, and "linguistic relativity", which states that people who speak different languages perceive and think about the world quite differently.
This hypothesis contradicts the cloak theory, which believes that language is simply the appearance of thought.
Whorf believed wholeheartedly in "linguistic determinism"; in other words, what one thinks is determined by their language and he also supported "linguistic relativity", which states that the differences in language reflect the different views of different people.
An example of this is the studies Whorf did on the Hopi language. He studied a Hopi speaker who lived in New York city near Whorf. based on the fact that Hopi speakers do not include tenses in their native tongue, he concluded that they therefore must have a different sense of time than other groups of people.
However, recently further studies of the Hopi language have revealed that although the Hopi do not include references to the past, present or future in their grammar, they do, in fact, have two other tenses, "manifested" and "becoming manifested". Manifested includes all that physically is and ever has been, which includes such things as the senses and concrete items. Becoming manifested includes anything which is not physical, has no definite origin and cannot be perceived with the senses.
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.[6]
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 The Great Whorf Hypothesis Hoax
- ↑ "Benjamin Whorf," New World Encyclopedia, http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Benjamin_Whorf?oldid=795326 (accessed February 25, 2009).
- ↑ Whorf, Benjamin; Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (John Carroll, Editor) ; 1956; MIT Press; pp 213-14.
- ↑ "Edward Sapir," New World Encyclopedia, (accessed February 25, 2009).
- ↑ Bruner, J. S., J. S. Goodnow & G. A. Austin ([1956] 1962): A Study of Thinking. New York: Wiley
- ↑ http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/cultural/language/whorf.html
