Presented to: Prof . Dr. Muhammad Iqbal Butt

Presented by : Asma Iqbal Kayani

MPhil Linguistics,

NCBA , Gujrat (Pakistan)

Language , Culture & ThoughtThe Theory of Linguistic Relativity

(Whorfian Hypothesis)

He gave man speech, and speech created thought, Which is the measure of the universe'

(Prometheus Unbound, Shelley)

Language reflects the culture. However , language is part of the culture and it also constitutes the culture.

(Jin & Cortazzi,1998)There is neither a society without a

language nor a language without a society which uses it”

( Baylon & Fabre,1975)

The question of the relationship between language, ,thought and culture has been of great interest and inquiry.

Boas , Sapir for the first time threw light on this relationship: language expresses the thoughts ,beliefs and assumptions of a community ; hence language reflects ways of looking at the world and understanding reality.

kluckhohn (1944) believes that culture without language is unthinkable.

Language , culture & thought

Kramsch (1998) believes that language relates to the culture in three main complex ways:

Language

Expresses cultural Embodies cultural symbolizes cultural

Reality reality reality

to express ideas , beliefs language is inherently symbolizes ones

That are understood within creative , so is used in identity , symbolic

A specific cultural setting various ways with a guide to the

variety of possible meanings culture

language relates to culture in three ways

Plato and Aristotle language is only the outward form or expression of thought. the behaviorist J. B. Watson thought is language . thought is sub-vocal speech. “thinking aloud,” it is called speech; “speaking covertly,” is

thinking. language determines thought categories of thought are determined by linguistic categories. Theorists within this group are divided between those who think that language completely determines cognitive

categories and those who merely say that language strongly influences

cognitive categories.

Language and Thought

linguistic political

Language is a social term cultural historical

Sociolinguistics views language as a socio cultural phenomena.

Language : a socio cultural phenomena

Relationship b/w language and cultureClaims about this relationship:1.The structure of a language determines the

way in which speakers of that language view the world . The weaker version is that the structure does not determine the world view but is extremely influential in predisposing speakers of a language toward adopting a particular world-view.(associated with Sapir and Whorf)

2.The culture of a people find reflection in the language they employ.

3.There is a little or no relationship between language and culture.

Claim no. 1 is referred to as Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.

Sapir acknowledged close relationship between language and culture , claiming that it is of disposition i.e. you could not understand or appreciate the one without a knowledge of the other.

Whorf extended these ideas by claiming that this relationship is deterministic one i.e. the structure of a language determines the way its speakers view the world.

Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

A long-standing claim is that the structure of a language determines the way in which the speakers of that language view the world. This view is called Linguistic Determinism.

A somewhat weaker version is that the structure doesn’t determine the view but is still extremely influential in predisposing speakers of a language towards adopting a particular world-view. This view is called Linguistic Relativism.

Language and culture

“Our speech is based on our thoughts”i.e. language is dependent on thought.

“What one perceives is dependent on the spoken word”

i.e. thought is dependent on language.

Views on language and thought

Linguistic theory

Relation between language and thought

Mould Theories Cloak Theories

Language is a mould in language is a cloak

Terms of which thought conforming to the Categories are cast customary

categories of thought of its

speakersThe Sapir Whorf HypothesisThe general idea that differences in language

structure cause people to view the world differently

Relationship between language and thought

Whorfian claim: Translation between one language and

another is problematic as it is impossible to mean the same thing in two different ways.

Universalism’s claim: We can say whatever we want to say in any

language and translation is possible.

Whorfian perspective vs. Universalism

The Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis

Things make sense to humans through a mediator , language

Notion of linguistic relativity

German Scholars:Johann Herder(1744-1803)Humboldt()Different people speak different languages because they think differently.

USA scholars:Boas(1858-1942):language has a role in unconscious shaping & explaining concepts of culture and thoughtSapir(1884-1939):people see ,hear and experience as they do because the language habits of community predispose certain choices of interpretations.Whorf(1897-1941): language shapes cognition; that is, concepts and ways of thinking depend on language. People who speak significantly different languages, then, view the world differently.

the Whorf hypothesis was named after the early twentieth-century linguist Benjamin Whorf, who claimed that, because the Hopi language expressed statements about time in importantly dissimilar ways than other languages, the Hopi held a different conception of time than other peoples. Related to linguistic relativity is linguistic determinism, the view that language necessitates how one thinks (thinking outside the bounds of one's language is impossible).

Whorfian Hypothesis

This theory is presented by Whorf and is also known as Whorfian Hypothesis.

It holds that one’s language shapes one’s view of reality.

it represents language as a mould in terms of which thought categories are cast.

It states that thought is cast from language what you see is based on what you say.

The structure of one’s language influences the manner in which one perceives and understands the world

Therefore, speakers of different languages will perceive the world differently

Whorfian Hypothesis

Components of Whorfian theory

Whorfian hypothesis

Linguistic Determinism

Strong Determinis

m

Weak determinis

m

Linguistic Relativity

strong Whorfianism weak Whorfianism

Linguistic Determinism Linguistic Relativism

Language determines Language biases

our perception our perception of the world of the world

Degrees of Whorfianism

The claim is that language may determine our thinking patterns . It refers to the concept that what is said, has only some effect on how concepts are recognized by the mind.  This basic concept has been broken down even further into “strong” and “weak” determinism (The Sapir-Whorf Hypotheses, 2002, p.1

Linguistic Determinism

Strong Vs Weak DeterminismStrong Determinism

refers to a strict view that what is said is directly responsible for what is seen by the mind. 

So, In it language defines

one’s view of the world.

Weak Determinism

there is indeed some affect on perception of one’s language, but that this is not as clear as in strong determinism. 

So,In it language doesn’t

define one’s view of the world.

it can be defined: “distinctions encoded in one language are

unique to that language along,” and that “there is no limit to the structural diversity of languages” (The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, p.1). 

The claim is that different languages view the world differently.

This view of cognition can be more simply defined as meaning: the language which one is brought up in (socially exposed to and taught) is the language that that person will think and perceive the world in

Linguistic Relativity

The Sapir-Wharf Hypothesis very pragmatically presents how language does have an affect on thinking as

the first component of the theory, linguistic determination, makes sense when applied to reality.  In actual thought one does indeed perceive concepts and objects in accordance to the words used to describe them. (speak a word and different people will imagine different concepts for it)

the second component , linguistic relativity also makes sense(old homes example)

The theory gives the reason of why all languages do not translate to each other

Does theory make a sense?

1.Theoretical scope It is comprehensive as it includes the

possible factors of analysis for this theory.  Everything that is encoded and decoded and the language used by society and cultures used all are encompassed in this theory.

2.Appropriateness is also achieved by this theory.  The theory

expects that the language of a person has an affect on how he decodes and that encoding differs from language-to-language and cannot always be translated.  (a word would bring to different minds--different images, all because of the receiver’s different experiences with the word. )

Criteria for evaluation

3.The heuristic value the heuristic value of the hypothesis lies in

the fact  that one is motivated to do experiments to verify its validity. 

4. Validity this theory holds great value as  it

accomplishes correspondence validity because the theory is very observable and has been observed numerous times by certain people. 

CONT.

5. simple and logical It makes complete sense that one’s

atmosphere and culture will have an affect on their decoding. In research done by the authors of the theory, many Indian tribes do not have word for certain objects because they do not exist in their lives.  

6. Pragmatic point of view

Pragmatically the Hypothesis makes sense.  It has the potential to be used in describing a great many misunderstandings in everyday life. This notion of relativity, passes beyond dialect boundaries, and delves into the world of language--from county-to-country and consequently from mind-to-mind. 

CONT.

Theory is widely criticized by linguists and anthropologists especially in its strong determinism

on the following grounds:It is not easy to admit that human thoughts were

prisoners of the structure of languages. “Peoples’ thoughts and perceptions are not

determined by the words and structures of their language. We are not prisoners of our linguistic systems” ( Fromkin et al. 2007)

Again it is unreasonable to believe that speakers of a language would not understand thought of another language users because of the different structure of their language.

Criticism on Linguistic Determinism

Whorf and Sapir are themselves reported to have at times contradictory statements ,as sometimes they advocated the strong position of Linguistic determinism and at other times , they adopted the week version of it.

Whorf claimed “if between two different languages , one has many words for closely related objects while other has relatively limited vocabulary, the users of L1 should have perceptually characteristics of the objects e.g. Eskimo language has different words for snow but in English we have mostly one word.

BUT it doesn’t prove that English speaking people don’t have the ability to distinguish characteristics.

CONT.

Whorf claimed that each language has a unique system and thus cross-cultural understanding is impossible.

BUT we can notice that many languages exhibit a shared attitude

towards certain phenomena e.g. objects of fear, things of contempt etc.

features to distinguish family and relatives by seniority or biological bond.

Different languages may express same thought

CONT.

Hypothesis is self conflicting as it claims that language determines thought but also claims there is no limits to diversity of languages.

BUT scholars indicate that human thought is universal.

If language determines the world view there would be no class conscious because every member of the society would view the world same and think by the same thinking patterns.

If language determines thought ,people speaking different languages would never understand each other.

CONT.

Languages borrow words from each other fairly and frequently.

What about bilinguals who can express their ideas freely in two or more languages?

What about deaf and dump people who understand ,respond and do think without using language ,If language determines thought ?

CONT.

The Hypothesis presents a view of reality being expressed in language and thus forming in thought.  The principles outlined in it present a very pragmatic and even simple view of how one perceives.

Now a days the weak version of this theory is generally acknowledged but it needs further research and analysis.

Whorfian hypothesis highlights the interconnection of language and culture.

Language reflects cultural meaning ,choices and at the same time it can be understood in the light of its cultural context

but the question is still debatable:

thought then language or language then thought?

 

CONCLUSION

Whether it is language which governs thought and hence shapes the culture ,

or it is the culture which acts upon

language and conditions language use?

What do you think?

There can be no deny to the fact that language , culture and thought are significantly connected .

The relationship is not of ‘which’ determines ‘which’. It is also not a relation of cause and effect, but a relation of alliance and correspondence.

What do I think……..

Can we finalize it as…Langua

ge

ThoughtCulture