Culture

1
Culture Language (1)
Group 1
Final Report
2
Job Distribution
3
QIs it true that the language I speak shapes my
thoughts?
Jerome Bruner
Benjamin Whorf
Lev Semenovich Vygotsky
4

• ?The related representatives and the theories
• (?) Lev Semenovich Vygotsky
• Reference book Principle of Language Learning
  and Teaching
• Main content
• The Social interaction, through language, is a
  prerequisite to
• cognitive development. Thought and language were
  seen as
• two distinct cognitive operations that grow
  together. Moreover,
• every child reaches his or her potential
  development, in part,
• through social interaction with adults and peers.
  Vygotskys
• zone of proximal development is the distance
  between a childs
• actual cognitive capacity and the level of
  potential development
• (Vygotsky 1962,1978).

5

• B. Reference web
• http//www-personal.une.edu.au/lgrunwa2/une/p
  sychology_theory/180notesvygotski.html
• Main content
• Language is the crucial tool in determining how a
  child will learn,
• advanced modes of thought are transmitted to a
  child through
• words. Therefore Vygotsky argues that the tools,
  language and
• social structure of the culture into which a
  child is born will affect
• the learning that takes place. Cognitive
  development is not so
• much the unfolding of schema within the
  individual but more
• understanding of the self within the social
  context.

6
The Zone of Proximal Development. Parents ,
teachers and peers interact with the child and
mediate learning through socially organized
instruction. The task of teaching is particularly
complex, because to be effective the teacher
needs to understand the social dynamics as well
as the individual differences in each student and
the teacher need to understand their own teaching
style to ensure that learning is being
facilitated. Zone of Proximal Development is seen
as the potential of the child to solve problems
(according to their developmental level) and the
level of potential development in regards to the
guidance by more knowledgeable peers or adults.
Learners ultimately appropriate and internalize
the knowledge transacted through assisted
performance so that it becomes their own. There
needs to be structure and support in place to
enable a child to grasp concepts, when the child
has developed confidence and is independent this
frame work can be removed (This is referred to as
scaffold instruction)
7

• (?) Benjamin Whorf 1897 - 1941
• Reference book Principle of Language Learning
  and Teaching
• Main content
• One of the champions of the position that
  language affects thought was Benjamin Whorf, who
  with Edward
• Spair formed the well-known Spair-Whorf
  hypothesis of
• linguistic relativity-namely, that each
  language imposes
• on its speaker a particular world view.

8
B. Reference web http//www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/in
formation/biography/uvwxyz/whorf_benjamin.html M
ain content The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis It is
generally accepted by Ethno linguists that
culture influences language but there is far less
agreement about the possibility that language
influences culture. Edward Sapir and his student,
Benjamin Whorf, suggested that language affects
how people perceive their reality, that language
coerces thought. This is known as the Sapir-Whorf
Hypothesis. Simply stated, the Sapir-Whorf
Hypothesis says that the content of a language is
directly related to the content of a culture and
the structure of a language is directly related
to the structure of a culture.
9

• (?) Jerome Bruner (1966) words shape concepts
• Reference web
• http//tiger.towson.edu/alobac1/301/theory.htmje
  rome
• Main content
• Bruner was very interested in children's stages
  of cognitive development.He described development
  in three stages
• The enactive stage (birth to about age 3) is when
  children
• perceive the environment through actions that
  they
• initiate.  Showing and modeling have the most
  learning
• value at this stage.  

10
2.The iconic stage (about age 3-8) is when
children are able to remember and use
information through imagery.  Their visual
memory increases at this stage and children are
able to imagine things without actually
experiencing them. 3.The symbolic stage (about
age 8) children have the ability to think and
talk about things in abstract terms.  They
have a better understanding on mathematical
principles and the use of symbols and the use
of symbolic idioms.  Bruner was very concerned
with the idea of discovery learning and felt that
students were more likely to understand concepts
they had discovered through their own exploration
and experience.  
11
What is Language? "Language is a purely human
and non-instinctive method of communicating
ideas, emotions and desires by means of
voluntarily produced symbols." (Edward Sapir,
1921) "A language is a system of arbitrary vocal
symbols by means of which the members of a
society interact in terms of their total
culture."  (G. Trager, 1949) A language is "a
set (finite or infinite) of sentences, each
finite in length and constructed out of a
finite set of elements. (Noam Chomsky 1957)
12
Language is "the institution whereby humans
communicate and interact with each other by
means of habitually used oral-auditor arbitrary
symbols." (R.A. Hall 1964 ) "Language is a range
of possibilities, an open-ended set of options in
behavior that are available to the individual in
his existence as social man. The context of
culture is the environment of any particular
selection that is made from within them ... The
context of culture defines the potential, the
range of possibilities that are open. The actual
choice among these possibilities takes place
within a given context of situation."(Michael
Halliday. 1973)
13
Language is one of the most important areas of
human development. Our communication skills set
us apart from the rest of the animal kingdom, and
they're also what brings us together with each
other . Throughout history, many have reflected
on the importance of language. For instance, the
scholar Benjamin Whorf has noted that language
shapes thoughts and emotions, determining ones
perception of reality. For the linguist Edward
Sapir, language is not only a vehicle for the
expression of thoughts, perceptions, sentiments,
and values characteristic of a community it also
represents a fundamental expression of social
identity. Sapir said "the mere fact of a common
speech serves as a peculiar potent symbol of the
social solidarity of those who speak the
language." In short, language retention helps
maintain feelings of cultural kinship.
14
A word is one or more sounds that in combination
have a specific meaning assigned by a language. 
The symbolic meaning of words can be so powerful
that people are willing to risk their lives for
them or take the lives of othersLanguage and
speech are not the same thing.  Speech is a
broad term simply referring to patterned verbal
behavior.  In contrast, a language is a set of
rules for generating speech.  Over the last few
centuries, deaf people have developed sign
languages that are complex visual-gestural forms
of communicating with each other.  Since they are
effective communication systems with standardized
rules, they also must be considered languages in
their own right even though they are not spoken.
15
Linguists estimate that there are about
5,000-6,000 different languages spoken in the
world today.  The imprecision in this estimate is
largely due to the fact that some dialects are in
the process of diverging and it is not clear that
they have reached the stage of being separate
languages.  If two people find each other's
speech unintelligible, they are usually thought
to be speaking different languages rather than
dialects. ( Please kindly take a look at
chart below )
16
(No Transcript)
17
Note If the 15 major variants of Arabic are
considered one language, Arabic is the 6th most
common language in the world having
198-201,000,000 native speakers withsubstantial
numbers in at least 46 countries. Source  
Ethnologue Volume I Languages of the World, 14th
ed. (2000). These
statistics are only rough approximations in most
cases.
18
???Individual Reflection NO, I dont think
so. In my opinion, language interacts
simultaneously with thoughts and feelings.
Additionally, I think that every theory has its
advantages, so I collected the related
representatives and the theories to solve this
chicken-and egg question. After reading these
related theories, I realize that language and
thought of human are affected by the different
ages, environments, cultures, and educations
therefore, I apply the advantages of these
theories and my previous knowledge to prove my
opinion. First, according to Vygotskys
view, he thinks that thought and language were
seen as two distinct cognitive operations that
grow together. Thus, I think thought and
language are interactive in the cognitive
development.
19
Second, according to Vygotskys ZPD (Zone
of Proximal Development), children are through
the social interaction with adults and peers to
reach the their potential development.
Consequently, the Vygotskys view shows that the
relationship of language and thought is
interdependent. Third, according to the
Spair-Whorf hypothesis, I know that we can learn
the different world views when we learn the
foreign languages. Furthermore, the Sapir-Whorf
Hypothesis says that the content of a language is
directly related to the content of a culture and
the structure of a language is directly related
to the structure of a culture. Accordingly, the
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis confirms that language and
thought have the mutual influenceable
relationships.
20
Fourth, in Audio-Lingual Method, culture
consists of the everyday behavior and lifestyle
of the target language speakers. Obviously,
learning languages affects our thought and
culture. Additionally, in the languagefour
skills, reading and listening are the interactive
process because they are the receptive language
and the productive language therefore, listening
and reading are developed on the language and
thought at the same time. Fifth, according
to the Jerome Bruners view, children have the
ability to think and talk about things in
abstract terms. They have a better understanding
on mathematical principles and the use of symbols
and the use of symbolic idioms.  Hence, children
have ability to think and to use language symbol
on their suitable developing stage. After
integrating these related points, I think that
language interacts simultaneously with thoughts.
21
???Individual Reflection "Language is the dress
of thought," is the famous statement of Samuel
Johnson, who was only translating the words of
the Roman Quintillion. If what you wear reflects
what you are, then your style of speech indicates
your thinking. Most of us today have been formed
from the time we were young in the school of
casualness and practicality. There is a natural
tendency to reject formalities and embrace the
vulgar, to revolt against the manners and speech
of a genteel society in favor of a more relaxed
and casual attitude and way of being. Within
linguistic theory, two extreme positions
concerning the relationship between language and
thought are commonly referred to as mould
theories, and cloak theories'. Mould theories
represent language as a mould in terms of which
thought categories are cast. Cloak theories
represent the view that language is a cloak
conforming to the customary categories of thought
of its speakers.
22
The Sapir-Whorf theory, named after the American
linguists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf, is
a mould theory of language. Moderate Whorfianism
differs from extreme Whorfianism in these ways
?The emphasis is on the potential for thinking
to be 'influenced rather than unavoidably
'determined' by language ? It is a two-way
process, so that 'the kind of language we
use' is also influenced by 'the way we see the
world' ? Any influence is ascribed not to
'Language' as such or to one language compared
with another, but to the use within a language
of one variety rather than another (typically
a sociolect - the language used primarily by
members of a particular social group) ? Emphasis
is given to the social context of language use
rather than to purely linguistic considerations,
such as the social pressure in particular
contexts to use language in one way rather
than another.
23
I do not agree with B. L.Whorf what I think is
that, differences in languages and societys
cultural background are related and have their
own ways to express their thoughts but it doesnt
mean that language could change peoples thoughts
and worldview. The first main point to decide
that peoples thoughts is being in the society,
nowadays, people have their economic state to
form the social group and rank, thus become
varieties worldview. If the language did change
these, then capitalist, bourgeois and laborer are
no different and will have no industrial disputes
at all. The major theme of Vygotsky's
theoretical framework is that social interaction
plays a fundamental role in the development of
cognition. Vygotsky states "Every function in
the child's cultural development appears twice
first, on the social level, and later, on the
individual level first, between people and then
inside the child. This applies equally to
voluntary attention, to logical memory, and to
the formation of concepts. All the higher
functions originate as actual relationships
between individuals.
24
A second aspect of Vygotsky's theory is the idea
that the potential for cognitive development
depends upon the "zone of proximal development"
(ZPD) a level of development attained when
children engage in social behavior. Full
development of the ZPD depends upon full social
interaction. The range of skill that can be
developed with adult guidance or peer
collaboration exceeds what can be attained alone.
Initially, this behavior begins as a meaningless
grasping motion however, as people react to the
gesture, it becomes a movement that has meaning.
In particular, the pointing gesture represents an
interpersonal connection between individuals. His
principles are 1. Cognitive development is
limited to a certain range at any given age. 2.
Full cognitive development requires social
interaction.
25
Through the chimpanzee and infant childs
experiment they are similar to each other and
have two stages- pre-language and
pre-thought, that is language and thought are
not produced at the same time, thought comes
first then language. This is much more objective
reality, but Vygotsky did not reveal the
intrinsic quality of language and thought
relationship and thats why we continue with this
discussion. However, I tend to lean toward this
theory, but why Vygosky cant answer further
about the question As the contained languages
thought does not include all though in form, why
not? Linguists J.Foder, Z.Pylyshyn, and
B.Mclaughlin have another hypothesis, that is
language as LOT (means thought language sort)
form and appear in our brain. The subject matter
is
26
1. Faith and other attentions exist in the
brains mental and physical surface features, and
they are the reason why we are concerned about
the appearance of actions. 2. These intention
status and intention object have similar
organization structure. Many theories have their
individual advantages and disadvantages, much of
the time, we do think in language, and can easily
conjure up mental images and sensations that
would be hard to describe in words. Also we can
think about the sound of a symphony, the shape of
a pear, or the smell of garlic bread. None of
these thoughts require language. So, it's
possible to think about something even if I don't
have a word for it? Yes. Take colors, for
example. There are an infinite number of
different colors, and they don't all have their
own names. In other words, the influence of
language isn't so much on what we can think
about, or even what we do think about, but rather
on how we break up reality into categories and
label them. And in this, our language and our
thoughts are probably both greatly influenced by
our culture.  Learning a different language won't
change the way I think? Not really, but if the
new language is very different from your own, it
may give you some insight into another culture
and another way of life. These are my opinions
about the questions, though I do believe its an
old chicken-and egg one. Reference
Website http//www.lsadc.org/faq/index.php?aaafa
qthink.htm http//www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Sprin
g_2002/ling001/thought.html http//orvillejenkins.
com/worldview/worldvthink.html http//www.webcom.c
om/bamboo/chinese/chinese.html
27

• ?? ? Individual Reflection
• Basically, in my opinion Language and
  Thoughts are usually interactive between each
  other.
• Language is the one method in our life to
  express our feeling and is one of the ways that
  we can ask the things that what we needs. Does
  the language come first, or the thoughts bounce
  up in our mind first? To discuss on this topic,
  we ought to find some clues out in the first
  place.
• For nowadays, there are some words that youth
  usually used in their life, such as
• You are so ??! It means you are always
  critical things, sometimes no matter whether you
  know the things or not, you are always say the
  wrong things in the wrong times to people, you
  say things directly but without thinking all the
  times.

28

• ??! It means you are always different
  between others, it can be the different logic
  thinking, or maybe to show in your speech,
  actions, thoughts, or even in your wearing styles
  something.
• ???E?????! The E means E-mail
  something to friends.
• Above examples are to express something
  that are not the same meaning as before anymore,
  and to express some feeling but not the words
  meaning. The thought wont be changed when using
  different language.
• Okay, now lets to study why it happened in our
  youth persons life. In case, there has no any
  needs to their life, then they dont need to
  invent the words to say something, and then we
  dont need any language to express the need. On
  the contrary, whenever people want to say
  something in thought, then certainly they need
  the external language to express their internal
  real thinking. To find new words that they can
  use in language would be the first mission in
  life. So that I think the Thought should be
  come out before the Language, therefore, upon
  the ways we can say the Language cant shape the
  Thought.

29

• A lot of parents even for the teachers, now,
  for the sake of join the youths life, perhaps
  sometimes would try to learn their language
  first, and learn their life styles and even to
  learn some their new words, to use youths words
  in life all the time when they company with them.
  Not only to learn the language of youth, but also
  through the language to negotiate with young
  people, it will make things more smooth going,
  its works than ever. It has some benefits in
  understand to the youths thoughts, maybe to
  learn their thinking logic will
• easier than to understand their language.
  So that I think the language should be one kind
  of tools, but not the only way to understand
  their thoughts, because
• thoughts are always can not be shaped,
  and language can be varied all the time. The
  conclusion of mine, I believe the language should
  be used in life, but anyhow the thoughts should
  be the point for that what we are thinking, and
  the last to concern about what does the word
  meaning in life exactly.

30

• ?? ? Individual Reflection
• There are grounds of thinking that about this
  question, but most of them are at the stance of
  objection. Whorfs hypothesis is too strong and
  too extreme to accept by most linguists. What is
  thought? It refers to the formulation of our
  thinking. And what is language? It is the
  Communication of thoughts and feelings through a
  system of arbitrary signals, such as voice
  sounds, gestures, or written symbols. In this
  sense, the language acts as a kind of expression
  or cloak of our thought. How can we discover the
  relation between language and thought? In order
  to convey my view on this debatable question, I
  try to find a newly invented linguistic item to
  reveal the process of the forming of langue and
  thought.

31

• In order to transmit the spirit of anarchy,
  one Japanese writer invented the term Chindogu to
  represent some un-useless daily gadgets as you
  can see attaching at the end of my essay. They
  represent freedom of thought and action the
  freedom to challenge the suffocating historical
  dominance of conservative utility the freedom to
  be (almost) useless. Analyzing the process, it is
  obvious that Chindogu is the dress of the thought
  of freedom within the domain of gadgets
  invention.
• But it is not the final round of this term.
  Surfing the website, I found that are recruiting
  new membership to on the Internet to enhance and
  promote their the spirit of Chindogu. They argued
  that Chindogu is not totally useless, it is just
  un-useless. Clarifying the idea of Chindogu,
  there must group of people who will try to invent
  their own Chindogu. That is how this term affects
  their thought.
• Now, I am trying to relate the idea of
  Chindogu with my own life experience, and I find
  it is true in sometimes, we may think of some
  kinds of idea that we thought that it is useful
  and finally it turned out to be useless, but we
  do experience the process that is kind of absurd.
  

32

• On the bases of argument with my partners, I
  agree with the point of that the potential for
  thinking to be 'influenced' rather than
  unavoidably 'determined' by language. It is a
  two-way process, so that 'the kind of language we
  use' is also influenced by 'the way we see the
  world'. And here, I would like to exemplify the
  view from the point of pragmatic that is widely
  accepted. Young generation in Taiwan like to say
  ?A???,?????Why do we use jargon, slang, or kind
  of style in our communication? Why we do not
  accept or dislike people who use foul language?
  The answer for these questions is mostly about
  social group identity, for in our life under
  certain culture background, the criterion for
  right or wrong, proper or improper has been
  defined and conveyed through languages before we
  experience it.
• We know the do and the donts in our life.
  That is how the language affects us in a certain
  degree on accounts of social linguistic point.
  Any influence is ascribed not to 'Language' as
  such or to one language compared with another,
  but to the use within a language of one variety
  rather than another (typically a sociolect - the
  language used primarily by members of a
  particular social group)

33

• Emphasis is given to the social context of
  language use rather than to purely linguistic
  considerations, such as the social pressure in
  particular contexts to use language in one way
  rather than another.
• The assertion about language determinism is
  dangerous in some ways. Observing the origin of
  language, we can get the conclusion that language
  is the product and media of our thought, but it
  does influence our thought in a certain degree.
  These two ideas interact for thousands of years.
  Language originated from our thought, and
  language does affect our thought in many ways
  from the sense of social linguistic.
• Reference website
• http//www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/short/whorf.
  html
• http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chindogu
• http//www.pitt.edu/ctnst3/chindogu.html
• http//www.pitt.edu/ctnst3/chindogu/tenents.html

34
?Testy Individual Reflection The
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis has changed the way many
people look at the relationship between language,
thought and cultural perception of reality. It
has influenced many scholars and opened up large
areas of study. While many like Edward Sapir and
Benjamin Whorf support the notion that language
strongly influences thought and others argue that
language does not influence thought, the evidence
from research indicates that language does
influence thought and perception of reality to a
degree but language does not govern thought or
reality . Language is a fundamental
component of the human experience and due to its
specific properties, is one aspect that makes
human beings unique in comparison to other
animals and species . It allows us to turn our
thoughts into meaningful words . If one asks
about the relation between thought and language,
people expect the issue to concern such matters
as whether we think in language, whether
creatures without language can "think", and the
way language shapes our concepts.
35
In my point of view, there is a much deeper
question, which concerns the nature of linguistic
communication. Philosophers and linguists
standardly conceive of language as basically a
means by which speakers convey the content of
their thoughts to others. The question is whether
that is a correct picture of linguistic
communication. This is a question about the
relation between thought and language because
this standard picture of communication gives
propositional thought a certain priority over
language. According to some research ,
At around age five, the focus on language
changes from acquiring and producing words,
phrases, and sentences, to actually thinking
about language itself . During this time of
metalinguistic awareness, we begin to play
with language ( such as making jokes ),
recognize sarcasm, and understand double meanings
. Clearly, language expresses thought, but can
language influence thought ? .
36
Indeed, semantic slanting and name-calling are
two concepts of language that have noticeable
effects on individual thought and behavior . As
would follow from such a perspective, different
communities of humans, speaking different
languages, would think differently to just the
extent that languages differ from one
another. The idea of linguistic relativity
is that having language, or having a particular
language, crucially shapes mental life. Indeed,
it may not just be that a specific language
exerts its idiosyncratic effects as we speak or
listen to it that language might come to be
our thought we may have no way to think many
thoughts, conceptualize many of our ideas,
without this language, or outside of and
independent of thislanguage. So I do
believe that in one sense, it is obvious that
language use has powerful and specific effects on
thought . But at the same time , I also think
that Thoughts are not determined by our
language , but they may be constrained by our
language .
37
A New Language Means New Thoughts.Is it true
..? Do you speak any other languages ?
Maybe you've considered how good it would feel to
be able to speak to people in another language,
but did you know it also expands the range of
your possible thoughts ? I personally think It's
true. There are concepts in each language that
don't exist in others, as well as different
expressions. These can give you new ways to
think, and change your perspective on things.
But I think it should be remembered that
language follows thought, is built up as an
expression of thought, and this is especially
true of philosophical terms. When Aristotle laid
down the ways in which the mind thinks about
things, it is true that he could not get away
from language as the medium of thought, but the
language follows thought and thought follows
things .
38
In another thoughts , I have another questions ,
Does language shape our thoughts, or is it the
other way around ? The linguist
Benjamin Whorf was one of the first to state
that thought is determined by the language we
use, and thus different cultures, since they are
linguistically different, will think in different
ways. For instance, in German there are a number
of words for on an, im, auf, um. A Whorfian
linguist would say that Germans make fine
distinctions about the placing of objects, but
English speakers do not, and therefore we are
unable to think about "on" in the same way. It
seemed proof that how we speak does indeed alter
how we think about the world. It clearly had
shown that environment alters our awareness of
space, and language is merely used to describe
the situation . Think about it ..
How do you think ..? Do you think in English or
Chinese ? or do you think in some abstract
terms , then translate your thoughts into
language when you want to express them ..?? .
language is not an after thought. Language is
not just what we use to describe thoughts .
Language not just limits our expressions . But Is
it shapes our thoughts ..?? Is it defines our
thoughts ..?? According to mer personal
view and opinion , I think its true , Language
shapes our thoughts ..Language defines our
thoughts..!!
39
Why..?? Well, here is my reason , during our
growth , we practice our language and we sharpen
our thoughts . The more practice we get , the
more efficient we become at wielding our language
/ thoughts . ( Most of this practicing is done at
early ages , without our own realization ) .
When you learn a new language , your ultimate
goal mostly is likely to eventually be able to
think in that language . But how good can you
achieve that goal ..? ( and how good are you in
your mother tounge ..anyway.. ? ) Most likely you
will get enough practice in everyday language use
. But do you get anough practice in exploring
your thoughts ..?? Do you intentionally practice
it ..? If you dont become good at thinking in
the new language , and you abandon thinking in
your mother tounge , how would you think
..?? Its just my personal point of view ,
everyone has their own rights to express their
idea on this issue , so come just come to think
of it. , If language shapes our thoughts , is
there any difference in capability of different
language..?? Are some languages inferior to
others is the best language for thinking..??
40
Language is one of the lenses, or prisons as I
call them, from which we view the world.  It is
one of the interpitave functions, inside of our
head . In case You ask me to decribe the taste
of a strawberry or the feeling of pain?  How
could you ask me without language.  How can you
say you are in pain without the word/idea of pain
being inside your vocabulary . Now what type of
pain are you talking about?  Physical ? , Mental
? , Emotional ?  Is it sharp or dull ?  What has
caused this pain ? .  By using language one can
get an idea and express it into a thoughts .
Language helps make relations between ideas.
 That is why analogies are so powerful. As Orwell
described in 1984 , He who controls the
language , controls peoples thoughts ,
After all , if the language does not enable you
to think in certain way , you wont be able to ..
41
Statements to the same or related effect to the
subject from diverse intellectual sources 1.
The limits of my language are the limits of my
world ( By Wittgenstein, 1922 and The
fact of the matter is that the 'real world is
to a large extent unconsciously built upon the
language habits of the group ( By Sapir,
1941, as cited in Whorf, 1956, p. 75 ). 2.
Language is a mirror of mind in a deep and
significant sense. It is a product of human
intelligence ... By studying the properties of
natural languages, their structure, organization,
and use, we may hope to learn something about
human nature something significant, if it is
true that human cognitive capacity is the truly
distinctive and most remarkable characteristic of
the species. (Chomsky, 1975, p. 4)
42
3. Contrary to these common beliefs among
philosophers concerning language, a well-known
German scholar and diplomat from the 18th
century, Wilhelm von Humboldt equated ,
Language and Thought as inseparable, as language
completely determining thought , in a
hypothesis known as the Weltanschauung ( world
view ) hypothesis ( Brown, 1968 ). Humboldt also
emphasized profound semantic differences
between languages which lead to varying
cognitive perspectives, an idea commonly known
as cultural relativity ( Wierzbika, 3 ).
Although little attention was given to this
extreme view at the time, this same idea drew
much interest and criticism in the 1930s in the
emergence of a hypothesis known as the
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis ( Linguistic Relativity
) . My Website Reference that related
to support my Opinion http//www.unc.edu/jdu
mas/projects/languagethought.htm http//host.uniro
ma3.it/progetti/kant/field/lat.htm http//www.thym
os.com/science/language.html http//www.newscienti
st.com/article.ns?iddn6303 http//www.ttt.org/lin
glinks/StacyPhipps.htm http//www.lsadc.org/faq/in
dex.php?aaafaqthink.htm
43
????s Individual Reflection When I first saw
the title, I had no idea at all, because I had
never thought about what language could do with
thought. I always thought that language is only
a tool for people to communicate with each other,
to express their ideas. I had never thought it
in the other way. Can the language we speak
shapes our thoughts? Its interesting and also a
good topic for debating. Just like all
debates, there is no certain answer before people
debate. Therefore, we need to identify the
question, collect information, and then decide
either against or for the argument. First, we
need to know why Benjamin Lee Whorf thinks that
languages can shape peoples thoughts. He was
conducted by E Sapir when studying at Yale
University he was influenced by E. Sapir, and
their research and studies. At that time, he
made many researches about English and American
Indian languages. They believe that they way
people behave is based on the language they
speak. Because different languages make the ways
of recognizing differently, different group of
people have different world-view. This is called
Sapir-Whorf-Hypothesis.
44
It sounds correct, but is language the only
factor that influences peoples thought? I am
afraid no body will agree with it totally.
Family, education, learning experience, social
relationships, religion, etc. can all effects our
thinking and its really hard to proof
Sapir-Whorf-Hypothesis scientifically.
Therefore, this hypothesis is not accepted
completely. Meanwhile, there are other scholars
believe that language is external of thought and
thought is internal of language. From this point
of view, language and thought are almost the
same. When we are thinking something, there are
always sounds or sentences across our mind. For
example, when people are angry with their parents
or boss, they dont usually swear in front of
them but those swear words do appear in their
mind. It sounds correct but it cant be applied
on the deaf or mute. At present, the most
popular hypothesis at this topic is brought out
by Lev Semenovich Vygotsky. He believes that
cognitive ability develops earlier than language
ability, but thoughts development can be hold by
the language. According to what he said,
children have feelings and thought before they
can speak, which is very true. The adults and
peer around them will influence the way they
think. Therefore, he thinks it should be the
thought affecting our language. Another example
is, nowadays, new words are created everyday. Do
people have the words first then they have the
thought? Or they have the thought and then they
create the new words. I personally support the
second one.
45
After reading and discussing with our group
member, now I have different thought about this
topic. I think that language and thought are
developed together. One can affect another.
They are not either totally individual or totally
the same. When we learn our first language, the
though is constructed most likely from adults,
peers, and education. When we learn the second
language, we learn another culture through that
language. By doing so, the second language
affect our thought more than the first language.
For example, when we learn countable noun and
uncountable noun in English, it helps us to get
the idea, which we dont have in Chinese. In
Chinese, we describe the item with its material
and shape, but we dont think if we can count it
or not because even uncountable noun, we still
give it a unit of measurement. Therefore, I
believe that for L1 learners, surrounding
environment affect ones thought more then
language, but for L2 learners, the language will
affect ones thought more than L1.
46
????s Individual Reflection The origins of
language and thought in early childhood The
period of infancy, in which fundamental
principles of thought are exhibited well before
language the simultaneous emergence of language,
deferred imitation, symbolic play, evocative
memory, and mental imagery, suggesting language
is but one outcome of more fundamental changes in
cognitive abilities the lack of effect of
language upon reasoning abilities in middle
childhood and the nature of speech in early
childhood, the claim being that the communicative
function of speech results from cognitive
developments. By contrast Vygotsky, while seeing
thought and language as initially separate
systems, considers the two merge at around two
years of age, producing verbal thought. Mental
operations are regarded as embodied in the
structure of language, and hence cognitive
development results from an internalization of
language.
47
Current research on infancy has elucidated the
perceptual and social sophistication of the
neonate, and points to developments occurring
from this base during the course of adult-infant
social interchanges. Preverbal gestural
communication is established between six and nine
months, and by twelve months is under intentional
control. The shift to referential communication
is again mediated by social interaction,
particularly the development of routines to bring
about the joint attention of adult and infant
upon the same object ?especially the production
and mutual comprehension of manual pointing. In
addition, underlying changes in the infant's
abilities to relate 'parts' to 'wholes' and to
construct relations between means and ends appear
to inform the elaboration of the simultaneously
emerging cognitive abilities noted by Piaget.
This suggests that the entire symbolic function
is a separate cognitive domain to which wider
cognitive abilities may be applied. For older
children the influence of language on thought has
proved difficult to investigate conclusively.
Evidence for the Whorfian hypothesis is scarce,
and is incomplete for the claim that language
plays a major role in the developing
self-regulation of the child's behaviour.
48
Previously, this material has been used somewhat
uncritically to inform phylogenetic speculation
on the role of language in the evolution of human
cognitive abilities. Recapitulatory theories of
'terminal addition' have overlooked the
possibility that behavioural development may not
occur in stages, and that such stages may not be
additive 'neotenous' theories do not deal
satisfactorily with how a rearrangement of the
timing of abilities can lead to 'qualitative'
changes in 'behavioural capacities'. Recent work
explains parallels in ontogeny and phylogeny by
appeal to common constraints on
information-processing that reflect the demands
of changing levels of the structure of knowledge
as it interacts with more basic perceptual
competencies Eds.
49
Does language shape thought? Does the
language you speak affect how you think about the
world? This question is taken up in three
experiments. English and Mandarin talk about time
differently--English predominantly talks about
time as if it were horizontal, while Mandarin
also commonly describes time as vertical. This
difference between the two languages is reflected
in the way their speakers think about time. In
one study, Mandarin speakers tended to think
about time vertically even when they were
thinking for English (Mandarin speakers were
faster to confirm that March comes earlier than
April if they had just seen a vertical array of
objects than if they had just seen a horizontal
array, and the reverse was true for English
speakers). Another study showed that the extent
to which Mandarin-English bilinguals think about
time vertically is related to how old they were
when they first began to learn English. In
another experiment native English speakers were
taught to talk about time using vertical spatial
terms in a way similar to Mandarin. On a
subsequent test, this group of English speakers
showed the same bias to think about time
vertically as was observed with Mandarin
speakers.
50
It is concluded that (1) language is a powerful
tool in shaping thought about abstract domains
and (2) one's native language plays an important
role in shaping habitual thought (e.g., how one
tends to think about time) but does not entirely
determine one's thinking in the strong Whorfian
sense. Linguists and other cognitive scientists
are centrally interested in understanding the
relationship between language and thought. Do we
think in language? Is thought simply no vocal
language, or is the linguistic system (partly)
distinct from more general thought processes?
Suppose we present you with a subtraction
problem like 1724 - 982 ?and a sentence like
51
Conclusions Based on Our Groups opinions
and data distributions , our group conclusions as
follow Language is the expression of
thought, and the act of translating thoughts into
words is the refining of understanding .
Language is a way to express our thoughts to
other people. Sometimes you may have an idea, but
don't know how to express that idea through
language, maybe it's just a picture in your head.
To say that language and thought are the same
would mean that those who lack the ability to use
langauge don't/can't think .
52
Basically language and thought are the same
thing, because you produce words and sentences
when you think, although sometimes there are not
well-structured sentences. Also I think thought
has the same characteristics and features as any
language , so that thought and language are the
same thing Language might shape the way we
think and usually what we are thinking can be put
into words and spoken, maybe not the exact things
we were thinking but a summary of our thoughts
put into words. We all have language and we all
think of things to say and things to do on a
daily basis. Doing so the thoughts we think are
then put into some type of language whether it is
spoken or written down on a piece of paper
. Language also might can shape the direction
of thought -- but do you think that language and
thought are "the same"? I found Napoli's comments
about Deaf people pretty salient the question
"do deaf people think slower than hearing people
because their 'spoken' language is slower ?" also
seemed rather absurd, for lack of a better word.
And it does seem that we tend to form a complete
thought very quickly and then unravel it slowly
through our words. What do you think ? .
53
Language is a vehicle to express our
thoughts, but I certainly don't believe it is
essential to thought. Personally, when I'm
writing a story, I tend to think in images and
pictures. For example , Imagine that you are sit
down at a computer to write what youve come up
with, You will automatically transit the pictures
into words and sentences. So all in all its very
convincing points to prove that thought and
language are not necessarily tied together . It
is absurd to think that they would think at
different speeds, simply because they speak with
gestures and expressions . I do believe that
thought and language can be very closely related,
but it is also eveident that though exists
outside of language. Human beings have thought
dealing with emotions and feelings that have no
language associated with them. It is also
possible for small children to relate images with
certain things, again with no direct language
association. They can associate something they
saw their parents do in the past with something
they want now, however this does not mean that
they know language .
54
Language and thought are in harmony with each
other a lot of the time but I also think that
thought can go outside of language. As others
have said humans or whatever you would like to
call , surely had thought but they just had no
way to really communicate their thoughts to
others. Your example of babies having thought but
really no language to communicate their thought
is also very interesting . Thought
influences language and language influences
thought, but they are definitely not the same
thing. However, a strong correlation does exist
between these thought and language. It is
possible to visually think, without language
coming into the picture. However, we most often
think with a combination of internal language and
visuals, though this is not a requirement of
thought. Also, thinking of children and toddlers
who haven't developed language yet, does this
mean there is no thought? I highly doubt it. If
you ask most children of early childhood
memories, many can give memories that existed
before they spoke the english language. This is
impressive and shows substantial evidence of both
the seperation of thought and language, but also
its strong coorelation .
55
Testy
???
??
??
???
???
???
That's all Thank you