Language and Thought

1
Language and Thought
2
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis According to
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, all higher levels of
thinking are dependent on language. Language
determines thought.
3
This strong notion is also called linguistic
determinism.
4
The hypothesis also holds that because languages
differ in many ways, speakers of different
languages perceive and experience the world
differently, relative to their linguistic
background, hence the notion of linguistic
relativism.
5
According to the strong version of the
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, there is no real
translation.
6
and it is impossible to learn the language of a
different culture unless the learner abandons his
or her own mode of thinking and acquires the
thought patterns of the native speakers of the
target language.
7
Arguments against the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
Language can not determine thinking. The relation
between linguistic forms and their referents is a
matter of convention. There is no inherent or
logic connection between language forms and what
these language forms represent.
8
Although languages may differ in their surface
structures, all languages are fundamentally of
the same universal human character.
9
Words and meaning The relationship between the
name and the meaning of a word is quite
arbitrary. Labeling a natural phenomenon or an
object is not fundamental to a conceptual system.
10
The speakers of one language with only one
lexicalized word for a specific concept such as
snow do not mean that they are poorer in
distinguishing between different kinds of, say,
snow than the speakers of a language with many
different lexicalized words for snow.
11
The speakers of a language with no lexicalized
word for snow does not mean that they can not
grasp the concept of snow.
12
It is generally believed that words are but
meaningless labels. Their meanings of depend
largely on the communicative context. As the
context of a word or a sentence changes, its
effect and meaning also change.
13
Grammatical structure
The differences in grammatical structures of
languages are not directly related to the
differences in the perceptual system of the
speakers of these languages. Language structures
and perceptual systems are not closely
interdependent.
14
Language differences are mainly differences in
surface structures. For example, English
indicates the third person singular number by
adding the morphological element -(e)s to the
end of a verb.
15
The lack of this morphological indication of the
third person singular number in Chinese does not
mean that the Chinese speakers can not understand
and master the concept of the third person
singular number.
16
Translation If language could determine thought
and language differences were the differences of
conceptual systems, then translation would not be
possible.
17
The fact that the conceptual uniqueness of a
language such as Hopi, which is radically
different from English, can be explained in
English shows that language can not determine
thinking.
18
While we say that language can not determine
thinking, we do not mean that language
differences have no effect on conceptual
differences. But the conceptual differences
because of different languages are not such that
mutual comprehension is impossible.
19
Second language acquisition
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is also challenged by
observations of second language acquisition
(SLA). If the differences in languages were the
differences of conceptual systems, then second
language acquisition would be impossible.
20
That fact that a person can master two, even more
than two radically different languages shows that
language differences can not represent different
conceptual systems.
21
Language and world views Language is only the
medium by which world views are expressed. The
language system is not inherently related to
world views.
22
The speakers with the same native language do not
necessarily possess the same world views, while
the speakers of different languages may share the
same world views.