From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linguistic relativity asserts that language influences worldview or cognition. One form of linguistic relativity, linguistic determinism, regards peoples’ languages as determining and influencing the scope of cultural perceptions of their surrounding world.^[1]

Various colloquialisms refer to linguistic relativism: the Whorf hypothesis; the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis (/səˌpɪər ˈhwɔːrf/ sə-PEER WHORF); the Whorf–Sapir hypothesis; and Whorfianism.

The hypothesis is disputed, with many different variations throughout its history.^[2][3] The strong hypothesis of linguistic relativity, now referred to as linguistic determinism, is that language determines thought and that linguistic categories limit and restrict cognitive categories. This was a claim by some earlier linguists pre-World War II;^[4] since then it has fallen out of acceptance by contemporary linguists.^{[5][need quotation to verify][6]} Nevertheless, research has produced positive empirical evidence supporting a weaker version of linguistic relativity:^[4][5] that a language’s structures influence a speaker’s perceptions, without strictly limiting or obstructing them.

Although common, the term Sapir–Whorf hypothesis is sometimes considered a misnomer for several reasons. Edward Sapir (1884–1939) and Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897–1941) never stated their ideas in terms of a hypothesis. The distinction between a weak and a strong version of this hypothesis is also a later development; Sapir and Whorf never used such a dichotomy, although often their writings and their opinions of this relativity principle expressed it in stronger or weaker terms.^[7][8]

The principle of linguistic relativity and the relationship between language and thought has also received attention in varying academic fields, including philosophy, psychology and anthropology. It has also influenced works of fiction and the invention of constructed languages.

History

The idea was first expressed explicitly by 19th-century thinkers such as Wilhelm von Humboldt and Johann Gottfried Herder, who considered language as the expression of the spirit of a nation. Members of the early 20th-century school of American anthropology including Franz Boas and Edward Sapir also approved versions of the idea to a certain extent, including in a 1928 meeting of the Linguistic Society of America,^[9][10] but Sapir, in particular, wrote more often against than in favor of anything like linguistic determinism. Sapir’s student, Benjamin Lee Whorf, came to be considered as the primary proponent as a result of his published observations of how he perceived linguistic differences to have consequences for human cognition and behavior. Harry Hoijer, another of Sapir’s students, introduced the term “Sapir–Whorf hypothesis”,^[11] even though the two scholars never formally advanced any such hypothesis.^[12] A strong version of relativist theory was developed from the late 1920s by the German linguist Leo Weisgerber. Whorf’s principle of linguistic relativity was reformulated as a testable hypothesis by Roger Brown and Eric Lenneberg who performed experiments designed to determine whether color perception varies between speakers of languages that classified colors differently.

As the emphasis of the universal nature of human language and cognition developed during the 1960s, the idea of linguistic relativity became disfavored among linguists. From the late 1980s, a new school of linguistic relativity scholars has examined the effects of differences in linguistic categorization on cognition, finding broad support for non-deterministic versions of the hypothesis in experimental contexts.^[13][14] Some effects of linguistic relativity have been shown in several semantic domains, although they are generally weak. Currently, a nuanced opinion of linguistic relativity is espoused by most linguists holding that language influences certain kinds of cognitive processes in non-trivial ways, but that other processes are better considered as developing from connectionist factors.

Ancient philosophy to the Enlightenment

The idea that language and thought are intertwined is ancient. In his dialogue Cratylus, Plato explores the idea that conceptions of reality, such as Heraclitean flux, are embedded in language. But Plato argued against sophist thinkers such as Gorgias of Leontini, who claimed that the physical world cannot be experienced except through language; this made the question of truth dependent on aesthetic preferences or functional consequences. Plato may have held instead that the world consisted of eternal ideas and that language should represent these ideas as accurately as possible.^[15] Nevertheless, Plato’s Seventh Letter claims that ultimate truth is inexpressible in words.

Following Plato, St. Augustine, for example, argued that language was merely like labels applied to concepts existing already. This opinion remained prevalent throughout the Middle Ages.^[16] Roger Bacon had the opinion that language was but a veil covering eternal truths, hiding them from human experience. For Immanuel Kant, language was but one of several methods used by humans to experience the world.

German Romantic philosophers

During the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the idea of the existence of different national characters, or Volksgeister, of different ethnic groups was a major motivator for the German romantics school and the beginning ideologies of ethnic nationalism.^[17]

Johann Georg Hamann

Johann Georg Hamann is often suggested to be the first among the actual German Romantics to discuss the concept of the “genius” of a language.^[18][19] In his “Essay Concerning an Academic Question”, Hamann suggests that a people’s language affects their worldview:

The lineaments of their language will thus correspond to the direction of their mentality.^[20]

Herder worked alongside Hamann to establish the idea of whether or not language had a human/rational or a divine origin.^[21] Herder added the emotional component of the hypothesis and Humboldt then took this information and applied it to various languages to expand on the hypothesis.

Wilhelm von Humboldt

In 1820, Wilhelm von Humboldt associated the study of language with the national romanticist program by proposing that language is the fabric of thought. Thoughts are produced as a kind of internal dialog using the same grammar as the thinker’s native language.^[22] This opinion was part of a greater idea in which the assumptions of an ethnic nation, their “Weltanschauung“, was considered as being represented by the grammar of their language. Von Humboldt argued that languages with an inflectional morphological type, such as German, English and the other Indo-European languages, were the most perfect languages and that accordingly this explained the dominance of their speakers with respect to the speakers of less perfect languages. Wilhelm von Humboldt declared in 1820:

The diversity of languages is not a diversity of signs and sounds but a diversity of views of the world.^[22]

In Humboldt’s humanistic understanding of linguistics, each language creates the individual’s worldview in its particular way through its lexical and grammatical categories, conceptual organization, and syntactic models.^[23]

More at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity