Benjamin Lee Whof's You Are What You Speak

In his article "Does Your Language Shape How You Think?" the author Guy Deutscher discusses how the acquisition of one's mother tongue shapes one's view of the world. The article was published in The New York Times in August 2010. The author's major paradigm is that every language one learns influences one's mind and feelings in a different way. Deutscher explains that depending on one's mother tongue, objects can be considered masculine or feminine, which results in the speaker feeling differently about them. The author believes that different languages do indeed make one speak about space in different ways as well; although he claims people do not have entirely different views of it. Deutscher then explains that experiments have shown that

The informational article Islands of Meaning written by Eviatar Zerubavel is an incredibly insightful tool that has allowed others to better understand concepts of schemas, accommodation, and assimilation. The article illustrates how we mentally categorize things by segmenting and applying meaning to the world around us. This enables us to form ideas and opinions that aid in the development of society along with our own image of self. Our boundaries can be dependent upon our cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds influencing what is defined as normal or acceptable. In this critical analysis, I will initially recount in a short summary Zerubavel’s main concepts on synopsis, socialization, and language. I will also examine and review the article from a critical standpoint and give personal opinions on the concepts for in this article.

Scholar, Gloria Anzaldúa, in her narrative essay, “How To Tame A Wild Tongue’, speaks her many experiences on being pressured on what language to use. She then expresses how the discrimination made her to realize the ugly truth--that people reject languages that aren’t their own. She adopts logos, ethos and pathos in order to appeal toward her audience who is anyone who is not bilingual. One of the perspectives she takes on in her piece clearly expresses the relationship between language and identity and how it creates a conflict between her and the world.

Do peace, unity, and equality still exist this day in time among groups of people? Are we influenced by our environment to associate our way of seeing things and create language based on that fact? How we view the environment around us helps shape our understanding by creating language to give it meaning. Based on the linguistic data of the recently discovered tribe, we can draw conclusions about the tribe’s climate and terrain, diet, views on family and children, system of government and attitude towards war. This data shows that the lost tribe was an isolated group that lived in a valley, coexisted in unison, valued life, had high regards for

The film “The Linguists” follows linguists Gregory Anderson and David Harrison on their journey to learn about and document endangered languages in Bolivia, India, Arizona, and Siberia. Through their quest, they are able to interact with some of the few remaining speakers of languages that are near death and they manage to make an impact on how these communities view their heritage language. Focusing on the moribund languages of Siberia and Arizona, it becomes evident that speakers of the heritage language feel a love for the language and the culture it represents, but went through periods of oppression and embarrassment for being speakers of a minority language that ultimately shaped their attitudes on the language.

It is often thought that the reality that is being expressed in spoken word is the very same as the reality which is being perceived in thought. Perception and expression are frequently understood to be synonymous and it is assumed that our speech is mostly based on our thoughts. This idea presumes that what one says is dependent of how it is encoded and decoded in the mind. (Badhesha, 2002) In any case, there are numerous individuals that trust the inverse: what one sees is reliant on the talked word. The supporters of this thought trust that thinking is reliant on language. Linguistic Edward Sapir and his understudy Benjamin Lee Whorf are known as far as concerns them in the promotion of this very guideline. Their aggregate hypothesis, known as the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, also known as theory of linguistic relativity, relativism, determinism, Whorfian hypothesis or even Whorfianism. Initially talked about by Sapir in 1929, the speculation got to be prominent in the 1950s after post mortem production of Whorf's works on the subject. After incredible assault

For all humans, language is the most common means of communication with others and it enables us to share our experiences and stories and to tell about our needs and feelings. For example, Yamamoto states that sociolinguistics see, it is ‘primarily through the use of language that people communicate with each other’ (1979: 146). We all speak one or more languages and as the main way of communication it is an important and vital part of our lives. There is many languages in the world and they differ from one another in many ways. But does the language we speak reflect to the way we see and experience the world around us? This paper will explore the question through the Sapir Whorf hypothesis and arguments for and against it.

Language, culture, and self are inseparable, as one cannot exist without the other. The structuration of one's consciousness stems from the language that one learns as a child, thus the formation of self is largely out of one’s control. As humans we live to experience, for our native language structures the world at which we inhabit and molds one's very modes of conscious awareness. Simply put, “who we become is not a matter of our own volition” (Encyclopedia of Identity 384), how we perceive and evaluate the world at large is entirely out of our control. Our development consciously is driven by the world we are brought into, ergo the language and culture we are raised with ultimately determines who we become.

The connection between language and identity are our expressions, how we are able to show our ideas and feeling which parts of our ethnicity are. For example, in the reading “Aria: Memoir of a Bilingual Childhood,” the language was an important resource for the kids to communicate with their Spanish culture, show affects to their parents and have communication with their families. Nevertheless,

Although the language individuals use reflects our identity, language use is not static and changes according to context. This is

Language influences thought. The rule of linguistic relativity holds that the structure of a language influences the routes in which its speakers can conceptualize their reality, i.e. their view of reality. Famously known as the Sapir–Whorf theory, or Whorfianism, the standard is by and large comprehended as having two unique variants: (i) the solid form that language decides thought and that linguistic categories constrain and decide psychological classifications and (ii) the feeble rendition that phonetic classes and utilization impact thought and certain sorts of non-semantic conduct.

Originally published in the Wall Street Journal in 2010, Lera Boroditsky’s paper titled “Lost in Translation” analyzes the impact language has on thought. Formatted as more of a persuasive than truth seeking essay, Boroditsky begins by asking the reader if the language a person speaks shapes the way they think. This makes the reader believe as though she is truly trying to find an answer to this inquiry, but as the paper goes on, the reader is mostly introduced to evidence that supports Boroditsky’s stance and she merely touches upon the argument of the opposing side. Although Boroditsky does not include more counterarguments, “Lost in Translation” is a well written article which demonstrates that languages indeed shape the way people think through her use of the Rhetorical Triangle, inductive logic, and her stylistic choices.

No matter where you are in the world, you are taught about language. Whether it’s in your home learning your language or in school trying to learn a foreign language. Although while learning language the notion is never really thought about or brought up that the language and way we speak can influence the way we think and interact. Phycologist and neuroscientist alike have spent years, with multiple different tests to see if there is a connection between the various languages that are spoken and the way people not only think but also how they go about their daily lives. She writes to not only her colleagues and neuroscientists but also to anyone in the general public that is genuinely interested in the connection between

Linguistic relativity is the notion that language can affect our thought processes, and is often referred to as the ‘Sapir-Whorf hypothesis’, after the two linguists who brought the idea into the spotlight. Whorf writes how “Language is not merely a reproducing instrument for voicing ideas but rather is itself the shaper of ideas, the program and guide for the individual’s mental activity” (1956:212), and I will explain how it is able to do so. In this essay I will argue that certain ways of mental categorization, spatial cognition and reality interpretation, based on the characteristics of our specific variety of language, influence our perception of the world. I will discuss how languages divide up nature differently, and

The idea that language affects the way we remember things and the way we perceive the world was first introduced by the influential linguists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf (Harley, 2008). The central idea of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, today more commonly known as the linguistic relativity hypothesis, holds that “each language embodies a worldview, with quite different languages embodying quite different views, so that speakers of different languages think about the world in quite different ways” (Swoyer, 2003). In the late 1990s, Cameron claimed that the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis was regarded as “that which must be refuted