Dd303 “the Way We Speak Determines How We Think”. Critically Evaluate This Statement, Drawing on the Key Theories and Research That Describe the Relationship Between Language and Thought

On the other hand Nativists believe that language acquisition is a biological occurrence. Their theories confirm that important aspects of children’s linguistic knowledge are not acquired, but innate (Ambridge B, 2011). Their theories emphasise the structure of the human brain and how it obtains and uses language. Social Critic Noam Chomsky proposed that children are born with the ability to generate grammar (Dulay, H. 1982). This emphasises nativist’s theories and promotes nature to be the dominant role.

Language is one of the most recognizable tools but some tools are more subtle. For example, technology is a tool in western society that less industrialized societies aren’t exposed to. An individual that has grown up with complete access to all the latest technology is going to think differently than an individual that has never seen any form of technology. Overall, some behaviors and ways of thinking can only be caused by exposer to specific social and cultural contexts, as this perspective explains.

Most questions of whether and how language shapes thought start with the simple observation that languages differ from one another. And a lot! Just look at the way people talk, they might say. Certainly, speakers of different languages must attend to strikingly different aspects of the world just so they can use their language properly.

The main reason that Boroditsky’s argument that language shapes our minds is valid is that the research she did with her teams covers a wide variety of aspects on this topic while still keeping her article cohesive. The first research Boroditsky introduces to her audience is the research on the Kuuk Thaayorre, which is an

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

Famous American anthropologist and social theorist Clyde Kluckholm , claims in one of his publication that “Every language is also a special way of looking at the world and interpreting experience concealed in the structure of language are a whole set of unconscious assumptions about the world and the life in it”(Writing logically, Thinking critically 7th edition P 35). Based on this theory, we can learn more

However, it can be argued with (Bruner 1964) that social interaction doesn’t explain all the complexities of language acquisition. Almost every day the language we hear is often incorrect, poorly defined, incomplete and full of hesitations, mispronunciations and other errors, and yet despite this we still learn to talk following the correct grammatical rules. Again this indicates the idea of Chomsky’s (1968) LAD model that children are born ‘hard-wired’ with the innate knowledge of linguistic rules and so these rules help the baby make estimations and presumptions about the language it is hearing. From these estimations and presumption the child can work out grammatical sets of rules and when more language is exposed to them, the more their language develops. Even within Chomsky’s (1968) LAD theory, undoubtedly he believed the role and promotion of the ‘nature’ aspect is the core foundation on which language can develop. But his theory also requires the role of nurture

　　　　Benjamin Lee Whorf believed that language had power over the mind however, this theory has crashed due

Language is a cognitive function that most of us take for granted. It starts from early on, some say at conception, and it develops in complexity as we get older. It is an essential part of communication and without it its development would be greatly hindered. This natural process requires complex structures and reasoning, the bringing together of sounds and words to develop concrete ideas and thoughts. In this paper we will discuss the components of language and how it relates to cognitive processes.

In the article “Lost in Translation”, the author, Lera Boroditsky, maintains as her thesis that the languages we speak not only reflect or express our thoughts, but also shape the very thoughts we wish to express. Boroditsky begins the main section of her essay with the history of the issue of whether or not languages shape the way speakers think. Charlemagne was the first to think that languages do in fact shape the mindset of speaker, but Noam Chomsky rebutted this idea with his thought that languages do not differ much from each other, thus in turn proposing that linguistic differences do not cause a difference in thinking. Now with scientists

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

Linguistics has impacted cognitive psychology as the quest to understand language acquisition and the structure of language itself is undertaken. Linguistics is a complex and multifaceted; it includes language structural patterns and language development (Barsalou, 2005). The process of language development is complicated and dense, as the study of language is examined; the role of cognition is inherently examined and analyzed. Sternberg (2006) also explores language as an innate process and presents the idea that humans are born ready for language as a biological and cognitive process.

The Sapir Whorf hypothesis mentioned above is based on the ideas of Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf who studied aboriginal languages among Native American tribes, mostly the Hopi. They believed that the language one speaks is directly related to the way they understand the reality and see the world. For example, Whorf once wrote ‘we dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages’ (Whorf cited in Salzmann 1993: 153) which led to Zdenek Salzmann’s conclusion of Whorf’s ideas: ‘Difference among languages must therefore be reflected in the differences in the worldviews of their speakers’ (1993: 156). This hypothesis has been challenged many times by several anthropologists and linguists and there are arguments and evidence for and against it.

“Language shapes the way we think, and determines what we can think about.” – Benjamin Lee Whorf

What was their hypothesis or what research question were they trying to answer? In order to solve this concern they came up with the hypothesis that language has a big relation to culture. Therefore, depending on any person 's culture; they will have a different view of the world, as culture influence on people 's behavior, thinking, and the way they