How Does Our Language Shape The Way We Think?

“Being WEIRD: How Culture Shapes the Mind,” by Ethan Watters, is a compelling article that challenges the reader’s perception on culture and cognition. Instead of cognition affecting culture, our culture affects our cognition. It’s interesting to conceptualize, and it makes one have to introspect their culture, beliefs, attitudes, and actions. Why do we do behave the way that we do? Are our thoughts our own? How much of us is influenced by our environment? This effect of culture can be rooted in our childhoods. We are taught societal norms and how to view, categorize, and perceive the world through the lens of the environment surrounding us. A prime example of this comes from the games we played growing up.

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.

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.

When I guide my friend Tianchu, an exchange student from Beijing, around school, we engage in a constant exchange of cultural nuances and slang. But after years of casual conversation and practical application, my curiosity leads me to wonder. Each language requires me to observe different aspects of my life. So, are the languages I use merely tools for expressing my thoughts, or do they actually shape my thoughts? In fact, do I attend to, partition, and remember my experiences differently because I choose one set of semantics over

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.

By welcoming the diverse languages and religions of the world, America is considered a melting pot of both cultural and ethnic identities. In the essay about bilingualism “How to Tame a Wild Tongue” by Gloria Anzaldúa she writes, “So, if you want to really hurt me, talk badly about my language. Ethnic identity is twin skin to linguistic identity - I am my language. Until I can take pride in my language, I cannot take pride in myself” (172). Anzaldúa believes that her ethnicity and language are what make her who she is. Therefore, by insulting her language, she is insulted as well. Her identity is “twin skin” with how she speaks. Linguistic identity is the ability for a person to speak freely in any language and ultimately their identity is shown through shared language. The things that define a person are their actions, their behavior, the way they walk, and the way they talk. A person’s culture has a heavy influence on their identity throughout their lives. To disrespect an important part of their culture, their language, is to disrespect the person on an extremely interpersonal level. The person would be, therefore, discouraged from speaking their native language. Anzaldúa shows that her language constitutes who she is; it binds her to the existence of her identity therefore a person’s language defines his/her identity.

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

The linguistic theory of Chomsky has changed the long, traditional way of studying language. The nature of knowledge, which is closely tied to human knowledge in general, makes it a logical step for Chomsky to generalize his theory to the study of the relation between language and the world-in particular, the study of truth and reference. But his theory has been controversial and his proposal of "innate ideas" has been resisted by some empiricists who characterize him as rationalist. In our view, these empiricists make a mistake. In the present paper we attend to his position regarding linguistics as a science of mind/brain, which we believe is an important aspect of his theory that has not been paid enough attention or understood by

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

Although there is no official language in the United States, the English language is the most widely spoken. Language helps to shape our identities, define and limit our expectations of the world around us and who we are. You might ask yourself, how does our language shape our identities and influence our perceptions of the world? Through language, we are able to make meaning, understand, and define ourselves. We are able to communicate what we feel, our ideas, our hopes, and our dreams with others who can respond to our feelings and thoughts. However, our choice of words cannot always capture what we are feeling to the full extent.

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

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.

Research by Lera Boroditsky (2001) posed many interesting questions regarding linguistic diversity and the resultant interplay between language and thought: whether linguistic diversity stimulates different ways of thinking, whether learning new languages changes the way one thinks, whether bilingual and multilingual people think differently when speaking different languages. Clark (2003) maintains that although language does not indicate a complete map of consciousness or thought, it is at least a “representational map” that varies across languages.