Linguistic relativity

In the above statement, Grugeon and Gardner criticise those who ‘view language as though it were an object’. By describing language as an object, it gives the impression of something static; incapable of growth or adaptation. In the author’s view, to think of language in this way disregards the different meanings that words can have in different social contexts. Language is a constantly evolving tool for communication and while many view it as though it is a constant framework, static and unchanging

from learning a culture in the form of its cuisine, traditions, beliefs, etc. When learning a language people learn how language interacts with how people think. The concept Linguistic determinism, first introduced in the early 20th century under linguistic research conducted by Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf. (Linguistic Society of America) The idea that proposed stated that language influences how a person thinks; it mainly cites differences between languages means some people can’t understand

Option 1 “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. Language has traditionally been characterized by Philosophers as a cognitive tool used to freely externalize ones thoughts (Green, 2010 as cited in Kaye, 2010). The relationship between language, thought, culture and reality has occupied the minds of many for centuries. Early

versions of the same hypothesis; one is known as linguistic determinism and the other as linguistic relativism. Linguistic determinism states "that all human thoughts and actions are bound by the restraints of language"( Ask a Linguist FAQ, 2015). In other words Sapir and Whorf argue that language determines how we think, and how we view our world. This version received more criticism than the much 'lighter" version of the same theory known as "linguistic relativism". This version explains that our

It is generally agreed that the reality expressed in spoken words reflects the reality that was perceived in thought. In other words, our thoughts and ideas give stimulation to construct our speech and languages. Therefore, what we say and how we formulate our language is dependent on our line of thoughts, values, beliefs, and habits, collectively known as culture. However, there is an interesting opposing viewpoint, which suggests that language profoundly determines or influences the modes of thought

The need to find a middle ground between the extremes of relying too heavily on interpreters/texts and the timely and consuming task of completely immersing oneself into the culture, abandoning the anthropological eye is clear in Boas’ text. Although a command of the language is “indispensable” in the obtainment of in-depth information, Boas admits that the aim, although ideal is, “entirely beyond our reach.” Whorf acknowledges the difficulty of stepping away from his native language in order to

Deaf Perceptions of Animacy Deaf culture has long been misunderstood and misrepresented within America, in part due to the significant language barrier between the American Deaf and their hearing counterparts. Though it is often thought to be nothing more than an elevated form of charades, American Sign Language (ASL) is a language like any other- not only with its own grammatical syntax, phonology, and morphology, but also in its compliance to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Created by Edward Sapir

I found this paper to be fascinating. I have always thought that our language shapes how we think; this paper sheds new light on the varying languages spoken throughout the world. The following is an excerpt from Lera Boroditsky’s paper: “Follow me to Pormpuraaw, a small Aboriginal community on the western edge of Cape York, in northern Australia. I came here because of the way the locals, the Kuuk Thaayorre, talk about space. Instead of words like "right," "left," "forward," and "back," which,

thought and endorse political ideologies. Structuralist Jonathan Culler corroborates Foucault’s assertion in his book, Structuralist Poetics: Structuralism, Linguistics and the Study of Literature, by avowing that language “governs the individual and determines meaning” (Culler, 1968). He elaborates on this notion by construing that the linguistic-structuralist model can assist in “formulating the rules of particular systems of convention rather than simply affirm their existence" (Culler, 1968). When

In the essay, “You Are What You Speak” by Guy Deutscher speaks on behalf of how an individual’s mind works through the impact of one’s language. The article starts off with Deutscher referring to what was said by Benjamin Lee Whorf. Whorf had said that an individual’s native language limits what they think, thus making them unable to retain certain concepts that are not given a specific name in one’s specific language. Deutscher then argues that Whorf’s claim is inaccurate and wrong for so many reasons