Does language dictate the way that we think?

Many people agree that there is a very strong relationship between language and thought, but the relationship itself causes many disagreements. To what extent are language and thought connected? Can we think without using language?  Are thought and language dependent or independent? Although these are very interesting questions, in this post, I will focus on the following question: does our language dictate the way that we think?

This question is the basis of linguistic relativity as it asks whether the structure of language or language itself affects or changes the way that speakers conceptualize their world. It is crucial when investigating this problem that languages (especially those from different families) differ in many extreme ways, so that we are able to examine their effects on speakers.

Like many philosophical questions, this was greatly debated in the 18^th century, especially by the Germans including Johann Georg Hamann (1730-88), Johann Gottfried Herder (1744-1803), and Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835). The highlighted theme at this time was that since there are so many languages on the planet and communication is incredibly important, it must affect our culture and thought. 

However, this conundrum spread across the world when it was addressed by Edward Sapir (1884-1939) and his student, Benjamin Whorf (1897-1941). Together, they created the famous Sapir-Whorf hypothesis which combines two major ideas. Firstly, linguistic determinism, which means that language controls the way we think. Secondly, they believed in linguistic relativity, showing that there are many features of a language not found identically in any other. I believe that the following quote summarizes Sapir’s interpretation of the question, as said in 1929:

‘The fact of the matter is that the ‘real world’ is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group. No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same worlds with different labels attached.’

Whorf’s opinion is more blurred as he tended to change his arguments to gain the audience’s attention. For example, linguists believe that many of his bold arguments were purely to boost the reputation of his theory and to captivate a large following. The following quote may be an example of his hyperbolic technique; however, I think that the logic of the quote shows his mind-set.  

‘We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages. The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds--and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds’

In order two judge this theory; I shall discuss the following sub- questions:

2. Which areas of language affect thought? How can we measure these effects with a systematic method?
 

Many different areas of language are said to have the ability to affect the speakers. For example, in the 1950s linguists focused on the colours. Apart from relative frequencies of radiation waves, there are no firm boundaries between different colours, so different languages use different methods to describe the colours. Investigators used Munsell colour chips, which are of a standardised array of colours, to see how their subjects would classify them. In 1969, Brent Berlin and Paul Kay compared the colour vocabulary of 100 languages to see how many universal colours or shades exist. They found 11 such colours; for example, each language that they examined had an equivalent to the English word ‘white’. In their study, they noticed that there was no word for ‘colour’ in language in Peru called Aguaruna. Interestingly, they found that they found it easier to explain the test to bilingual people (who also spoke Spanish) because of this reason. This suggests to me that the Aguaruna speakers were less able to think about colour because of their lack of word for it, possibly hinting towards the Sapir-Whorf theory.

2. What can language influence?

The theory explicitly hypothesises that language influences thought. Taking this example of colour, if a language does not had a word for a certain shade or hue of a colour it is likely that speakers will be less likely to differentiate that colour. This will not only affect visual perception but even memory. Evidence has been found to support this in Russian, where they make a greater distinction between light and dark shades of blue, because subject were more able to visually discriminate between different shades.

In the 1970’s an additional study was completed, which compared the perception of colour in English to Berinmo (a small tribe in Papua New Guinea). Both groups were given 160 different colours and they had to categorize and group them. Interestingly, the Berinmo separated the colours into fewer categories as they did not differentiate blue and green therefore they linked these together. However, they did split different shades of yellow into two groups, as in their language they have two different words for yellow (nol and wor). Sawyer said in 1999 that because of their linguistic differences, the English were better at separating blue/ green colours and the Berinmo speakers were better at identifying differences in yellow. Therefore this study also backs up that the colour perception of different language groups depends on the amount of colour words that their language processes, supporting the Sapir-Whorf theory further. 

But this effect is not restricted to colours. Another example lies in the language Kuuk Thaayorre which is spoken in Pormpuraaw (an aboriginal area in Australia), where instead of using words like ‘left’ and ‘forwards’ they only use cardinal directions such as south or north. This has a huge impact on the way that they think because they have a much greater navigational ability than speakers of other language since they always know exactly which was they are facing. In fact their language affects the way that they act too and therefore will affect their culture. When asked to arrange some pictures in chronological order, speakers placed them so that time ran from east to west, regardless of their bodily position.

33. How strong are the influences?

Human languages and their users are very adaptable, for example, most languages borrow words from other languages if they do not have an equivalent in their own. One of these is ‘schadenfreude’ which is a loanword from German meaning the pleasure found from others’ misfortune. Therefore, in many cases, a languages ability to change or constrict thinking ability is minimal however, there have been many cases showing quite extreme influences.

Further evidence for the Sapir-Whorf theory

Recently, there have been many more experiments completed in relation to this theory. I am going to focus on a study by Lera Boroditsky. Think about the following question:

We have a meeting on Wednesday. It has been moved forwards two days to Friday. Which day is the meeting, Monday or Friday?

Which do you think is most likely? This example shows the basis of Boroditsky’s work, considering whether language can affect our perception of time. Time is an abstract idea that we cannot see therefore language is used to make it seem physical so we are more able to understand it. In English we say phrases such as ‘Easter is coming’, using a sense of motion to show that ‘soon it will be Easter’. But, there are two ways to look at this, either we are moving towards Easter, or Easter is moving towards us. 

Boroditsky predicts that people who have recently been travelling will be more likely to assume that they are moving so are ego-moving. These people think that they are moving towards Easter and going back to the example of the meeting, they’ll think that the date of the meeting is Friday (as they will be the ones moving forwards two days). Whereas people who have been stationary for a long time are more likely to be time-moving so are more likely to say Monday. Boroditsky tested this in an airport where there is a mixture of people rushing and waiting and she found that her hypothesis was correct – a person’s physical position affects the way they think and communicate time.

In fact time is a very interesting subject when addressing this theory because there are many languages which treat time differently. Historically, there was a ‘Hopi time controversy’ because people, including Whorf, believed that people that spoke Hopi conceptualized time differently than speakers of most other languages. In fact many people were adamant that they had no sense of time at all. 

According to Whorf, Hopi had "no words, grammatical forms, construction or expressions that refer directly to what we call 'time'", and therefore he inferred that it had "no general notion or intuition of time as a smooth flowing continuum in which everything in the universe proceeds at equal rate, out of a future, through the present, into a past”.

Since then there have been many arguments against this as there are methods to discuss time, for example they have the construction ‘I will X’, showing what will happen in the future. Malotki published books claiming both that the Hopi language did have words and constructions referring to time and that users do cognitively think about time using spatial metaphors to signify units of time. Malotki found that there are distinct markers of time. For example a word in the future has a –ni suffix whereas present and past tenses are unmarked. He noticed, however, that they judge time on the movement of the sun, for example someone could say that time is moving quickly by saying ‘"the sun moves slowly quickly" so instead of thinking about time directly, they’re thinking about the sun. Although they may have the ability to think about time, they’re language does not allow them to think about the abstract ideas related to it because Hopi focuses so much on the sun and therefore this daily continuum. 

Modern evidence against the Sapir-Whorf theory

Chomsky conducted a lot of research on generative grammar and found many similarities between languages. He named the most similar of these linguistic universals, and although no universal has been found in all 5,000 languages, he predicts that it is likely they do appear. Chomsky also predicted that these universals may be predetermined in a child’s brain and could be the reason how they learn their L1 with such ease and haste. Therefore, his arguments state that maybe languages do not differ as much as Sapir and Whorf suggested, so linguistic relativity may not be true. If languages are all very similar, they cannot differ by enough to influence the thought of their users.

An idea against linguistic determinism is that people have been found to have the ability to think if they cannot talk. People who have grown up without language and those who have lost their language (i.e stroke victims and aphasics) are able to follow instructions and are commonly able to remember what they were thinking and are able to retell their thoughts once they gain their ability to communicate. Furthermore, animals such as chimpanzees who do not speak a formal sophisticated language are able to think about time, space and are able to categorize object so they must be able to think about colour and shape.

To conclude, I believe that the Sapir- Whorf hypothesis sparked a lot of interest in the topic and it changed the way that many people look at the relationship between language and thought. Their work has influenced many people, but also caused others to retaliate against them. Taking both sides into account, I still think that our language must have some influence on thought. Language may not have the ability to govern though, but it may still constrain and influence it to a certain extent.

For more information:

• I recommend ‘The Language Instinct’ by Steven Pinker for arguments against the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.
•  ‘Rethinking Linguistic Relativity’ (John J. Gumperz and Stephen C. Levinson) includes a lot of research and ideas about the Sapir-Whorf theory.
  

Spanglish

The definition of Spanglish has not been formalised but many linguists class it as the language formed from the mixture of Spanish and English. 

Why does the language exist?

Spanglish was originally formed in Puerto Rico where the US tried to make them speak English and it is commonly used as the interlanguage between America and Mexico.  Therefore, code switching was a great way to communicate each other’s ideas in a way which both groups were likely to understand without having to learn a second language. However, many linguists also say that these two languages have a “lexical attraction”, as they are naturally very similar. 

Is Spanglish a language?

As Spanglish has evolved, its classification developed too. Initially, Spanglish was a form of code-switching¹, where the language used was interchanged when people did not know a certain word in their second language.

Then, Spanglish became classed as a pidgin² since people simplified the grammar that they were using by changing languages. For example, an informal rule for speaking Spanglish is to try to avoid conjugating Spanish verbs, so Spanglish speakers could even avoid learning Spanish verb conjugations.

As the language evolved, rules began to emerge. For example, often the code-switching is used for effect, even by bilingual people, showing that it may be a stand-alone language. 

Nowadays, it can also be classed as a creole³ because it is spoken as a native language to those who are exposed to it on a day to day basis. 

Therefore, Spanglish can be classed as a mass of terms and even if it is not a language now, I predict that it will develop further into its own language soon. Many people deny that it is a language because they think it is only used by those too lazy to learn a second language, but Spanglish does show many linguistic properties.

Every natural language is based on other languages, for example, English has been highly influenced by Latin, French and German, yet each of those are languages. Using this principle, although Spanglish is highly based on Spanish and English, it could be a language. 

 There are even Spanglish words that are not the same as their Spanish/ English counterparts. Let’s consider the following clichéd example:

‘el rufo está leakeando’

Since, leakear is not a Spanish verb; it is based upon the English word, using the Spanish conjugation. Also, words formed from Spanglish are now in circulation in Spanish. For example, chequer (to check) is not used across the US, Puerto Rico and Mexico even in fluent Spanish speech. This is contrasted to the traditional Spanish word ‘comprobar’, showing the English influence on Spanish. 

These examples show that Spanglish is more than code-switchning, a pidgin and a creole, and therefore must be a language, ¿verdad?

Are there any formal rules of Spanglish?

There are very few grammar books on Spanglish, so rules are very informal and rules are very irregular. However, over the years, patterns have formed across Spanglish speaking communities and dialects have erupted.

There are two types of Spanglish:

Intersentential code-switching is when one sentence is spoken in a certain language and then the following sentence is completely in the second language. This is the form of Spanglish which si usually found in spontaneous language, such as dialogue.

Intrasentential code-switching is when separate phrases are articulated in different languages. This involved a lot of skill because the accent also needs to be altered and the speaker must be very fluent in both languages to be able to avoid grammatical inaccuracies and to make it sound fluent.

One of the rules in intrasentential Spanglish is that it is ungrammatical to change languages between the noun and the following adjective. For example, el flor red is ungrammatical. This may be because Spanish uses post-nominal structure (la niña bonita) where are English uses pre-nominal (the pretty girl). Since these rules contrast, the adjective in Spanglish must be between the noun and determiner, for example “El old man está enojado.”⁴

Since it is nearly Christmas, below is the Spanglish version of ‘twas a night before Christmas’

‘Twas the night before Christmas and all through the casa,

Not a creature was stirring - ¡Caramba! ¿Qué pasa?

Los niños were tucked away in their camas,

Some in long underwear, some in pijamas,

While hanging the stockings with mucho cuidado,

In hopes that old Santa would feel obligado,

To bring all children, both onten and malos,

A nice batch of dulces and other regalos.

Then chuckling aloud, seeming very ontent,

He turned like a flash and was gone como el viento,

And I heard him exclaim, y ¡esto es verdad!

Merry Christmas to all, ¡y Feliz Navidad!'

¹code-switching: the act of alternating between two or more languages or dialects in a conversation.

²pidgin: a simplified language to break the language barrier between two groups.

³creole- a separate language that has evolved from the mixing of two or more languages, i.e. an evolved pidgin.

⁴Sourced from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanglish

If you want to learn more about the language, I recommend the following resources:

Pardon my Spanglish

This is the title of the book by Bill Santiago, a stand-up comedian, who was brought up in a Spanglish speaking environment. He wrote the whole book in Spanglish which is amazing for the reader (but detailed knowledge of both languages are required to understand it fully). Santiago has had very little linguistic experience, therefore do not expect a grammar reference book, instead this is a funny explanation of the language with many humorous examples.

There is a very good interview with Bill Santiago on:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fKPFRNghCKE

Spanglish (film)

This is a wonderful romantic comedy film with some interesting linguistic aspects. One of the main characters, Flor, works in an American household but speaks very little English which causes many problems. Flor uses a simplified version of Spanglish to communicate with her bosses, showing viewers the process of how the communication develops from code-switching to a more sophisticated language.

This film is also mentioned in ‘Is that a fish in your ear’ (a book that I reviewed on the 1^st of December), as it shows the difficulties in translation. Flor relies on her young daughter to translate an argument however the daughter fails to understand that she does not need to replicate the angry tone of voice or actions that her mum was doing when translating. This shows that interpreting is a skill, rules need to be learned to do it properly and that the emotion is lost in translation as interpreters are not expected to convey it.

How can we save the Welsh language?

As we saw yesterday, there has been a vast decline of Welsh. This is worrying because it is crucial to maintain their culture and history. It is likely to be possible to save the language and possibly to revive it to its former popularity, but it would take a lot of money and work.

Firstly, language must be promoted to all Welsh inhabitants. More schools should teach more lessons in Welsh from primary school level so that students have a firm understanding of the language. Although all students up to the age of 16 must have some lessons in Welsh, I think that the age and the amount of lessons should be increased. Also, the Welsh GCSSE should be offered to all students in the British Isles.

If more school children are taught, this will boost the profile and reputation off welsh and therefore will spread positive awareness. Hopefully this would make more people learn the language, especially if they were moving to the area. But in order for them to learn, there need to be more accessible organisations to teach them.

The main problem is that although people do know the language, they do not use them socially. This is because there are many areas that are English dominated. This means that the residents would have to make an effort to recall and use the language.

I believe that if some of these things are firmly put into place, the number of Welsh speakers should increase for the 2021 census.

 

 

 

There are many different ways that you could learn Welsh yourself, including:

• Watch 'S4C Digidol' - a Welsh television programme available in britain on freeview.

• Buy an audio course to immerse yourself in the language
• Search your local community for a Welsh teaching society or school
• Follow Learn Cymraeg on facebook for regular updates