Title: Introducing sociolinguistics (language in society)
URL Source: file://pdf.4aee5afe886a13af3831ba2b6addcda7/
Markdown Content:
In this weeks sessions well be addressing the following
topics/questions :
What is the relationship between language and thought?
Does language determine the way people think and view the
world?
Does language shape the way people think and see the world?
Concluding remarks .
> 17/02/2025 2
Any ideas?
Have a chat in pairs or in groups and try to suggest
some answers to this question?
> 17/02/2025 3
The relationship between language, thought, and culture is a
central issue in psycholinguistics.
The typical question being asked: is language necessary for
thought ?
> 17/02/2025 4
The main views on how thought is related to language .
-Speech is necessary for thought .
-Language is necessary for thought .
-Language determines the way we think and see the world .
-Language relatively affects the way and we think and see the
world .
> 17/02/2025 5
Here thought is viewed as a kind of behavior that comes from
speech production.
-This view tries to replace the notion of thought or cognition with
something observable and noticeable (behavior).
-According to this view, thought here is defined as subvocal speech
or behavior and not something mental.
Thinking is primarily speaking inside your head, but you cannot do
this before you learn how to speak loudly.
(Steinberg & Sciarini, 2006).
> 17/02/2025 6
-Children having no speech production can still comprehend speech and
think .
-Although producing speech is a good indicator of language knowledge, the
absence of speech production may not necessarily mean lack of language
knowledge .
-Speech comprehension, which implies thought , develops before speech
production in normal children .
> (Steinberg & Sciarini, 2006).
> 17/02/2025 7
-The developmental process is that speech comprehension comes
before speech production .
-The comprehension and production processes develop in a parallel
mode with production always trying to keep up with comprehension .
-So, the conclusion of these critiques is that speech comprehension
is the basis for speech production and since the ability to comprehend
speech implies the existence of thought, then speech production is
not necessary for thought .
> (Steinberg & Sciarini, 2006).
> 17/02/2025 8
The language system with its rules of vocabulary is necessary for
thought .
This view is somehow broader than the previous theory, it
encompasses all language, both speech production and
comprehension .
The view that people can think , or even reason, without
language is an illusion (Sapir, 1921 ).
> (Steinberg & Sciarini, 2006).
> 17/02/2025 9
-Most deaf babies are not exposed to language straight after birth . Why?
-They start learning a language at a later age (often after 3 years) .
-These children behave intelligently and rationally with respect to the
environment just as normal children do.
-If language is essential for thought, one would argue that these children do
not think .
(Steinberg & Sciarini, 2006).
> 17/02/2025 10
-Consider multilingual people who are proficient in more than one
language .
-When two or more languages have been learned in childhood . What does
this mean based on such a view?
-If the language system forms thought , and if different languages form
different thought systems , then such persons would have formed more than
one system for thought .
(Steinberg & Sciarini, 2006).
> 17/02/2025 11
-Language determines the way we think and see the world .
-Language relatively affect the way and we think and see the world .
Sapir and Whorf hypothesis :
-This hypothesis is sub -divided into two forms with regards to the relationship
between language , culture, and world view :
1. Linguistic determinism : that is, the structure of the language people speak determines the ways
people think, behave and view the world ; and Language provides a screen or filter to reality . It
determines how speakers perceive and organise both the natural and the social world around them .
2. Linguistic relativity : Linguistic relativity suggests that the culture in which people
operate, through language, affects NOT determines the way people think , behave and view the
world .
> 17/02/2025 12
Lets now have a look at some examples to discuss these views on the
relationship between language, culture and the world view :
-Well have a look at some syntactic (grammatical) and lexical (vocabulary) differences
among some languages of the world to see how such differences would relate to the ways
speakers of these languages think, behave, and view the world?
-The strongest Whorfian deterministic view is that : The grammatical categories
available in a particular language not only help the users of that language to perceive the
world in a certain way but also at the same time limit such perception . They act as
blinkers : you perceive only what your language allows you, or predisposes you, to
perceive . Your language controls your world view . Speakers of different languages will,
therefore, have different world -views . (Wardhaugh, 2010 , p.232 ) .
> 17/02/2025 13
## Grammatical and lexical variation among languages :
-Legs in English can be used for both people and bulls, but
-In Spanish, different words are used : Piernas is used for people and patas is used
for bulls .
-Both people and horses eat in English but in German people essen and horses
fressen .
-French has two pronouns (tu and vous) corresponding to English you which is
used as a singular and a plural .
-Japanese language has an extensive system of honorifics (Wardhraugh, 2010 , p.
235 ).
-In what ways do you think such differences between these languages would
determine/affect the ways their speakers think , behave and view the world?
> 17/02/2025 14
Grammatical and lexical variation among languages :
Some languages like Kiriwina spoken in the Trobriand Islands has no terms that
denote logical relations among propositions .
As an example for cause and effect sentences, In English you would say something like :
Tim forget his math book , so he was unable to complete his homework .
So the absence of the terms that denote such logical relationships among propositions in
Kiriwina language would mean that the Kiriwina speakers would have a world view
for which the cause and effect relationship is of no importance (Lee, 1949 , as cited in
Hill, 1988 ).
> 17/02/2025 15
Whorfs contrast between the Hopi (Amerindian language in northeast
Arizona) linguistic structure and the linguistic structures of what he called
the Standard Average European languages (SAE) such as English - French -
German :
Grammatical categories in Hopi provide a process orientation towards time
and space while in SAE they give a fixed orientation towards time and space .
In SAE , events occur, have occurred and will occur in a definite time
(present, past or future) .
To Hopi speakers what is important is whether the events can be warranted
to have occurred or to be occurring or to be expected to occur .
> 17/02/2025 16 -
Whorf based on this contrast, argued that these differences in the structural
characteristics between SAE and Hopi lead the their speakers to view the world
differently .
-Hopi speakers see the world as essentially an ongoing set of processes , objects
and events are not discrete and countable and time is not apportioned into fixed
segments so that certain things recur (e .g., minutes, mornings, and days) .
-In contrast, speakers of SAE regard nearly everything in their world as discrete,
measurable, countable, and recurrent ; time and space do not flow into each
other, sparks, flames, and waves are things like pens and pencils, mornings recur
in twenty -four -hour cycles and past, present and future are every bit as real as
gender differences (Wardhaugh, 2010 , p.233 ).
> 17/02/2025 17
-The underlying point is that the forms of the language we speak relate in a
way or another to the ways we behave , think , and see/view the world .
Culture is in a way or another related to language and it, through language,
affects people thought , behaviours and views towards the world .
-The two claims of the Sapir and Whorf hypothesis (the linguistic
determinism and the linguistic relativity) have been subject to many tests
across the languages of the world to account for the relationship between the
language, culture and the world view .
-The tests have been conducted on many linguistic levels (lexical,
morphological and grammatical, etc .).
-The variability found among the languages on these levels have been used
to account for the different ways in which the speakers of these languages
behave, think and view both the natural and physical world around them .
> 17/02/2025 18
-There are some tests (e .g., expression of anger) which showed that there are things
which are universal among the languages of the world .
How do you see that in relation to the claims that differences among languages
entail that the speakers of these languages think, behave and view the world
differently ?
-The similarities among the languages of the world in some aspects and their
differences in other aspects would support the linguistic relativity claim rather
than the linguistic determinism .
That is, theres somehow a relatively kind of relationship between the forms the
language people speak and the ways those people think , behave and see the world .
> 17/02/2025 19
Using the knowledge and insights youve gained from todays lecture, try to
compare some grammatical and lexical elements from your mother tongue with
some grammatical and lexical elements of other language (s) you speak, and
discuss in which ways do you think the theories of linguistic determinism and
linguistic relativity would apply .
> 17/02/2025 20
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YvAn9YZLl5w language
and thought.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RKK7wGAYP6k language
and thought TED talk
> 17/02/2025 21
-Steinberg, D. & Sciarini, V. (2006 ). An Introduction to Psycholinguistics (2nd ed .).
Pearson Education Ltd .
-Hill, J.H. (1988 ). Language, Culture, and World View . In F.J. Newmeyer (Ed .).
Linguistics : The Cambridge Survey IV . Language : The Socio -cultural Context
(PP .14 -36 ). Cambridge : Cambridge University Press .
-Wardhaugh, R. (2010 ). An introduction to sociolinguistics (6th ed .) Chichester :
Wiley Blackwell .