sapir Whorf hypothesis culture language & thoughts

1. Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis By
Raj Wali Khan
Lecturer in English
Department of English Language and Literature
University of Lahore (Pakistan)
Raj.wali@ell.uol.edu.pk

2. The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
The Sapir-Whorf theory, named after the American linguists Edward
Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf, is a mould theory of language.
Sapir (1929)
Human beings do not live in the soceity alone. Language of the society
predispose certain choices of interpretation about how we view the
world.
Whorf (1930s)
We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages. We
categorise objects in the scheme laid by the language and if we do not
subscribe to these classification we cannot talk or communicate.

3. The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis consists of two associated principle:
1. Linguistic Determinism
2. Linguistic Relativity
Linguistic Determinism: Language may determine our thinking
patterns, the way we view and think about the world. Linguistic
Determinism is also called «strong determinism»
Linguistic Relativity: the less similar the languages more diverse
their conceptualization of the world; different languages view
the worl differently.

4. Whorfian Perspective vs Universalism
The Whorfian perspective is that translation between one
language and another is at the very least, problematic, and
sometimes impossible. According to the Whorfian
stance, 'content' is bound up with linguistic 'form', and the use of
the medium contributes to shaping the meaning: 'it is impossible
to mean the same thing in two (or more) different ways.'

5. The Whorfian perspective is in strong contrast to the extreme
universalism of those who adopt the cloak theory. Universalists
argue that we can say whatever we want to say in any
language, and that whatever we say in one language can always
be translated into another: Even totally different languages are
not untranslatable.

6. Whorfian Perspective vs Universalism
In the context of the written word, the 'untranslatability' claim is
generally regarded as strongest in the arts and weakest in the
case of formal scientific papers (although rhetorical studies have
increasingly blurred any clear distinctions). And within the
literary domain, 'untranslatability' was favoured by Romantic
literary theorists, for whom the connotative, emotional or
personal meanings of words were crucial.

7. Moderate Whorfianism
Moderate Whorfianism differs from determinist Whorfianism in
these ways:
• Patterns of thinking can be influenced rather than
determined,
• Language influences the way we see the world and it is
influenced by that also,
• Any influence should be ascribed to the variety in a language
rather than the language itself (sociolect*),
• Influence can be seen on the social context but not in purely
linguistic form

8. Advantages of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
Advantages* of Linguistics Determinism:
– Language does exert great influence on patterns of thinking and
therefore on culture
– Language may reinforce certain ideas and push them into attention
Advantages of Linguistic Relativity:
– There can be differences in the semantic associations of concepts
– Encoding of life experience in language is not exclusively accessible to
everyone but only to members of that certain social group
– Linguistic structure doesn’t constrain what people think but only
influence what they routinely think
– Language reflects cultural preoccupations
«Advantage» means in this context generally accepted or proved part of
SWH.

10. Disadvantages of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis asserts that each language has a unique
system and thus cross-cultural undertanding is impossible.
BUT we have:
– Perceptional universsals (different languages may express the same
thought)
– Cultural universal (each language has taboos, implements, slang)
– Features to distinguish family and relatives (by seniority, biological
bond or sex)
– Languages may exhibit a shared attitude towards one thing (respect
for elderly, objects of fear, concept of blasphemy)

11. Dis……….
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is self-conflicting. It claims that
«language determines thought» but also «there is no limits to
diversity of languages».
If there is no limit to diversity language cannot determine
thought to a great extent to be called «determination» rather
than «influence».
AND many scholars indicate that human thought is universal.

12. Disadvantages….
From a historical stand pint it SHOULD be society and culture
that determine language because social enviroment exert
great influence upon percptual ability. BUT decise factor is
NOT the language.
• If language determines the world view there would be NO
class conscious because every member of the society would
view the world same and think by the same thinking patterns.

13. More Use of SWH
There are many studies on Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis but a
majority of these studies focus on these main problems:
• Perception of time continuity in languages
– Dividing time periodically (i.e. English)
– Not dividing (i.e. Indonesian)
– Dividing time by source of knowledge (i.e. Turkish)
• Perception of snow
– Eskimo languages vs English
• Perception of colours
– Universal colours vs local colours
• Counting systems

14. More application of the theory.
A study (Berlin & Kay) on colour perception which claimed that a
regular, universal system of colour categorisation existed across
the world’s languages: while the number of names of discrete
colours varies across languages, these are based on a set of focal
colours. Furthermore, research done on a stone-age cultural
group in Indonesia, the Dani, by Rosch Heider (1972) suggested
that members of the group, despite only having two colour
categories, perceived colours in much the same way as English
speakers.
Of course not all languages follow the predetermined order and
too little is known about a great number of the world’s
languages to be able to formulate universally valid hypotheses

15. Thanks for your time