This presentation was created as an assignment for a subject called "Gender Psychology". It discusses several aspects of the same.

1. Relationship of Language &
Thinking

2. Introduction
 Plato and Aristotle argued that the categories of thought determine the
categories of language. To them, language is only the outward form or
expression of thought.
 J. B. Watson, an American psychologist and the founder of Behaviorism,
believes that thought is language. He believed that thought is sub-vocal
speech, that is, when we “think a loud,” it is called speech; when we “speak
covertly,” it is called thinking.
 A less radical position is that language determines thought. According to
this view, the categories of thought are determined by linguistic
categories.
 Theorists within this group are divided between those who think that
language completely determines cognitive categories and those who say
that language strongly influences cognitive categories.

3. Two opinions on the prior discussion
 The notion of language and thought and their relation subsequently got divided
into two groups mainly:
1. Whether thoughts are formed in advance of the words that we utter.
2. Or whether ideas are formed in terms of the words themselves.

4. A few examples
 The Eskimo language for snow:
 apun= “snow on the ground”,
 qanikca= “hard snow on the ground”,
 utak= “block of snow” etc.
 English - camel, Chinese - luòtuo,
 Arabic - more than 400 words for camel.
 English – love, likeness
 Urdu – lagan, chahat, mohabat, piyaar, ishq, junoon…and several more

5. Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
 It is generally accepted by Ethno linguists that culture influences language
but there is far less agreement about the possibility that language
influences culture.
 Edward Sapir and his student, Benjamin Whorf, suggested that language
affects how people perceive their reality, that language coerces thought.
This is known as the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.
 Simply stated, the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis says that the content of a
language is directly related to the content of a culture and the structure of
a language is directly related to the structure of a culture.

6. Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
 The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis as we know it today can be broken down into
two basic principles: linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity
 Linguistic Determinism
 Language determines thought
 Different languages impose different conceptions of reality
 Linguistic Relativity
 Language influences thinking
 Linguistic differences between cultures are associated with cultural differences
in thinking

7. Linguistic Determinism
 It is the idea that language and its structures limit and determine human
knowledge or thought.
 Whorf states that language does not only voice ideas but also shapes
them.
 The child’s knowledge is socially constructed in interaction with adults, so
child logic develops only with the growth of child’s social speech.

8. Linguistic Relativity
 Speakers of different languages
 perceive the world differently.
 resulting cognitive systems are different.
 Accordingly the mental universe of an English speaker may be different
from that of a Chinese speaker because they happen to speak different
languages.

9. Criticism on Linguistic Determinism
 Linguistic Determinism is far too strong a claim and thus false.
 “Peoples’ thoughts and perceptions are not determined by the words and
structures of their language. We are not prisoners of our linguistic systems”
(Fromkinetal.2007)
 May not have the exact word but are able to express their ideas and thoughts
using other words or word combinations
 The Dani tribe, who have only a 2 colour system, black/dark and white/light, were
successfully trained to identify and name different shades of red
 Similarly Eskimos just have a greater need for more vocabulary of types of snow
that us–it is arguable whether their perception is affected

10. Other counter claims
 There are bilinguals among the general population who can express their ideas
freely in two or more languages.
 Languages borrow words from each other fairly frequently.
 Does the fact that a language does not have separate terms for certain phenomena
means that the users of this language are unable to distinguish these phenomena
from others?