The hypothesis of linguistic relativity is the fruit of many scientists. Even in ancient times, some philosophers, including Plato, spoke about the influence of the language that a person uses when communicating on his thinking and worldview.
However, these ideas were most clearly presented only in the first half of the 20th century in the works of Sapir and Whorf. The hypothesis of linguistic relativity, strictly speaking, cannot be called a scientific theory. Neither Sapir nor his student Whorf formulated their ideas in the form of theses that could be proved in the course of research.
Two versions of the hypothesis of linguistic relativity
This scientific theory has two varieties. The first of these is called the "strict" version. Its adherents believe that language completely determinesdevelopment and features of mental activity in humans.
Supporters of another, "soft" variety tend to believe that grammatical categories do influence worldview, but to a much lesser extent.
In fact, neither Yale professor Sapir nor his student Whorf ever divided their theories regarding the correlation of thinking and grammatical structures into any version. In the works of both scientists at different times, ideas appeared that can be attributed to both a strict and a soft variety.
Misjudgments
The very name of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of linguistic relativity can also be called incorrect, since these Yale colleagues were never really co-authors. The first of them only briefly outlined his ideas on this problem. His student Whorf developed these scientific assumptions in more detail and supported some of them with practical evidence.
The material for these scientific researches he found, mainly by studying the languages of the indigenous peoples of the American continent. The division of the hypothesis into two versions was first proposed by one of the followers of these linguists, whom Whorf himself considered insufficiently knowledgeable in matters of linguistics.
The hypothesis of linguistic relativity in examples
It should be said that this problem was de alt with by the teacher of Edward Sapir himself - Baes, who refuted the theory ofsuperiority of some languages over others.
Many linguists at that time adhered to this hypothesis, which said that some poorly developed peoples are at such a low level of civilization because of the primitiveness of the means of communication they use. Some of the supporters of this view even recommended that the native inhabitants of the United States of America, the Indians, be forbidden to speak their own dialects because, in their opinion, this hinders their education.
Baes, who himself studied the culture of the natives for many years, refuted the assumption of these scientists, proving that there are no primitive or highly developed languages, since any thought can be expressed through each of them. In this case, only other grammatical means will be used. Edward Sapir was largely a follower of his teacher's ideas, but he was of the opinion that the peculiarities of the language sufficiently influence the worldview of people.
As one of the arguments in favor of his theory, he cited the following thought. On the globe there are not and have not been two languages close enough to each other in which it would be possible to produce a literal translation equivalent to the original. And if the phenomena are described in different words, then, accordingly, representatives of different nations also think differently.
As evidence for their theory, Baez and Whorf often cited the following interesting fact: there is only one word for snow in most European languages. In the Eskimo dialect, thisa natural phenomenon is indicated by several dozen terms, depending on color, temperature, consistency, and so on.
Accordingly, representatives of this ethnic group of the north perceive the snow that has just fallen, and the one that has been lying for several days, not as a whole, but as separate phenomena. At the same time, most Europeans see this natural phenomenon as the same substance.
Criticism
Attempts to refute the hypothesis of linguistic relativity were mostly in the nature of attacks on Benjamin Whorf due to the fact that he did not have a scientific degree, which, according to some, could not do research. However, such accusations are in themselves incompetent. History knows many examples when great discoveries were made by people who have nothing to do with official academic science. In Whorf's defense is the fact that his teacher, Edward Sapir, recognized his work and considered this researcher to be a sufficiently qualified specialist.
Whorf's hypothesis of linguistic relativity has also been subjected to numerous attacks by his opponents due to the fact that the scientist does not analyze exactly how the connection between the features of the language and the thinking of its speakers occurs. Many of the examples on which the proofs of the theory are based are similar to anecdotes from life or have the character of superficial judgments.
Chemical Warehouse Incident
When presenting a hypothesisLinguistic relativity is given, among others, and the following example. Benjamin Lee Whorf, being a specialist in the field of chemistry, in his youth worked at one of the enterprises where there was a warehouse of combustible substances.
It was divided into two rooms, in one of which there were containers with flammable liquid, and in the other, exactly the same tanks, but empty. Factory workers preferred not to smoke near the department with full cans, while the adjacent warehouse did not cause them concern.
Benjamin Whorf, being a specialist chemist, was well aware that tanks that are not filled with a flammable liquid, but contain its remains, pose a great danger. They often produce explosive fumes. Therefore, smoking near these containers endangers the lives of workers. According to the scientist, any of the employees was well aware of the characteristics of these chemicals and could not have been unaware of the imminent danger. However, workers continued to use a room adjacent to the unsafe warehouse as a smoking room.
Language as a source of illusions
The scientist thought for a long time about what could be the reason for such a strange behavior of the employees of the enterprise. After much deliberation, the author of the hypothesis of linguistic relativity came to the conclusion that the personnel subconsciously felt safe smoking near unfilled tanks due to the deceptive word "empty". This influenced people's behavior.
This example, placed by the author of the hypothesis of linguistic relativity in one ofhis work, has been criticized more than once by opponents. According to many scientists, this isolated case could not be evidence of such a global scientific theory, especially since the reason for the imprudent behavior of the workers was rooted, most likely, not in the peculiarities of their language, but in a banal disregard for safety standards.
Theory in theses
Negative criticism of the hypothesis of linguistic relativity has played in favor of this theory itself.
Thus, the most zealous opponents of Brown and Lenneberg, who accused this approach of lack of structure, revealed two of his main theses. The hypothesis of linguistic relativity can be summarized as follows:
- Grammatical and lexical features of languages affect the outlook of their speakers.
- Language determines the formation and development of thought processes.
The first of these provisions formed the basis of a mild interpretation, and the second - a strict one.
Theories of thought processes
Considering briefly the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of linguistic relativity, it is worth mentioning the various interpretations of the phenomenon of thinking.
Some psychologists tend to consider it as a kind of inner speech of a person, and accordingly, we can assume that it is closely related to the grammatical and lexical features of the language.
It is on this point of view that the hypothesis of linguistic relativity is based. Other representatives of psychological science are inclined to consider thought processes as a phenomenon not subject to the influence of anyexternal factors. That is, they proceed in exactly the same way for all human beings, and if there are any differences, then they are not of a global nature. This interpretation of the issue is sometimes called the "romantic" or "idealistic" approach.
These names were applied to this point of view due to the fact that it is the most humanistic and considers the opportunities of all people equal. However, at present, most of the scientific community prefers the first option, that is, it recognizes the possibility of the influence of language on some features of human behavior and worldview. Thus, it can be said that many modern linguists adhere to a mild version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of linguistic relativity.
Influence on science
Ideas about linguistic relativity are reflected in many scientific works of researchers in various fields of knowledge. This theory aroused the interest of both philologists and psychologists, political scientists, art critics, physiologists and many others. It is known that the Soviet scientist Lev Semyonovich Vygotsky was familiar with the works of Sapir and Whorf. The famous creator of one of the best textbooks in psychology wrote a book about the influence of language on human behavior, based on the research of these two American scientists from Yale University.
Linguistic relativity in literature
This scientific concept formed the basis of the plots of some literary works, including the science fiction novel "Apollo 17".
A inIn the dystopian classic of British literature George Orwell's "1984", the characters develop a special language in which it is impossible to criticize the actions of the government. This episode of the novel is also inspired by scientific research known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of linguistic relativity.
New languages
In the second half of the 20th century, attempts were made by some linguists to create artificial languages, each designed for a particular purpose. For example, one of these means of communication was intended for the most effective logical thinking.
All the features of this language have been designed to enable its speakers to make accurate inferences. Another creation of linguists was intended for communication between the fair sex. The creator of this language is also a woman. In her opinion, lexical and grammatical features and her creations make it possible to most vividly express the thoughts of the ladies.
Programming
Also, the achievements of Sapir and Whorf were repeatedly used by the creators of computer languages.
In the sixties of the 20th century, the hypothesis of linguistic relativity was subjected to strong criticism and even ridicule. As a result, interest in it disappeared for several decades. However, in the late 80s, a number of American scientists again drew attention to the forgotten concept.
One of these explorers was a famouslinguist George Lakoff. One of his monumental works is devoted to the study of such a means of artistic expression as metaphor in terms of various grammars. In his writings, he relies on information about the characteristics of the cultures in which a particular language functions.
It can be said with certainty that the hypothesis of linguistic relativity is still relevant today, and on its basis, discoveries are being made in the field of linguistics.
