The Sapir-Whorf theory of language

According to this hypothesis, the language we speak makes us think and perceive things differently.

Traditionally, human beings have understood language as a means of communication through which it is possible to establish a link with the world and allows us to express what we think or feel.

This conception sees language as a means of expression of what is already inside. However, for Sapir-Whorf's theory of language, however, language is of much greater importanceIt plays a much more important role in organizing, thinking or even perceiving the world.

Although the relationship between thought and language has been a field of study that has received much interest from psychologists and linguists, few theories have gone so far in relating these two worlds.

When language shapes thought

According to Sapir-Whorf's theory of language, human communication at the verbal level, the use of language in human beings, is not limited to expressing our mental contents, is not limited to expressing our mental contents. For this theory, language plays a very important role in shaping our way of thinking and even our perception of reality, determining or influencing our vision of the world.

Thus, the grammatical categories in which language classifies the world around us makes us adhere to a specific way of thinking, reasoning and perceiving, which is linked to the culture and communicative context in which we are immersed throughout childhood. In other words, the structure of our language makes us tend to use specific interpretative structures and strategies.

Likewise, the Sapir-Whorf theory of language establishes that each language has its own terms and conceptualizations that cannot be explained in other languages. This theory thus emphasizes the role of the cultural context in providing a framework within which to elaborate our perceptions, so that we are able to the world within socially-imposed margins, and we are able to observe the world within socially-imposed margins..

Some examples

For example, Eskimo people are accustomed to living in cold environments with lots of snow and ice, possessing in their language the ability to discriminate between different types of snow. Compared to other peoples, this contributes to their being much more aware of the nature and context in which they live, being able to perceive nuances of reality that would escape a Westerner.

Another example can be seen in some tribes in whose language there are no references to time. Such individuals have severe difficulties in conceptualizing time units. Other peoples do not have words to express certain colors, such as orange.

A final, much more recent example is the term umami, a Japanese concept that refers to a flavor derived from the concentration of glutamate and that has no concrete translation for other languages, making it difficult for a Westerner to describe.

Two versions of the Sapir-Whorf theory.

With the passage of time and the criticisms and demonstrations that seemed to indicate that the effect of language on thought is not as modulating of perception as the theory initially stipulated, Sapir-Whorf's theory of language has undergone some subsequent modifications.. This is why we can speak of two versions of this theory.

1. Strong hypothesis: linguistic determinism

The initial view of Sapir-Whorf's theory of language had a very deterministic and radical view of the role of language. For the strong Whorfian hypothesis, language completely determines our judgment, thinking ability and perception, shaping them.For the strong Whorfian hypothesis, language completely determines our judgment, thinking ability and perception, shaping them, and it can even be considered that thought and language are essentially the same thing.

Under this premise, a person whose language does not contemplate a certain concept will not be able to understand or distinguish it. By way of example, a people who have no word for the color orange will not be able to distinguish one stimulus from another whose only difference is color. In the case of those who do not include temporal notions in their speech, they will not be able to distinguish between what happened a month ago and what happened twenty years ago, or between present, past or future.

Evidence

Subsequent studies have shown that the Sapir-Whorf theory of language is not correct, at least in its deterministic conception. is not correct, at least in its deterministic conception.Experiments and research have shown it to be at least partially false.

The lack of knowledge of a concept does not imply that it cannot be created within a given language, which under the premise of the strong hypothesis would not be possible. Although it is possible that a concept does not have a concrete correlate in another language, it is possible to generate alternatives.

Continuing with the examples of previous points, if the strong hypothesis were correct, people who do not have a word to define a color would not be able to distinguish between two different colors. would not be able to distinguish between two identical stimuli except in that respectThey would not be able to perceive the differences. However, experimental studies have shown that they are fully capable of distinguishing such stimuli from others of a different color.

Similarly, we may not have a translation for the term umami, but we are able to detect that it is a taste that leaves a velvety sensation in the mouth, leaving a prolonged and subtle aftertaste.

Likewise, other linguistic theories, such as Chomsky's, have studied and indicated that although language is acquired through a long learning process, there are partially innate mechanisms that, before the emergence of language as such, allow us to observe communicative aspects and even the existence of concepts in babies, being common to most of the known peoples.

2. Weak hypothesis: linguistic relativism

The initial deterministic hypothesis was, with time, modified in the face of the evidence that the examples used to defend it were not completely valid, nor did they demonstrate a total determination of thought by language.

However, Sapir-Whorf's theory of language has developed into a second version, according to which, although language does not determine per se per se determines thought and perception, but it does is an element that helps to shape and influence the type of content that is the type of content to which most attention is paid.

For example, it is proposed that the characteristics of the spoken language may influence the way in which certain concepts are conceived or the attention given to certain nuances of the concept to the detriment of others.

Evidence

This second version has found some empirical demonstration, since it reflects the fact that the fact that a person finds it difficult to conceptualize a certain aspect of reality because his or her language does not contemplate it means that he or she does not focus on that aspect.

For example, while a Spanish speaker tends to pay a lot of attention to verb tense, others such as Turkish tend to focus on who performs the action, or English on spatial position. In this way, each language favors highlighting specific aspectswhich, when acting in the real world, may provoke slightly different reactions and responses. For example, the Spanish speaker will find it easier to remember when something has happened than where, if asked to recall it.

This can also be observed when classifying objects. While some people will use shape to catalog objects, others will tend to associate things by their material or color.

The fact that a particular concept does not exist in language means that even if we are able to perceive it, we do not tend to pay attention to it. If for us and our culture it is not important whether what happened happened a day ago or a month ago, if we are asked directly when it happened it will be difficult for us to give an answer because it is something we have never thought about. Or if we are presented with something with a strange characteristic, such as a color we have never seen before, this may be perceived but it will not be decisive in making distinctions unless the coloration is an important element in our thinking.

Bibliographical references:

• Parra, M. (n.d.). The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Department of Linguistics, Universidad Nacional de Colombia.

• Sapir, E. (1931). Conceptual categories in primitive languages. Science.

• Schaff, A. (1967). Lenguaje y Conocimiento. Editorial Grijalbo: México.

• Whorf, B.L. (1956). Language, Thought and Reality. The M.I.T. Press, Massachussetts.