Linguistics Study Guide Linguistic Relativity | Michigan State University

University:
Michigan State University
Course:
LIN 401 | Introduction to Linguistics
Academic year:

2022
Views:

301

Pages:

2
Author:

Marilyn James

Notes- Linguistic Relativity The Basics • Linguistic relativity: one’s native language influences the way people think • Linguistic relativity is aka the Sapir-Wharf hypothesis Problems with the theory • What does it mean by think? o Categorize? Perceive? Remember? Notice? • Translation mistakes – seeing one language through the lens of the other o Negative Concord dialects – double negatives is just one negative spread out with a marker (ex: “I didn’t see nothing” = I didn’t see anything) • Vocabulary differences do not always mean thought differences o There’s the myth about there being hundreds of Eskimo words for snow • It’s more about culture than language o Many languages don’t use ego-oriented (based on people) directions like left/right but rather, use cardinal directions • If your language forces you to make certain distinctions do you think about them differently? o Ex: Would a Chinese speaker be more aware of sibling ages than an English speaker? o Ex 2: Would a dual language speaker be more aware of two vs three objects? ▪ Dual language = a language with words meaning two (like pair, couple, duo, etc) • Do speakers of path languages vs manner languages see motion differently? o Speakers of path languages are forced to encode path ▪ Ex: The snake slithered → The snake slithered through the garden ▪ Manner is optional for path languages o English generally has both o Tests were performed with 3 conditions: ▪ linguistic encoding – asked to describe the event 26 ▪ free encoding – could think about whatever they wanted ▪ blocking of linguistic encoding – used shadowing to make sure they couldn’t be thinking about it linguistically (repeating nonsense syllables) o The only difference in testing was that Spanish speakers were more entuned to the path and English speakers were more focused on manner Conclusion on linguistic relativity • The different linguistic patterns do play a role when speakers definitely encode the events linguistically • There are no deep perceptual differences: speakers are not always attuned to seeing path vs manner since in free encoding and shadowing conditions, there were no effects of the language Evidentials • Many languages require verbs in main clause declaritives to be marked with a marker (like as suffix) that specifies the source of evidence o Do speakers of such languages pay more attention to the source of evidence? • Some languages distinguish direct vs indirect evidence o Ex: Quechua in Purvian Andes • For languages which mark direct evidence, occasionally visual evidence is marked differently o so there is direct visual and sirect other • Often, direct evidence is bit explicitly marked, indirect evidence is • Direct evidence: personal experience/knowledge • Indirect evidence: inferential or reportative 27