We Have a New Site!
With the help of your donations we have been making good progress on designing and launching our new website! Check it out at https://linguistlist.org/!***We are still in our beta stages for the new site--if you have any feedback, be sure to let us know at webdevlinguistlist.org***
Ask A Linguist FAQ
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
What is the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis?
What are some criticisms of the hypothesis?
LINGUIST Discussion of the topic
What is the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis?
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the theory that an individual's thoughts and actions are determined by the language or languages that individual speaks. The strong version of the hypothesis states that all human thoughts and actions are bound by the restraints of language, and is generally less accepted than the weaker version, which says that language only somewhat shapes our thinking and behavior. Following are quotes from the two linguists who first formulated the hypothesis and for whom it is named, Edward Sapir and Benjamin Whorf :
"Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their society. It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection. The fact of the matter is that the 'real world' is to a large extent unconsciously built upon the language habits of the group. No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same world with different labels attached... We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation." -Sapir (1958:69)
"We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages. The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds - and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds. We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way - an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language. The agreement is, of course, an implicit and unstated one, but its terms are absolutely obligatory; we cannot talk at all except by subscribing to the organization and classification of data which the agreement decrees." -Whorf (1940:213-14)
What are some criticisms of the hypothesis?
While linguists generally agree that the weaker Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, also known as linguistic relativism, can be shown to be true to some extent, there are criticisms of the stronger form of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, also known as linguistic determinism. Among the criticisms of the strong form of the Hypothesis are:
- One of Whorf's central arguments in his paper on language determining thought was that the Hopi terminology for time gave the Hopi a different and unique understanding of how time worked, distinct from the typical Western conception of time. Pinker (1994) argues that Whorf had never actually met anyone from the Hopi tribe and that a later anthropologist discovered, in fact, the Hopi conception of time was not so different from the traditional Western understanding of it.
- The problem of translatability: if each language had a completely distinct reality encoded within it, how could a work be translated from one language to another? Yet, literary works, instruction manuals and so forth are regularly translated and communication in this regard is not only possible, but happens every day.
Discussions on LINGUIST that pertain to the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis September 27, 1991 to Present
- 2.572 Disc: Whorf and Warning
- Bruce E. Nevin, self concept
- bert peeters, 2.559 Warning
- Re: 2.559 Responses: Soviet language, warning, kilometer, etc.
- WARNING/posting
- 2.588 Misc: Whorf, Einstein, Change
- bert peeters, Another myth: "unconditioned change"
- Whorf and Relativity
- Alan Prince, Re: 2.567 Einstein
- Michael Kac, Re: 2.567 Einstein
- 2.603 Disc: Whorf and Plurals
- Re: 2.588 Responses: Whorf, Einstein, Change
- Re: 2.588 Responses: Whorf, Einstein, Change
- Re: 2.594 Queries: Whorf
- Ellen Prince, Re: 2.599 Plurals
- Michael Covington, Re: 2.599 Plurals
- 2.610 Misc: Whorf, Washing and Whenever
- David E. Newton, Re: Washing, etc
- A HARRIS - Alan Harris, re: needs washing and anymore/SouthernCA.
- Pamela Munro, Re: 2.555 It needs washed
- Catrin Sian Rhys, Re: 2.596 Whenever
- Logical Language Group, Re: 2.603 Whorf and Plurals
- 2.632 Disc: Whorf
- Allan C. Wechsler, 2.610 Whorfian relativism
- Niko Besnier, Whorf again
- CHARLES LAUGHLIN, SAPIR-WHORF
- 2.636 Disc: Whorf
- Fan mail from some flounder? Re: 2.632 Whorf
- William McKellin, Re: 2.632 Whorf
- Niko Besnier, Berlin & Kay vs Whorf
- Re: 2.632 Whorf
- Re: 2.632 Whorf
- 2.657 Disc: Whorf
- 2.670 Disc: Whorf Part 1
- on the SW hypothesis
- CHARLES LAUGHLIN, MORE ON SWH
- 2.671 Disc: Whorf Part 2
- Bruce E. Nevin, Whorf-Sapir Hypothesis
- 2.682 Disc: Whorf-Sapir Hypothesis
- Bruce E. Nevin, interest in II, not III
- Bruce E. Nevin, more on W-S Hypothesis
- Margaret Fleck, neuroscience and Sapir-Whorf
- 2.700 Disc: Whorf
- PETER GINGISS, Re: Whorf
- Willet Kempton, Whorf and color
- 5.768 Disc: Pinker's book and linguist bashing
- Dan Alford, Pinker's book and linguist bashing
- 5.1259 Disc: Eskimo "snow"
- Douglas J. Glick, Re: 5.1239 Eskimo "snow"
- Eskimo snow
- 5.1322 Disc: Sapir-Whorf
- Douglas J. Glick, Re: "snow" 1/2
- 5.1449 Disc: Sapir-Whorf, Words for snow
- Logical Language Group, Sapir-Whorf
- Re: 5.1401 Sum: Snow
- 6.1149 Disc: Sapir-Whorf and what to tell students these days
- 10.1268 Disc: Re: Universal Word Order
- JFThiels, Re: 10.1263, Disc: Universal Word Order
-
10.1283
Disc:
Universal Word Order
- Roger Billerey, Universal Word Order?
- Dan Moonhawk Alford, Re: 10.1263, Disc: Universal Word Order[, or The Great Whorf Hypothesis Hoax Revisited]
-
10.1289
Disc:
Universal Word Order
- Larry, Re: 10.1283, Disc: Universal Word Order
- Sean Witty, Re: 10.1283, Disc: Universal Word Order
- 10.1292 Disc: Universal Word Order
- Dan Moonhawk Alford, Re: 10.1289, Disc: Universal Word Order (and Whorf)
- 10-1323 Disc: Universal Word Order
- Dan Moonhawk Alford, Re: 10.1320, Disc: Universal Word Order
- 15.163 Disc: New: Gil & Boroditsky: Indonesian Linguistics
- Denis Donovan, No Deep Structure?
- Whitney Ann Postman, Economist Article: Indonesian Linguistics
- 15.243 Disc: Re: Gil & Boroditsky: Indonesian Linguistics
- Rose Thomas, Re: Gil & Boroditsky: Indonesian Linguistics
References Cited
Sapir, Edward. 1958. Culture, Language and Personality. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Pinker, Steven. 1994. The Language Instinct. Harmondsworth: Penguin.
Whorf, Benjamin Lee. 1940. Science and Linguistics. Technology Review (1940) 35: 229-31, 247-8.