Language and thought. Relationship of cognition and language Categories of cognition are shaped by language –Sapir and Whorf’s linguistic relativity Cognitive.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Window on Humanity Conrad Phillip Kottak Third Edition
Advertisements

Edward Sapir (1884 —1939 ) German and Indo-European philology to descriptive Native American linguistics to psychological anthropology Demonstrate view,
Sociolinguistics 2 Everyday knowledge and language.
Linguistic Relativity BCS 261 4/26/04. Issues The main question in this research is “Does language influence our perception and modes of thinking about.
Language and Cultural Meaning
Political Correctness. Language, or behavior, which is claimed to be calculated to provide a minimum of offense, particularly to the racial, cultural,
The cultural origins of colour categories Tony Belpaeme Artificial Intelligence Lab Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
English 306A; Harris 1 Linguistic relativity A.K.A. “Whorfian hypothesis” After Benjamin Lee Whorf, author of Language, thought, and reality.
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis Sampson (1980) Elena Galkina.
What is Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
Language, Culture, and Cognition
LANGUAGE AND CULTURAL MEANING Cultural behaviour is not essentially different from other forms of learned behaviour; it is a consequence of the dynamic.
LANGUAGE AND CULTURAL MEANING Cultural behavior is not essentially different from other forms of learned behavior; it is a consequence of the dynamic.
Culture & Language Relationship There are many ways that a language interacts with the culture of its speakers For many people, the language(s) they use.
Cognitive Processes PSY 334 Chapter 11 – Language Structure.
Language & the Mind LING240 Summer Session II, 2005 Lecture 6 Language Influencing Perception & Thought.
Cognitive Processes PSY 334
LANGUAGE AND CULTURAL MEANING Cultural behaviour is not essentially different from other forms of learned behaviour; it is a consequence of the dynamic.
PSY 369: Psycholinguistics
PSY 369: Psycholinguistics Language, Culture, and Cognition.
Perception: Getting Started April 24, Perception is a key topic in Cognitive Science Cognitive Science regards the mind as an information processing.
Language in Context Chapter 10.
Colour Language 1: Typology, Psycholinguistics, Neurophysiology Mike Dowman Language and Cognition 3 October, 2005.
Lost in translation What is lost in translation from one language to another? Why? If only translating was this simple...
Language Part III Language in Animals Language and Thought.
Sign Language SIGN LANGUAGE Used primarily by hearing-impaired people, Uses a different medium: hands, face, and eyes (rather than vocal tract or ears).
Sign Language.
Unit VII: Cognition Part three-LANGUAGE  Language  our spoken, written, or gestured works and the way we combine them to communicate meaning 
Structural Linguistics
Chapter 6 Language.
Language and Culture What is Culture? In the anthropological sense culture is the total way of human life. – Culture permeates every aspect of human.
Language and Thought Benjamine Worlf.
Psy1306: Language and Thought Lecture 7: Spatial Frames of Reference.
Language and Thought.
Does Language Affect Colour Perception? Miscal Avano-Nesgaard Thursday October 27, 2005.
LANGUAGE AND CULTURE. Culture – the concept more or less synonymous with civilization (opposed to “barbarism”); classical conception of culture (art,
1 Linguistics lecture #9 November 23, Overview Modularity again How visual cognition affects language How spatial cognition affects language Can.
Language & Thought Dr. Yan Jing Wu. PSY /38 Experiment 1 1.Languages in the world 2.The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis 3.Electrophysiology of cognition.
Culture And Anthropology Cultural Variation Cultural Variation Ethnocentrism Ethnocentrism Cultural Relativity Cultural Relativity.
Broca’s Aphasia Paul Broca Language and the Brain First connections drawn:
Culture, Language, and Communication.  Language is a universal psychological ability possessed by all humans.  Language forms the basis for creation.
By: Corelle Gwyn Catane.  Language is more than just a means of communication.
Language (Ch 6 from Berry et al., Cross-cultural Psychology, 2002) Ype H. Poortinga (Prof Em) Tilburg University, Netherlands & University of Leuven, Belgium.
LANGUAGE AND THOUGHT.
1 A discussion and extension of Davidoff (2001). Language and Perceptual Categorisation Kelly Sorensen Christopher Thomas November 2, 2004.
Defining ‘Culture’ Linguistic Relativity Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.
1) Linguistic determinism: Language determines / governs / affects non-linguistic cognitive processes [and behavior]. [STRONG and WEAK versions] 2) Linguistic.
Chapter 9 Psycholinguistics
Cognition & Language Claudia Stanny PSY What is Cognition? Processes of knowing  Attending  Remembering  Reasoning Content of these processes.
Cognitive Processes PSY 334 Chapter 5 – Meaning-Based Knowledge Representation.
Culture and Language Dr. K. A. Korb University of Jos 1 June 2009.
Language Part III Language in Animals Language and Thought.
Warm Up Describe the following objects as fully and completely as you can:
Ring ON Pole Cup ON Saucer Telephone ON Wall Moustache ON Face Lady ON TV IM? UM? AUF? AN?
Chapter 11 Language. Some Questions to Consider How do we understand individual words, and how are words combined to create sentences? How can we understand.
NO ANTHROPOLOGY CLASS ***FRIDAY, SEPT 13 th*** (All 100- and 200-level classes between 10 and 11 are cancelled for orientation) ***FRIDAY, OCT 4 th ***
Chapter 9 Knowledge. Some Questions to Consider Why is it difficult to decide if a particular object belongs to a particular category, such as “chair,”
Word meaning Word meaning changes over time
Chapter 6, Language.
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
Language & Culture.
Linguistic Principles
CHAPTER 5 This chapter introduces students to the study of linguistics. It discusses the basic categories and definitions used to study language, and the.
Using ideas from Szamarasz Vera, Bencze Ildikó, Fekete István
Linguistic relativity and Second language acquisition
GCSE Psychology Unit 2: Language, Thought & Communication
GCSE Psychology Unit 2: Language, Thought & Communication
Lost in translation What is lost in translation from one language to another? Why? If only translating was this simple...
Ways Of Thinking & Communicating L
outlines. Introduction: Views of some theorists:
Presentation transcript:

Language and thought

Relationship of cognition and language Categories of cognition are shaped by language –Sapir and Whorf’s linguistic relativity Cognitive categories develop independently of language both in evolution and in ontogeny, language only builds upon these –Piaget: cognitive development leads language development Language and cognition are independent –Chomsky Cognition follows its own path, but language modulates its categories

Early experiments 1.language = thought Behaviorism Watson, 1913: thought = subvocal speech 2.language ≠ thought Smith et al., 1947: curare experiment: muscle relaxant

Political correctness “language use has an effect on the way we think” euphemisms in politics –Pacification/pacifikáció = bombázás –Revenue increase/bevételnövelés = adó –Rationalisation/munkaerő-gazdálkodás = elbocsátások social movements: sexist/racist etc. language is responsible for sexist/racist etc. thinking –chairman → chairperson –Gypsy → Roma (?) –blind → with visual impairment Orwell, 1984: Newspeak

Language shapes the mind linguistic determinism : a language shapes psychological mechanisms Benjamin Lee Whorf Language shapes the mind, world view, structure of science Differences in lexical (vocabulary) and grammatical organization result in different conceptual schemes

Whorf: linguistic determinism and relativity Linguist and engineer, student of anthropologist Edward Sapir –Studied native American cultures and languages –Emphasized the variety and differences of cultures, not the common features Strong view: all higher forms of thought build on language Weak view: the structure of the language one generally uses influences the way they understand their environment and act upon in it

Linguistic relativity (the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis) Follows from linguistic determinism Linguistic relativity: distinctions encoded in one language are unique to that language alone, and "there is no limit to the structural diversity of languages” –It is impossible to translate precisely from one language to another lexical and grammatical relativity

Lexical influences Lexical level: what words are found in a given language, and what they refer to –different languages carve up the world in different ways through more or less specialized vocabularies –languages differ with respect to how they divide up the world into nouns and verbs lightning: a N in English, but a V in Hopi –duration an important feature Tzotzil Mayan: eat-mushy; eat-a-slender-shape-food, eat- meat –the properties of objects are incorporated into the verbs

Grammatical influences on thinking Number category –whether inanimate nouns can be pluralized or not –in English any noun can be pluralized as long as the referent is discrete, i.e., mass nouns such as paper, flour cannot be pluralized count nouns such as pen, girl –in Yucatec, only animate nouns can be pluralized –Lucy (1992): English speakers specify the number of objects in descriptions of line drawings more frequently than Yucatec speakers

Grammatical influences Tense markers –determine location of events in time past now future –he is running –he ran WARI in Hopi –he will run How does a temporal language compare to a “timeless language”?

Tense Hopi distinguishes between –Reportive: report of a recent or ongoing event –Expective: report of an expected event (past or future) –Nomic (not described) According to Whorf these are not tenses because they reflect the epistemic validity of the statement rather than its duration or location in time

Potawatomi inclusive and exclusive pronouns: we (

Hungarian object agreement The verb form signals the specificity of the object –Megevett egy almát. –Megette az almát.

Hungarian locatives StaticGoalSource Interior (3D) BANBABÓL Exterior (2D) NRARÓL Approximate (dimension neutral) NÁLHOZTÓL

Examples 1.snow 2.colours 3.gender 4.spatial language

Snow Eskimos have many different words for ‘snow’ → evidence that they see snow differently ( urban legend! ) → Boas, (1911): 4 aput („snow on the ground”) gana („falling snow”) piqsirpoq („drifting snow”) qimuqsuq („a snowdrift”) → Sapir& Whorf, 1940: 7 → 1978: 50 → 1984 ( New York Times ): 100

The truth about snow There are several Eskimo languages + Eskimo languages differ in the number of expressions they have for snow Definition of “word” is problematic –Inuit is a polysynthetic language: are words derived from the same stem different or not? More importantly Even if it was true that one language had more, is it evidence that they see snow differently? painters: paints ornithologists: birds

Colors

Basic colour terms (Berlin & Kay, 1969) Properties –1 morpheme –Not restricted to one class of items (e.g. blond) –Do not belong to the scope of another color terms (e.g. torqoise) –Frequently and generally used Basic color terms are chosen from 11 colors by all languges: black, white, red, yellow, green, blue, brown, pink, purple, orange, grey. languages differ in how many basic color terms they have (Hungarian for ‘pink’ rózsaszín is not a basic color term)

2 colour terms (mili-mola): Dani, New Guinea There seems to be a universal hierarchy of colour categorisation.

blackwhite red greenyellow blue brown purplepinkorangegrey

Do speakers of different languages see colors differently? Color categories are not arbitrary! Same everywhere: –light –Operation of the human eye 3 kinds of cones in color perception → these determine what we see Experiments (pl. Heider, 1972 – the dani): recalling and discrimination is good for colors—focal colors

Experimental results (pl. Heider & Oliver, 1972; Rosch, 1978, Berlin & Kay 1969, Kay & Kempton 1984) People speaking different languages choose the same shade as best exemplars of a category (focal colours) –The best exemplar of grue in grue languages is the same as the best exemplar of green in green-blue languages Dani do as well as English speakers in non/verbal colour discrimination and memory tasks In a free categorization task, different speakers use different categories (those marked in their languages)

Winawer et al 2007 Russian speakers: faster RT if the two shades are from different linguistic colour categories English and Russian speakers –Russian: dark blue/light blue distinction A blue shade shown, then two blue shades Task: which of the two is the same shade as the probe?

Gilbert et al 2006 If language affects perception, the effect should be stronger for the right visual field Task: Which side is the different shade on? Variables: –shade difference across or within linguistic category (blue-green) –Target in left or right visual field Results: when different linguistic categories, faster response in RVF

Korean locatives (Bowerman & Choi 1994, 2001)

Korean locatives (Bowerman, 1996) Korean (vs. English and Hungarian): no linguistic distinction, between placing an object in a container or on a surface ( in vs. on, -ban vs. -on) Korean language distinguishes between tight fit (ring on a finger, picture on the wall) and loose fit (fruit in a bowl, object leaning against a wall) –This distinction holds for both containment ( in ) and support ( on ) Experiments –English/Korean babies differentiate all potential spatial distinctions –As a results of acquiring a language certain spatial distinctions (those strengthened by language) become salient in representation

Navajo shape classifiers Carroll and Casagrande: Navajo vs. English –Navajo verbs change form according to the shape of the object it takes (shape classifiers) flexible vs. rigid; flat vs. round –give blue rope and yellow stick and ask which of the two a blue stick can go with Navajo choose shape: yellow stick –English choose color: blue rope –conducted the test with upper class Bostonians responded like Navajo children –there is other kinds of determinism than just linguistic determinism

Grammatical gender and object perception Experiment (Boroditsky & Schmidt, 2003) –Spanish, German and English speakers (experiment language: English) –Training: 24 pairs of object - name –Test: object word shown, name has to be recalled Results –For Spanish and German speakers, better recall performance for pairs where the gender of the name corresponds to the gender of the object word apple – Paul / Paula bench – Eric / Erica clock – Karl / Karla apple – ? bench – ? clock – ?

Spatial reference (Brown 2001) Ego-centric (left, right, in front of me, behind me) – relative Intrinsic (left of the object, in front of the object, etc) Geocentric (hill-wise, sea-wise, etc) – absolute

Relative front back left right

Intrinsic left right front back

Absolute North West South East

Tzeltal Left „xin” and right „wa’el” –Refer to body parts only Absolute reference system: –„alan”: downhill ~North –„ajk’ol”: uphill ~South –Indoors, outdoors

Experiments Dutch + Tzeltal speakers (Bowerman, Levinson) –Seated at talble in a room, shown a pattern –Turned 180 degrees, asked to reproduce pattern

Chips task

Chips task - results

Maze task

Maze - results

Evidence for Relativity? Li & Gleitman (2002) –Response depends on environment: the availability of reference points Compare cities/varied landscape vs. open landscape –In a darkened room (no visible reference points), English speakers also use the absolute reference frame

Reference frames and ecological conditions