Language and the self

The relationship between language and thought is a much debated on topic in linguistics. Several linguists have
had differing theories about the relationship shared between the two. Theories that relate to the Sapir-Whorf
hypothesis state that our thoughts are a direct product of the language we speak making language a sort of
prison for our thoughts. Other theorists like Piaget argue that our thoughts precede language and our language is
developed as we go through the different stages of cognitive development and some other theorists state that
our language is a reflection of how we perceive the world. Clearly the theories all differ but they all agree that
language and thought have a relationship.
In the passage an important issue raised is the differences between language speakers and their perception of
thought. In the line “In English…however in Japanese or Spanish”. The reason why this is important is because
Boroditsky is analysing how people of different languages perceive something based off of how they speak. She
mentions how in Japanese or Spanish blame is not assigned to an act if it is accidental so a cup breaking would
not be “he broke a cup” like in English but “a cup broke”. This lines up with the theory of reflectionism that states
that our language is a direct reflection of the way we think as it can be argued that the reason why the Japanese
and Spanish do not assign blame in the case of an accident is because they feel that no one in particular is
responsible if they did not intend it to happen. Boroditsky’s findings also suggest that we perceive the world and
our thoughts differently based off of the language we speak, this further ties into the idea of reflectionism as it
provides evidence of the fact that we shape our environment based off of the language that we speak. Boroditsky
also described the rules of the several other languages, in the extract the line “In the Yegua language of Peru…”
talks about the grammatical rules of the Peruvian language and the tenses used in the language. This is
important because it suggests to the reader of the article that just like in the English language the Peruvian
language follows a set of grammatical rules concerning tense further suggesting that perhaps languages are all
similar as they share rules and regulations similarly. This idea is further expanded on in the theory of
universalism that states that every language is similar due to language being a reflection of the human psyche.
The example provided in the text is similar to the fact that every language in the world, when spoken, contains
vowels and consonants. Boroditsky through her work has provided evidence to support two theories, the theory
of linguistic reflectionism and the theory of Universalism.
However, what is even more interesting is that Boroditsky seemingly provides evidence for linguistic determinism
in the extract. In the line reading, “in Japanese or Spanish, she explains, intent matters” it can be argued that
here Boroditsky is acknowledging the fact that there are differences in thinking between people of different origin
as she even tells the presumably English interviewer that “you would likely say” showing that the origin of a
person can affect their thinking due to the way language is used in that region as she has predicted the thinking
of the interviewer before they even speak. This theory can be supported by the fact that in countries such as
China the phrase “so do we have a deal?” requires a positive response as in their culture they do not believe in
the spread of negativity. In an African context most African languages do not have gender specific pronouns
meaning they do not refer to the individual but instead have words that refer to a group such as “baja” in the
Chewa language which means them. It can be argued that this feature of the language is the reason why African
people usually associated in groups and believed in group gatherings and discouraged anti-social behaviour.
Further in the article it is stated that “differences in how cultures…time or gender”, this is important because it
underlines a specific detail that is ignored in some theories such as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. According to the
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, the language spoken by a people strictly dictates their thinking, the justification for this
theory was the fact that the Hopi people had no language to express time so they therefore had no concept of
time. The details in this article disprove this thinking as Boroditsky seemingly suggests that these concepts are
universal but they are just expressed differently in every language. An example that supports this is the fact that
most African languages do not have an expression for gender specific pronouns but there is evidence that
African tribes understand gender which opposes the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis completely. Interestingly enough,
there is further evidence of the theory of universalism in the text. In the line “Indonesian verbs never change to
express time” it is suggested that although the rules may differ in Indonesian, the concepts of time and
grammatical rules still apply in the country and Indonesians still have a perception of what time is. Other
languages such as Bemba and Tonga from Zambia are also similar in the sense that they also have a perception
of time but they only denote it by the stages of the sun’s movement. According to universalism, all languages
have similar concepts but the expression of those concepts differs as it is a reflection of our culture, this example
seemingly proves that theory which is why it is very important.
From the evidence discussed so far it can be argued that a very important aspect of the text in this extract is the
diversity of language and the effect it has on thought. In the opening paragraph of the text the writer goes into
great detail to explain how Boroditsky has travelled across the world to encounter several different culturals even
going as far as the Aboriginal people. This extensive researching of cultures is further evidence of the theory of
linguistic reflectionism. An example from the text that illustrates this. The line “the Yagua language…or legendary
past” the text shows that the Yegua language is extremely precise when it comes to telling the time, this
suggests that the people of Peru would be confused by the more general telling of time in English but also that
the people of Peru provide extensive detail when describing a time to meet for example. Another example would
be the perception of time in Zambia. In Zambia often people denote time with morning, afternoon, evening and
night time but not with specific hours due to the traditional way time was perceived which was using the sun.
Many Zambians have a tendency of being late because if they are told to come in the morning for example they
consider any time from sunrise to noon morning and rarely use specific hours of the day. The examples provided
show that our language is a direct reflection of our perception of the world based off our culture. One could argue
that this also provides some evidence of Noam Chomsky’s theory that our language is affected by our support
system around us. From the examples above you can see that if a thinking or form of language is used
extensively in a society then it will affect those that grow into the culture as they are exposed to it from a young
age. The early example in the text in the line “small children shook their heads” provides further evidence of this
idea as it shows that at a young age children begin to perceive the world around them because of the adult
influence in their environment. The elders of the Aboriginal people most likely told stories of navigation and the
dangers of crocodiles which in turn has been told to the children which has moulded their thinking allowing them
to express this for themselves in language.
In conclusion, the most important parts of this extract seemingly provide evidence of several linguistic theories
such as the theory of linguistic reflectionism, universalism, Chomsky’s LASS and language relativity. Boroditsky’s
research analyses language from several different contrasts and puts into consideration people of varying
backgrounds while also providing evidence to disprove some theories such as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. The
relationship between language and thought is broad and extensive and cannot be exhausted, however, the text
in this article goes a long way in explaining this relationship effectively.