Language determines thought
- Piaget (see here) believed that language depends on thought i.e. it is not possible to have the words available or to understand language without context (thoughts being a context in which language can ‘take root’)
- The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (SWH) takes the opposite view i.e. language precedes (and in turn produces) thought
- There is a so-called ‘strong version’ of the SWH which goes as follows:
- Language determines thought, therefore if the language you speak does not have specific words/vocabulary for an object/idea/event then you will not be able to think about such an object/idea/event
- People from different cultures will think differently based on their cultural experiences - and this will be reflected in the language they use, which is known as linguistic relativity
- The language a person uses determines their worldview and perspective i.e. language comes first and thoughts depend on the structure, content and quality of whichever language is learned from birth
- An example of linguistic relativity is the Inuit Eskimos and their words for snow: qanik (falling snow); aputi (ground snow); aniu (drinking water snow) compared to the one word for snow in English
How many types of snow? The Inuit Eskimos have several different words for the English language word 'snow'.
Exam Tip
The terms ‘strong’ and ‘weak’ relating to the two different versions of the SWH are nothing to do with actual strength or quality: they simply refer to the degree to which language is assumed to influence thought. So, the ‘strong’ version assumes that language directly determines thought; the ‘weak’ version suggests that language influences thought i.e. in a more ‘gentle’ and indirect way.