Linguistic Relativity

Abstract

The term “Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis” (LRH) has come to be used as a cover term for a family of related hypotheses about the possible causal impact of learning and speaking particular languages on nonlinguistic cognition. This chapter aims to distinguish among some of these hypotheses, trace their origins, and discuss the presently available evidence for and against them. It also examines the implications of the hypotheses and the sources of the interest in them. And it chronicles the waxing and waning of this interest since the writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf (1897–1941), which launched an at times heated debate about these ideas among scholars from across a range of academic disciplines. A classification of different types of language‐on‐thought effects is proposed. Special emphasis is placed on the role of the language‐specificity and culture‐specificity of linguistic meaning in the debate.

Verbal Symbols Support Concrete but Enable Abstract Concept Formation: Evidence From Brain‐Constrained Deep Neural Networks

“…Likewise, symbol addition led to more substantial and more prolonged activation, as shown by peak activation and reverberation measures (e.g., Figure 3, Panels A and B). This is clear evidence for a facilitatory causal effect of language on conceptual processing in brain‐constrained deep neural networks, which is in line with classic and current “Whorfian” theories of linguistic relativity (Athanasopoulos & Casaponsa, 2020; Bohnemeyer, 2021; Gumperz & Levinson, 1991; Lupyan et al., 2020; Maier & Abdel Rahman, 2019; Majid et al., 2004; Miller et al., 2018; Thierry, 2016; Whorf & Carroll, 1976). Please note that our simulation procedures imitating brain processes of perceiving and experiencing objects and actions in the world remained unchanged across simulations and learning conditions, and that the influence of linguistic‐symbolic learning documented in the simulations must therefore be present at the neurocognitive level of stored conceptual and symbolic representations that emerged in the brain‐constrained networks as a result of correlation‐driven learning.…”

Metaphors in Mentalization-Based Treatment: Reintroducing the Language of Change in “Plain Old Therapy”

“…These concepts govern our thought, our everyday functioning, but also structure what we perceive, how we get around in the world, and how we relate to other people (Lakoff & Johnson, 2008). The hypothesis of linguistic relativity posits that the language, or the logos, we operate within is a large contributor to how we view our reality (Bohnemeyer, 2020). As expressed by Kopp (1995): "Metaphors are mirrors that reflect our inner images of self, life, and others.…”

Influence of language on perception and concept formation in a brain-constrained deep neural network model

“…In recent years, two aspects have received particular attention; on the one hand, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis [5], also known as the linguistic relativity hypothesis (for reviews, see [6][7][8]), predicts that a speaker's language, specifically the way in which this language 'carves up' and categorizes percepts, influences how those percepts are processed to start with. This has most extensively been studied in the domain of colour where an impressive body of evidence now exists suggesting that differing colour vocabularies in different languages are linked with different performance in colour perception, categorization and memory, both at the behavioural and neural levels [9,10].…”