Agenda Pomona College LCS 11: Cognitive Science ֠ Linguistic relativity Linguistic relativity ֠ GQ # 4.3 discussions ֠ Pirahã and exact cardinality Jesse A. Harris April 13, 2013 Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 1 Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 2 Does language shape thought? Linguistic determinism What . . . are you crazy? Consensus view in modern linguistics: Mapping between language and thought is universal – variations are largely arbitrary. Yes, totally “To have a second language is to Linguistic determinism: The language of an individual have a second soul.” determines how that individual thinks about the world. Yes, kind of Linguistic relativity: The language of an indivudal in fl uences, Charlemagne (742–814) but does not wholly determine, an individual’s thoughts. Holy Roman Emperor Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 3 Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 4
Sapir Whorf hypothesis Linguistic determinism “We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native language.” ∼ Whorf “The limits of my language mean the limits of my world.” ◮ Somewhat misleading: Sapir and Edward Sapir (1884–1939) Whorf never jointly proposed the idea. (Actually intended to determine the boundaries of philosophical thought; ◮ Yet, variants can be found in both Wittgenstein later abandoned this authors’ writings, to di ff ering project.) extremes. ◮ Seemingly presupposes that thought is dependent (or even reducible) to a Ludwig Wittgenstein kind of internal language. Benjamin Whorf (1889–1951) (1897–1941) Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 5 Substance Circular reasoning Who fi an. Eskimos are greatly in fl uenced by their language (1) a. Two pens in their perception of snow. For example, they have N words for snow [N varies widely – see b. # Much pen Pullum], whereas English only has one, snow. Having all these di ff erent words makes them Count noun think of snow very di ff erently than, say, Americans do. Skeptic. How do you know they think of snow di ff erently? (2) a. # Two dirts Whor fi an. Look at all the words they have for it! N of them! b. Much dirt Parody from Greg Murphy (1996), cited in Bloom & Keil (2001) Mass noun Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 7
Substance Substance (3) a. Two waters b. Much water Classi fi ers Yucatec Mayan nouns refer to substances and receive a Count noun numerical classi fi er for shape ( fl at, oblong, round, people) when noun is in a counting context. Mass noun Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 10 Lucy and Gaskins (2001) “These fi ndings suggest that aspect of grammar can in fact shape the way speakers of a language conceptualize the shapes and materials of objects.” Initial item Shape condition Substance Open question What do you think? Is this English More likely to compare in terms of shape. conclusion warranted? Mayan More likely to compare in terms of material. Lera Boroditsky Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 11
“These fi ndings once again indicate Grammatical gender that people’s thinking about objects is in fl uenced by the grammatical genders thier native language assigns to the objects’ names. It appears that Languages encode items with grammatical gender: masculine, even a small fl uke of grammar (the feminine, neutral. Largely arbitrary. seemingly arbitrary assignment of a noun to be masculine or feminine) German hard, heavy, jagged, can have an e ff ect on how people metal, serrated, useful think about thinkgs in the world.” Spanish golden, intricate, little lovely, shiny and tiny Lera Boroditsky Open question What do you think? Is this Lera Boroditsky conclusion warranted? Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 13 Boas Jakobson Principle GQ # 4.2 For many deep contrasts, there is, in fact, a continuum of possible values. The case of linguistic relativity is no different. On one extreme, we might argue that our language completely determines our thought and world-view. On the other extreme, “If di ff erent languages in fl uence their we might argue that language and thought are entirely speakers’ minds in varying ways, this independent. Frank et al (2008) offer a nice compromise between Franz Boas is not because of what each language the two views. First, brie fl y summarize their position with (1858–1942) respect to how language impacts the use of exact numbers. allows people to think but rather Second, do you think that the case of verbal evidentiality in because of the kinds of information Matses, as discussed at the end of chapter 6 of Deutscher, shows each language habitually obliges something similar, but in a di ff erent subject matter? Or is the people to think about.” (Deutscher, Matses case entirely di ff erent? Why or why not? (This answer is 2011) open ended, so just o ff er a short, simple position.) Group leaders: Orren, Devon, Tatiana, Alex, Natasha, Sarah, Lea Lynn, Noah, Cole Roman Jakobson (1896–1982)
Pirahã Pirahã “My own view then is that the case ◮ Language in Brazilian Amazon of Pirahã illustrates, perhaps as well (N = 300-350) as any example ever discussed in the ◮ Hunting-gathering tribe literature, the kind of bi-directional causal relationship between language ◮ Constrained productivity and culture that Boas and Sapir 1. Only 3 pronouns would have expected us to fi nd.“ 2. A relative counting system 3. Arguably, no subordination, no recursion http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/ ∼ myl/languagelog/archives/001387.html Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 17 Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 18 Pirahã Pirahã The lack of linguistic terms for exact quantity did not a ff ect the Piraha’s performance on analog matching tasks, only those that required remembering larger cardinalities. Relative numbers ◮ Language plays a “compressive role” allowing e ffi cient hói few encoding hoí fewer ◮ Able to use verbally mediated memory system to encode baagiso many and retrieve these items more e ffi ciently. Fig. 1. Proportion of Pirahã speakers using each of the three proposed quantity words in Pirahã. Sets with different quantities were presented in increasing order and participants were asked to describe their quantity. Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 19 Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 20
Evidentiality Evidentiality Evidentiality Marking the source of knowledge via linguistic means. Discussion question ◮ About a quarter of the world’s languages exhibit some How do languages with evidentiality compare with languages grammatical markers of evidentiality: Matses, Croatian, with di ff erent linguistic expressions of time? Do they reveal Salish, Eastern Pomo, Navajo, Korean, etc. anything in particular about the plausibility of linguistic ◮ Types of evidentiality vary across languages: direct determinism? How about a weakened version of linguistic evidence, indirect, through reason, hearsay, from an relativity? authority, from well-known lore, etc. ◮ Ways of expressing evidentiality varies as well: clitics, verb or mood classes, limited to types of connectives, full verbal paradigms, etc. Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 21 Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 22 ֠ Reading: Sacks, 2010 chapter ֠ Writing response due April 19 (moved back 2 days) any time. ֠ Begin unit on vision (Ho ff man, 2000) next Wednesday. Jesse A. Harris: LCS 11: Cognitive Science, Linguistic relativity 23
Recommend
More recommend
