In this thesis, the author considers the nature of the relativity thesis of language and some of the philosophical problems that arise from it. The thesis has probably become best known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis of the relativity of language, after two scholars of American Indian languages who supported various forms of the hypothesis. Views similar to theirs have been expressed by a number of different authors both before and after the writings of Sapir and Whorf. The introduction is devoted to a discussion of some of the variety of the formulations of the thesis. There is mention of a few of the many authors who have been thought to be "relativists". Some attempt has been made by others to systematise the various possible theses, and a couple of these attempts are also discussed. It is suggested that the thesis can be best discussed in terms of the very general statement of it as a thesis about a relation between linguistic and non-linguistic factors. The views of particular authors can then be discussed in respect to (1) the linguistic factors, (2) the non-linguistic factors, and (3) the nature of the relation between the factors. The rest of the first part is then devoted to an interpretive and philosophical study of four authors who have supported a relativity thesis in some form or another. It begins with a discussion of the philosophy of language of Giambattista Vico, and Italian philosopher, who was one of the first to suggest a relativity thesis of language. His main interest was in the origin and development of speech and language. He postulated three eras, those of the gods, of the heroes, and of men, to which correspond three different languages. The languages are said to develop parallel to the institutions of the eras. The nature of the language is discussed. The chapter ends with a discussion of Vico's notion of an incomplete language and the need for words. The third chapter is a detailed study of the views of Benjamin Lee Whorf, who has probably been the most prominent in the promotion of the relativity thesis. It is pointed out that there is a great variation of the theses he presents and some of them are quire wild. Linguistic factors, non-linguistic factors, and relations are discussed in turn, giving those aspects of the thesis considered most important by Whorf. It is pointed out that Whorf thought there could be no simple correlations, but there is also discussion of his view about a language embodying and foreing on its speakers a science and metaphysics. In the fourth chapter an investigation of the views of Edward Sapir is taken up. Sapir, who was an influential American linguist, formulated his views before Whorf, but without the vigour and interest that Whorf had had in the thesis. It is pointed out that there was a radical change in Sapir's views that has gone unexplained. In this chapter, an attempt is made to give at least a partial explanation for this change. Sapir distinguished between the form and the content of the language, and in his earlier writings he maintained that all languages were equal in content (what could be said in them) but different in form. At that time Sapir considered the difference of form irrelevant, and he rejected the relativity thesis without qualification. It is then pointed out that he later accepted a relativity thesis because of a change in his distinction between form and content. The distinction is questioned and is discussed later in chapter 11. The fifth chapter is a discussion of some of the views and experiments of a contemporary psychologist, Erie Lenneberg. Lenneberg argues that previous formulations of the thesis have been useless because of a lack of precision and the impossibility of experimental confirmation. The various causes of failure and its remedies, according to Lenneberg, are discussed. Lenneberg's criteria for the formulation of a relativity thesis and some possible theses are considered. Finally, there is a discussion of some of the experiments to test a relativity thesis. The experiments have been mainly considered with the relation between colour terminology and the memory of colour samples. The chapter ends with an indication of how little has actually been shown about relativity between linguistic and non-linguistic factors. Part II is concerned with some of the philosophical problems that arise from the thesis and are connected with it. The distinction between language and speech is considered both historically and linguistically in chapter six. It is argued that sentences are not parts of a language and that consequently beliefs and confusions cannot be contained in a language. The identity of a language is then discussed partly in connection with the number of words that can be added to a language without changing its identity. The relation between language and speech is shown to be close, but confusions about the nature of speech are revealed. A resulting indeterminacy of the word 'speech' is discussed, and a distinction between utterances and sentences is shown. Chapter seven is devoted to some problems connected with non-linguistic factors and thoughts in particular. It is pointed out that there is a sense of the word 'thought' according to which there are "propositional" thoughts, which appear to be independent from language in a way specified. It is then considered whether one might have a thought which one discovered to be inexpressable in one's language. There are various attempts to make sense of this question, discussing how the having of a thought is related to the specification of the thought. It is then argued that any thought must have a complete specification and that if everything else fails this can always be achieved by using a predicate language. [Continued in text]

Thesis (doctoral)--Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität in Frankfurt am Main. / Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (p. 145-151) and index.

Thesis (M.A.)--West Virginia University, 2001. / Title from document title page. Document formatted into pages; contains vi, 93 p. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 88-91).

According the linguistic relativity hypothesis, the language one speaks affects how one thinks. Because languages differ in how they categorize color, linguistic relativity has often been tested by conducting experiments on color perception and memory. This study examines the linguistic relativity hypothesis using ecologically valid stimuli: pictures of eyes. Because Russian-speakers are more likely to describe blue/grey eyes as grey, whereas English speakers are more likely to describe them as blue, English and Russian participants were asked to match the overall color of blue eyes to a color scale. There were three conditions. In the first condition (perception), participants saw the color scale and an eye picture simultaneously and then chose the color that best matched the picture. In the second condition (memory), participants matched the color of an eye to the color scale from memory. The third condition (label) was similar to the second, except participants labeled the eye orally before matching the color from memory. A 3 (condition) x 2 (language) ANCOVA and Bayesian analysis were used to analyze the data. Overall, the ANCOVA and Bayesian analysis indicated that there was a main effect of language. Russian-speaking participants were more likely to rate the eyes as greyer than English-speaking participants. The Bayesian analysis also suggested that there may also have been an interaction, with Russian and English-speaking participants rating the eyes similarly in the perception condition, but not the memory or labeling conditions. Overall, the findings provide novel evidence for the linguistic relativity hypothesis.

Zugl.: Marburg, Universiẗat, Diplomarbeit, 2007.

Thesis (Diplomarbeit)--Universität Marburg, 2007. / Includes bibliographical references (p. 85-92).

No description available.

Esta dissertação teve por objeto delinear alguns fatores relativos ao processo de emergência da leitura dos trabalhos do linguista e antropólogo norte-americano Edward Sapir (1884-1939) como um dos proponentes de um conjunto de afirmações acerca da natureza das línguas naturais, agrupadas sob o rótulo relativismo linguístico, cujo debate recebeu bastante atenção dos antropólogos linguistas estadunidenses, na primeira metade do século XX. Costuma-se afirmar que o relativismo linguístico seja uma hipótese, que alega que a língua pode moldar a percepção da realidade, o pensamento ou a cultura. Visto o nome de Sapir estar associado ao de Whorf, como o rótulo hipótese Sapir-Whorf indica, e que este rótulo tem sido bastante utilizado atualmente para se referir ao relativismo linguístico, efetuou-se o rastreamento de alguns conceitos fundamentais nesta discussão, dentro do quadro teórico proposto por Sapir, tal como suas concepções acerca da língua, da cultura e do pensamento, com vistas a avaliar a procedência de sua recepção como um relativista. Havido sido este trabalho conduzido sob a metodologia da Historiografia Linguística, buscamos também resgatar os fatores contextuais nos quais tais proposições teóricas emanaram. Por fim, propomos a discussão da configuração do termo relativismo no horizonte teórico do autor, visando fornecer uma perspectiva de leitura diferente da proposta, atualmente, por inúmeros manuais de História da Linguística. / This dissertation had as its objective to outline some factors related to the emergence process of reading the American anthropologist and linguist Edward Sapirs (1884- 1939) papers as one of the proponents of a set of assertions about the nature of natural languages, grouped under the label linguistic relativity, whose debate received much attention from American linguistic anthropologists, during the first half of the twentieth century. It is often said that the linguistic relativity is a hypothesis, which argues that language can shape the perception of reality, thought or culture. Since Sapirs name has been associated with Whorfs, as the label Sapir-Whorf hypothesis indicates, a term widely used today to refer to linguistic relativity, we carried out tracking of some fundamental concepts in this discussion, within the theoretical framework proposed by Sapir, as his conceptions of language, culture and thought, in order to assess the merits of its reception as a relativist. As this research was conducted under the methodology of Linguistic Historiography, we have also sought to rescue the contextual factors in which such theoretical propositions have emanated. Finally, we propose to discuss the setting of the term relativism in the author\'s theoretical horizon, aiming to provide a reading perspective fairly different from the ones proposed currently by numerous handbooks on the History of Linguistics.

Esta dissertação teve por objeto delinear alguns fatores relativos ao processo de emergência da leitura dos trabalhos do linguista e antropólogo norte-americano Edward Sapir (1884-1939) como um dos proponentes de um conjunto de afirmações acerca da natureza das línguas naturais, agrupadas sob o rótulo relativismo linguístico, cujo debate recebeu bastante atenção dos antropólogos linguistas estadunidenses, na primeira metade do século XX. Costuma-se afirmar que o relativismo linguístico seja uma hipótese, que alega que a língua pode moldar a percepção da realidade, o pensamento ou a cultura. Visto o nome de Sapir estar associado ao de Whorf, como o rótulo hipótese Sapir-Whorf indica, e que este rótulo tem sido bastante utilizado atualmente para se referir ao relativismo linguístico, efetuou-se o rastreamento de alguns conceitos fundamentais nesta discussão, dentro do quadro teórico proposto por Sapir, tal como suas concepções acerca da língua, da cultura e do pensamento, com vistas a avaliar a procedência de sua recepção como um relativista. Havido sido este trabalho conduzido sob a metodologia da Historiografia Linguística, buscamos também resgatar os fatores contextuais nos quais tais proposições teóricas emanaram. Por fim, propomos a discussão da configuração do termo relativismo no horizonte teórico do autor, visando fornecer uma perspectiva de leitura diferente da proposta, atualmente, por inúmeros manuais de História da Linguística. / This dissertation had as its objective to outline some factors related to the emergence process of reading the American anthropologist and linguist Edward Sapirs (1884- 1939) papers as one of the proponents of a set of assertions about the nature of natural languages, grouped under the label linguistic relativity, whose debate received much attention from American linguistic anthropologists, during the first half of the twentieth century. It is often said that the linguistic relativity is a hypothesis, which argues that language can shape the perception of reality, thought or culture. Since Sapirs name has been associated with Whorfs, as the label Sapir-Whorf hypothesis indicates, a term widely used today to refer to linguistic relativity, we carried out tracking of some fundamental concepts in this discussion, within the theoretical framework proposed by Sapir, as his conceptions of language, culture and thought, in order to assess the merits of its reception as a relativist. As this research was conducted under the methodology of Linguistic Historiography, we have also sought to rescue the contextual factors in which such theoretical propositions have emanated. Finally, we propose to discuss the setting of the term relativism in the author\'s theoretical horizon, aiming to provide a reading perspective fairly different from the ones proposed currently by numerous handbooks on the History of Linguistics.

Inom översättning och vid inlärning av ett nytt språk kan man stöta på ord som är svåra att uttrycka påmålspråket. Ett sådant ord är ”förvirring” i förhållande till franskan. I denna uppsats undersöks konceptet”förvirring” samt de besläktade orden ”förvirrad”, ”förvirrat”, ”förvirra”, samt ”förvirrande”, och hurdessa uttrycks på franska. Detta görs genom att jämföra översättningar i en parallellkorpus med hjälp avordboksdefinitioner och genom att diskutera kontexterna där de hittats. Resultatet visar att det finnsmånga varierande sätt att uttrycka de olika svenska orden på franska, och det verkar krävas att man i storutsträckning beaktar kontexten, då de svenska orden ofta är mer polysema än de franska. Undantaget ärsubstantivet ”förvirring” som utan större problem kan översättas till ”confusion” i de flesta sammanhang.Konceptet ”förvirring” verkar dock ha en annan roll och andra kopplingar i det svenska språket än vad dethar i det franska språket.