Investigating Linguistic Relativity through Bilingualism: The Case of Grammatical Gender
Student Number: 11032901
Module Code: PC5003
Kousta, S.-T., Vinson, D. P., & Vigliocco, G. (2008). Investigating linguistic relativity through bilingualism: The case of grammatical gender. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34 (4), 843-858.
Language is the expression of feelings, thoughts, ideas and experience through the use of sounds or symbols (Goldstein, 2011). Whether we “think in language” or whether language shapes our thoughts is still a matter of huge debate, today .There are two main paradigms underlying the relation between language and thought. On the one hand, the linguistic universality hypothesis, of which the origins can be traced in Chomsky’s Universal Grammar (1978) suggesting that the system of principles, conditions and rules are common features among all human languages (Chomsky, 1975), proposes that the universal repertoire of thought and cognition precedes linguistic constraints that each language entails (Pae, 2012). On the other hand, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis advocates that human cognition depends on language and that this relation creates discrepancies in thought across language communities (Wolff & Holmes, 2011). There are two forms of the latter hypothesis. The first one, the stronger form of Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, called linguistic determinism, supports that language determines the way we perceive and think about the world; while, the second one, namely linguistic relativism, is the weaker form of the hypothesis and assumes that different languages encode different categories and that speakers of different languages therefore think about the world in different ways (Fromkin, Rodman & Hyams, 2007). Conversely, Whorf (1956) took distance from the strongest form of his theory as he believed that additional language learning has the power of transforming or enhancing the speaker 's worldview arguing for the benefits of linguistic pluralism. However, Stubbs (1997) argued that languages are not
Module Code: PC5003
Kousta, S.-T., Vinson, D. P., & Vigliocco, G. (2008). Investigating linguistic relativity through bilingualism: The case of grammatical gender. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34 (4), 843-858.
Language is the expression of feelings, thoughts, ideas and experience through the use of sounds or symbols (Goldstein, 2011). Whether we “think in language” or whether language shapes our thoughts is still a matter of huge debate, today .There are two main paradigms underlying the relation between language and thought. On the one hand, the linguistic universality hypothesis, of which the origins can be traced in Chomsky’s Universal Grammar (1978) suggesting that the system of principles, conditions and rules are common features among all human languages (Chomsky, 1975), proposes that the universal repertoire of thought and cognition precedes linguistic constraints that each language entails (Pae, 2012). On the other hand, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis advocates that human cognition depends on language and that this relation creates discrepancies in thought across language communities (Wolff & Holmes, 2011). There are two forms of the latter hypothesis. The first one, the stronger form of Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, called linguistic determinism, supports that language determines the way we perceive and think about the world; while, the second one, namely linguistic relativism, is the weaker form of the hypothesis and assumes that different languages encode different categories and that speakers of different languages therefore think about the world in different ways (Fromkin, Rodman & Hyams, 2007). Conversely, Whorf (1956) took distance from the strongest form of his theory as he believed that additional language learning has the power of transforming or enhancing the speaker 's worldview arguing for the benefits of linguistic pluralism. However, Stubbs (1997) argued that languages are not
References: List Chomsky, N. (1975). Reflections on language. New York: Pantheon Books Fromkin, V., Rodman, R. & Hyams, N. (2007). An Introduction to Language. (8th ed). Boston: Thomson Wadsworth. Goldstein, E. B. (2011) (3rd Ed). Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research and Everyday Experience. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. Kousta, S.-T., Vinson, D. P., & Vigliocco, G. (2008). Investigating linguistic relativity through bilingualism: The case of grammatical gender. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34 (4), 843-858. Pae, H. K. (2012) “Linguistic relativity revisited: the interaction between L1 and L2 in thinking, learning and production”, Psychology, Vol 3(1), pp. 49-56. Pavlenko, A. (2005). Bilinguism and Thought. In Krol J. F. &, de Groot , A. M. B. (Eds) Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches. New York: Oxford University Press Perani, D. & Abutalebi, J. (2005). The neural basis of first and second language processing. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, vol. 15, pp. 202-206. Wolff, P. & Holmes, K. J. (2011). “Linguistic relativity”, Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, vol. 2(3). p. 253-265.