If Language isn't simply vocabulary, and isn't simply communication, how might you describe what it is (and how it works)?
If Language isn't simply vocabulary, and isn't simply communication, how might you describe what it is (and how it works)?
Language is the expression of human communication through which knowledge, belief, behaviour, and experience can be explained and shared. This sharing is based on systematic, conventionally used signs, sounds, gestures, or marks that convey understood meanings within a group or community. Humans express thoughts, feelings, and ideas orally to one another through a series of complex movements that alter and mould the basic tone created by voice into specific, decodable sounds. Speech is produced by precisely coordinated muscle actions in the head, neck, chest, and abdomen. Speech development is a gradual process that requires years of practice. Language is a defining and limiting set of words, symbols, sounds, gestures, or marks that are used to convey or transfer experiences. The use of language evokes many problems of knowledge that tie into the limits that it imposes on the transmission of an experience. Language limits the way in which an experience is conveyed in three ways. First, our thoughts are limited by our language. Secondly, language, in this context, does not limit, however, it shapes and moulds our interactions with other people. Lastly, language may act as a barrier to acquiring certain skills. All of these aspects must be addressed, while keeping the problems of knowledge that arise from language itself in mind. Of course, these assertions are not universal, and induce rather fierce debate, and the counter claims will be examined.
The contention that our thoughts are limited by language is one that is hotly debated throughout the world today. In fact, the non-extreme version of this theory is widely supported. The language we speak can affect the way we think. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis was developed by two anthropologists who firmly believed in this notion. The concept is known as linguistic determinism, and is divided into two main categories; strong determinism and weak determinism. The former, is the extreme belief of the hypothesis, stating that language actually determines thought and that language and thought are synonymous. On the other hand weak determinism holds that thought is simply affected or influenced by our language. Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression in their society. It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection: The fact of the matter is that the 'real world' is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group. No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same world with different labels attached. Even comparatively simple acts of perception are very much more at the mercy of the social patterns called words than we might suppose. We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation. Both Sapir and Whorf agreed that it is our culture that determines our language, which in turn determines the way that we categorize our thoughts about the world and our experiences in it. An experiment was carried out using two bilingual Japanese women as test subjects. These women, were married to Americans, and only spoke Japanese when they met the Americans. The test showed very interesting results. The bi-lingual interviewer talked to each woman on two different occasions, using only Japanese on one occasion, and only English on the other, while asking the same questions. The differences were as such:
Language is the expression of human communication through which knowledge, belief, behaviour, and experience can be explained and shared. This sharing is based on systematic, conventionally used signs, sounds, gestures, or marks that convey understood meanings within a group or community. Humans express thoughts, feelings, and ideas orally to one another through a series of complex movements that alter and mould the basic tone created by voice into specific, decodable sounds. Speech is produced by precisely coordinated muscle actions in the head, neck, chest, and abdomen. Speech development is a gradual process that requires years of practice. Language is a defining and limiting set of words, symbols, sounds, gestures, or marks that are used to convey or transfer experiences. The use of language evokes many problems of knowledge that tie into the limits that it imposes on the transmission of an experience. Language limits the way in which an experience is conveyed in three ways. First, our thoughts are limited by our language. Secondly, language, in this context, does not limit, however, it shapes and moulds our interactions with other people. Lastly, language may act as a barrier to acquiring certain skills. All of these aspects must be addressed, while keeping the problems of knowledge that arise from language itself in mind. Of course, these assertions are not universal, and induce rather fierce debate, and the counter claims will be examined.
The contention that our thoughts are limited by language is one that is hotly debated throughout the world today. In fact, the non-extreme version of this theory is widely supported. The language we speak can affect the way we think. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis was developed by two anthropologists who firmly believed in this notion. The concept is known as linguistic determinism, and is divided into two main categories; strong determinism and weak determinism. The former, is the extreme belief of the hypothesis, stating that language actually determines thought and that language and thought are synonymous. On the other hand weak determinism holds that thought is simply affected or influenced by our language. Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression in their society. It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection: The fact of the matter is that the 'real world' is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group. No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same world with different labels attached. Even comparatively simple acts of perception are very much more at the mercy of the social patterns called words than we might suppose. We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation. Both Sapir and Whorf agreed that it is our culture that determines our language, which in turn determines the way that we categorize our thoughts about the world and our experiences in it. An experiment was carried out using two bilingual Japanese women as test subjects. These women, were married to Americans, and only spoke Japanese when they met the Americans. The test showed very interesting results. The bi-lingual interviewer talked to each woman on two different occasions, using only Japanese on one occasion, and only English on the other, while asking the same questions. The differences were as such:
