To what extent are beliefs, thoughts and knowledge restricted or helped by the language which can be used to express them?

Kendra J. Chisholm 12 BSCH February 18th, 2005

TOK: To what extent are beliefs, thoughts and knowledge restricted or helped by the language which can be used to express them?

For:

If a person is really interested in something or someone they will have such passion for this thing that they will use as many positive and detailed descriptions. This can be due to people’s thought processes and perhaps the individual is really keen on allowing someone else to get the full picture (understanding) of their idea that they will want it to be as accurate as possible. However, in some languages, such a thorough portrayal can be described by the use of only one word. For instance, in the Australian language, Pintupi, the word ‘katara’, is the hole that a goanna makes when it has broken the surface of its burrow after hibernation. Here, we can see that it takes many words to reproduce the meaning that the Australians are able to conjure in one sole word. This is probably the effect of the regular use of this translated phrase, which probably reflects the Australian’s beliefs and traditions.

Language is different for each individual and the idea of language will affect this person’s outlook on life, his or her future tactics on situations and also the way in which he or she remembers. E.g. American Indians, Hopi, were said to view the world in a much different way to others. They treated words such as ‘lightning’ and ‘wave’ only as verbs, whereas in English we use them as both a verb and a noun. This causes a much more confined speech and they consequently produce different, individual views.

Language is different for each individual and the idea of language will affect this person’s outlook on life, his or her future tactics on situations and also the way in which he or she remembers. E.g. American Indians, Hopi, were said to view the world in a much different way to others. They treated words such as ‘lightning’ and ‘wave’ only as verbs, whereas in English we use them as both a verb and a noun. This causes a much more confined speech and they consequently produce different, individual views.

A point that I would like to include is the idea that ‘language dictates thought’ and the notion that ‘concepts are untranslatable’. This is obviously false as babies learn their first words through those processes.

Thought still depends some-what on language and this is illustrated through imagery and names given to certain things, which enhances our memory and clarity of them. Personally, I find it much easier to remember a phrase, in any language, if I have previously conjured an image so that I have something to relate it to when I think of it. This simply allows a more natural process, as I am able to match a name to an image.

Against:

Language doesn’t entirely determine thought because even if an individual has no understanding of the meaning of a word, for example, it can still be explained to them without the full understanding its background or having a stable foundation. Such explanations would be helpful but are not necessary and so reflects the idea that the person who doesn’t know the word does not put much thought into it.

Another idea that proves that language is not responsible for completely determining thought is the reference to language. If we look at the French word ‘les magazines’ we can easily pick up the similarity that it shares to the English word ‘magazines’. The ability for the French to borrow this language stresses the fact that language is independent on determining thought completely.