Sapir-Whorf theory: Thinking depends on language

Thinking depends on language

Sapir and Whorf believed that language comes first, and then the thought comes after. Words influence our thoughts, memories and perceptions, not the other way around.

Strong and weak version.

The strong version

Language determines thought. If a particular language has no words for a certain thought, object or idea, then people who speak that language will have no way of thinking about it.

E.g. Inuit people have 27 words for snow, meaning that they are able to think about it and perceive it in a much deeper way than English speakers.

The weak version

Language influences thought, but does not completely determine what they think. In the Inuit language example, it is possible for English people to think about the different types of snow without actually knowing the words for them. However, having words makes it easier.

WEAKNESS 1

Just because a culture has more words, doesn’t mean the words came first. If the Inuit language has more words for snow, the important question is why. Sapir and Whorf did not consider this.

For example, if there is always lots of snow, then the language which develops will include lots of different words for snow, as the Inuit experience will have led them to make finer distinctions between types of snow.

This suggests that language develops because of the way we perceive our environment, not the other way around, supporting Piagets’s theory of thought coming before language.

WEAKNESS 2

Differences were exaggerated. Gregory Pallum argued that there were really only two words for snow in the Inuit language, calling it the Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax that some people believe there are more.

This challenges the conclusion that Sapir-Whorf came to.