Lecture 4 Notes: Language and Cognition

Overview: Language and Cognition

This lecture explores the linguistic relativity hypothesis (also known as the Whorfian hypothesis), which questions whether the specific language we learn influences how we conceptualize the world.

Review of Innate vs. Learned Language

The lecture starts by referencing the discussion from the previous week: "How much of language is learned or innate?" It contrasts innate language rules with the general ability to learn, setting the stage for examining the role of learning in shaping our perception through language.

Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis

The core question addressed is: If learning has a significant role in language, does the specific language we learn impact the way we conceive of the world around us?

Language as a System

Language is described as an implicit system of rules and words used to communicate about the world. As we develop, language becomes automatic, focusing our attention on certain aspects of our environment.

The central question is reiterated: Does the language we speak influence our mental representation of the world?

Example: "The man is running out" illustrates the combination of words and rules in language.

Linguistic Diversity

Languages differ significantly in several ways:

  • Sentential markers:
    • English uses tense (e.g., "The train arrive-d early").
    • Turkish uses evidence type (e.g., "The train arrive-di early").
  • Vocabulary differences:
    • Color terms: Some languages have few terms (light & dark), while others have many.
    • Motion Verbs: Some emphasize manner, others emphasize path.

Language & Cognition Relationship

Two contrasting views are presented:

  1. Universal View:
    • Aligns with the innate, modular view of language.
    • Proposes that all humans have similar mental representations.
    • Languages differ only in how they map these same thoughts into words.
  2. Linguistic Relativity View:
    • Correlates with the learning, interactive view.
    • Suggests that language may influence our mental representations, at least in some circumstances.

Studying language-cognition relationship

We can compare the performance of speakers of different languages in tasks designed to elicit an influence of language on non-linguistic tasks (Whorfian effect).

An example would be: Studying color vocabulary - comparing speakers with few vs. many color names to see if they differ in their ability to distinguish colors.

This diagram illustrates the interaction between different cognitive processes:

  • Input: Language interacts with vision and audition.
  • Processing: Influences thoughts and memory.
  • Output: Affects motor control.

Color Perception Case Study

The Munsell color system is introduced as a 3D system defined by hue, saturation, and lightness.

English vs. Berinmo

A study by Davidoff et al. (1999) compared English and Berinmo speakers.

Participants were shown a target color chip, followed by a 30-second retention period, and then asked to identify the original chip from a selection.

English speakers performed better with blue/green distinctions, while Berinmo speakers excelled at distinguishing "nol" and "wor" colors.

Interpretation of Results

Color discrimination from memory improves when we have names to refer to the color alternatives.

The lecture raises critical questions:

  • Do color names generally alter our ability to discriminate colors?
  • Is the effect generalizable to other situations?
  • Would a shorter retention period eliminate the difference?
  • Are participants consciously using color names as a memory aid?

Sensitive Tests

More sensitive tests, such as those by Winawer et al. (2007), use reaction times and rapid responses involving Russian vs. English speakers.

In Russian, there are two distinct categories within what English speakers call "blue": "goluboy" (light blue) and "siniy" (dark blue).

Findings

Russian speakers were faster than English speakers at discriminating colors from different Russian categories in a single task. However, this language effect was eliminated when participants performed a dual task, holding numbers in memory while matching the chips.

Hemispheric Processing

Gilbert et al. (2006) manipulated which brain hemisphere received visual information first.

  • The left hemisphere (LH) is where words are stored.
  • Participants had to quickly identify the odd one out.
  • Results showed a language effect only when the LH was stimulated first.

Conclusions from Color Studies

Color words do not permanently alter perception.

The influence of language on perception is evident:

  • When color words are quickly activated in the left hemisphere.
  • When people can rely on words to perform a memory or discrimination task.

These findings support the linguistic relativity or Whorfian hypothesis.

Motion Events

Different languages describe motion events differently.

  • English uses Motion + Manner (e.g., "sneak in", "clamber up", "run out").
  • Spanish/Greek uses Motion + Path (e.g., "enter (silently)", "ascend (with difficulty)", "exit (running)"). Manner is not typically expressed in the verb.

The question is: Do Spanish/Greek speakers attend less to manner of motion because their words do not typically include how a person is moving?

Motion Events and Eye-Tracking

Studies used eye-tracking to monitor participants' attention during motion events.

Two conditions:

  1. Linguistic description.
  2. Observation for later memory test.

Example stimuli: Greek: "The man is approaching the snowman"; English: "The man is skating to the snowman".

Study Findings

While preparing to describe the event, Greek speakers focused more on path/goal, while English speakers focused more on manner.

No language difference was observed during simple viewing without the need for linguistic description.

When images froze and speakers prepared to commit to memory for later recall, differences in fixations between groups emerged.

The graph shows % fixations on snowman while preparing to describe: Greek speakers fixated more on the snowman (path/goal) than English speakers.

Implications of Motion Studies

Attention allocation depends on the task: observation vs. description.

Describing events elicits language-specific patterns of attention.

Simple observation does not seem to involve linguistic meaning, unlike color names.

However, language might be used to memorize events.

Overall Conclusions

Language may influence some cognitive representations, depending on the task and stimulus types (colors vs. events).

For example, language may aid memory or perceptual discrimination.

Evidence supports the linguistic relativity view.

Habitual or learned words-to-world associations can be useful if this makes task performance more efficient.

This perspective challenges the universal view.

This diagram illustrates how language interacts with other cognitive processes to affect memory, thoughts, and perception.

Summary

  • Different views on the relationship of language and cognitive representations.
  • Relevant evidence from color terms and motion events.