语言学论文 Language and Thought

成绩XXXXX大学课程论文英文题目:LanguageandThought中文题目:语言和思维学院:外国语学院专业:英语班级:学生姓名:学号:ShenRongLanguageandThoughtiContentsContents..........................................................................................................................................iChapter1Introduction..............................................................................................................1Chapter2LanguageandThought...........................................................................................42.1LanguageStronglyInfluencesThought...........................................................................42.2LanguageDoesNotInfluenceThought...........................................................................52.3LanguagePartiallyInfluencesThought...........................................................................6Chapter3Conclusion..............................................................................................................10Bibliography................................................................................................................................11ShenRongLanguageandThought1Chapter1IntroductionTherelationshipbetweenlanguage,thoughtandrealityhasoccupiedphilosophers,linguists,anthropologistsandpsychologistsforcenturies.DatingbacktoPlatoandhistheoryofforms,inwhichPlatodescribedtheideaofthoughtandlanguagehavingmeaningasstemmingfromabstractdefinitionsorconceptscalled“forms”andwhichallthe“entitiesandqualitiesdesignatedtherebycanbesubsumed”(Gill,1997:132).AlongwiththestandardwesternthoughtPlatoultimatelydescribeslanguageasbeingbasedonreality.SimilarlyJohnLockeofamorerecenttimedescribestherelationshipbetweenrealityandlanguage:Oursenses,conversantaboutparticularsensibleobject,doconveyintothemindseveraldistinctperceptionsofthingsaccordingtothosevariouswayswhereinthoseobjectsaffectthem.Andthuswecomebythoseideaswehaveofyellow,white,heat,cold,soft,hard,bitter,sweetandallthosewhichwecallsensiblequalities;whichwhenIsaythesensesconveyintothemind,Imean,theyfromexternalobjectsconveyintothemindwhatproducesthoseperceptions(EssayConcerningHumanUnderstanding,book2,chapter1).Lockeexemplifiesinthisstatementwhatmanyphilosophersandpsychologistsfeltabouthowwethinkandhowweperceiverealityandhowthatisthenreflectedinourlanguage.Contrarytothesecommonbeliefsamongphilosophersconcerninglanguage,awell-knownGermanscholaranddiplomatfromthe18thcentury,WilhelmvonHumboldtequatedlanguageandthoughtasinseparable,aslanguagecompletelydeterminingthought,inahypothesisknownastheWeltanschauung(worldview)hypothesis(Brown,1968).HumboldtalsoemphasizedShenRongLanguageandThought2“profoundsemantic”differencesbetweenlanguageswhichleadtovarying“cognitiveperspectives,”anideacommonlyknownasculturalrelativity(Wierzbika,3).Althoughlittleattentionwasgiventothisextremeviewatthetime,thissameideadrewmuchinterestandcriticisminthe1930’sintheemergenceofahypothesisknownastheSapir-WhorfHypothesis(LinguisticRelativity).ThishypothesiswasrootedinSapir’sstudyofNativeAmericanLanguages,whichlaterdrewtheparticularattentionofSapir’sstudentBenjaminLeeWhorf.Whatcaughttheattentionofmanyscholarsandnon-scholarsalikeandhasstimulatedcomparativeresearchamongmanydifferentlanguageswasaparagraphthatSapirreadtoagroupofanthropologistsandlinguistsin1928:Humanbeingsdonotliveintheobjectiveworldalone,noraloneintheworldofsocialactivityasordinarilyunderstood,butareverymuchatthemercyoftheparticularlanguagewhichhasbecomethemediumofexpressionfortheirsociety…Thefactofthematteristhatthe‘realworld’istoalargeextentunconsciouslybuiltuponthelanguagehabitsofthegroup.Notwolanguagesareeversufficientlysimilartobeconsideredasrepresentingthesamesocialreality.Theworldsinwhichdifferentsocietieslivearedistinctworlds,notmerelythesameworldwithdifferentlabelsattached(Salzmann,1993:153).ThisstatementandsimilaronesbyWhorf,attemptingtoillustratethatlanguageisthemediumbywhichoneviewstheworld,culture,realityandthoughthavearousedanintensedesireinnotonlyscholarsbutalsofornon-scholarstovalidateofdisprovethishypothesis.MostresearcherstodaycurrentlyargueoneofthefollowingthreepositionsinrelationtotheSapir-WhorfHypothesisorLinguisticRelativity:languageheavilyinfluencesthought(stronginterpretation),languagedoesnotinfluencethoughtorlanguagepartiallyinfluencesthought(weakShenRongLanguageandThought3interpretation).Chapter2LanguageandThought2.1LanguageStronglyInfluencesThoughtBenjaminWhorf,likeSapirstudiedNativeAmericanlanguages.WhorfsitesseveralexamplesformtheNativeAmericanlanguage,Hopi,tosupporthishypothesisthatthoughtisstronglybasedonlanguage.AccordingtoWhorftheHopilanguagedoesnotcontainanywords,grammaticalconstructionsorexpressionsthatrefertotheEnglishconceptof‘time.’WhorfgoesontoexplainthatitispossibleintheHopilanguagetoexpresstheworldorrealityinwaysotherthanwhatmanylanguagesrefertoas‘time.’TheHopiviewofrealityisspecifictothelanguageandcanonlybebestexpressedifoneisfamiliarwiththelanguage(Carroll,1956:57).InthisexamplewhereWhorffeelslanguagestronglyinfluencesthought,heisoftencriticizedwithcirc