How Myths about Language Affect Education: What Every Teacher Should Know

5. Myths about Language and Thinking

85 CHAPTER 5 Myths about Language and Thinking Language is the dress of thoughts. —Samuel Johnson, 1779 At some point in a linguistics course, students question the relationship between language and thought. It occurs to students that somehow language and thought are connected, but they are not quite sure how. The lexicographer Samuel Johnson understood the relationship, but he did not know exactly how the two were related. For centuries people have pondered and questioned the connection between language and thought and have tried to answer one question: How does language influence thinking? In this final chapter, this question along with two misconceptions about language and cognition, are discussed: 1. Language determines how we think. 2. Politics, popular culture, and technology are corrupting English by limiting many traditional forms of English. uMisconception: Language determines how we think. Truth: Language influences thought, but it does not determine it. There is an idea that holds that thinking is restricted by a person’s native language (or languages). Language’s influence on thinking is addressed 86 HOW MYTHS ABOUT LANGUAGE AFFECT EDUCATION by the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis that, while influential in linguistics and ESL research, should not be accepted without being qualified because it could lead to the myth that thinking is determined by language. The hypothesis, developed by linguist Benjamin Whorf (1897–1941) and his mentor Edward Sapir (1884–1939), stipulates that our thinking is determined and even limited by the language we speak.This hypothesis is also known as linguistic determinism because language determines our thinking and our perception of reality. Whorf was not a professional linguist but rather a fire prevention expert who worked for Hartford Fire Insurance. It was his work with Hartford that led him to many business trips to the southwest region of the United States where he gained a special interest in Native American languages,which ultimately resulted in his theory of linguistic determinism. Whorf developed this theory during his work with Native American languages, particularly Hopi. His work with these languages led him to the belief that speakers of different languages view the world differently. Whorf was convinced that since Hopi and English are so different structurally ,semantically,and lexically,speakers of these languages must think differently and,consequently,view the world differently.For example,he noted that English has a grammatical affix (the suffix -ed) to express past tense, while in Hopi, no such tense markers exist. Whorf claimed that the lack of tense markers caused Hopi speakers to conceptualize time differently, not as linear passage of events like English speakers. In 1940, Whorf published an article in M.I.T.’s Technology Review titled“Science and Linguistics”(reprinted in Carroll,1956).In this article, Whorf argued against what he claimed was the traditionally held belief that languages do not contribute to the development of thoughts; the prevailing wisdom (according to Whorf) was that all the world’s languages simply communicate ideas.He argued different languages do more than simply communicate thoughts; individual languages,he insisted,are the “shaper of thoughts” and thus different languages will cause speakers of those languages to generate different sorts of thoughts. Speakers of English will have different thoughts than speakers of French or any other language. His famous quote expands on this idea that thoughts are shaped by language: 87 Myths about Language and Thinking We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages.The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary,the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds—and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds.We cut nature up,organize it into concepts,and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language.The agreement is,of course,an implicit and unstated one,but its terms are absolutely obligatory; we cannot talk at all except by subscribing to the organization and classification of data which the agreement decrees. (Carroll, 1956) Note that Whorf used the word obligatory when describing one’s perception of reality and language. The language determines and...