Differences between Universal Grammar and Linguistic Relativity

The following essay will provide the main differences between two famous theories; the Universal Grammar Theory vs. the Linguistic Relativity Theory. This paper focusses on the particular aspects of the two theories, in order to point out and establish the aim of each theory, analyzing and showing how opposite both theories are and how both theories influences the in which speakers see the world and make sense of it.

According to Chomsky (1965) "Universal Grammar is a set of general principles available in particular linguistic grammars". In this case many experts suggest that "Universal Grammar is the set of linguistic principles and we are endowed with at birth in virtue of being human" (Smith 1999: 42), which is to say that basically, humans are born with the ability to speak any kind of language in the world.However, it does not mean that we were born with knowledge referring to language acquisition, but with the general principles that all languages possess. Innate knowledge allows us to select a specific language. For instance, one principle proposed by the theory of universal grammar is the default parameter which refers to the natural ability we have, we actually were born with a language parameter and that minimal sample input will allow us to know how to set the parameters for our own language. This theory is inversely related to the theory of Linguistic relativity from Sapir-Whorf.

According to Sapir 'The fact of the matter is that the real world is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group. He also highlighted that language is structurally unique; it means that every language has a different structure based on their ethnical and cultural factors. The theory of linguistic relativity among others describe that every language in the world has a different structure in the state to adjust well to the culture of the society itself. For example, for humans to acquire a specific language they should know the elements and structure which compose the language to communicate, the differences in the structure of the languages will be reflected in cognitive differences in the speaker for whom these languages are native. Whorf and Sapir also hypothesized that the structure of anyones native language will fully determine the world view of that specific person. Here we can noticed how different and opposite these both; the Universal Grammar and the Linguistic Relativity theories are.

As a conclusion, from the explanations already exposed, we can say that both theories aim to explain how we acquire language. It would be difficult to find which theory is the most certain, due to the fact that both languages aim to explain the same thing from a different point of view, which is respectable and valuable.

Ingelore Heitmann

Analysis and Discourse

Miss Silvia Velazquez