Whorf: la hiptesis Sapir-Whorf o el relativismo lingstico

Whorf: la hiptesis Sapir-Whorf o el relativismo lingsticoProfa. Fraibet AveledoUniversidad Simn Bolvar

La lengua que hablamos afecta nuestro pensamientoJohann Georg Hammann (1730-1788) Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767-1835) Gottfried Herder (1744-1803)

Romanticists detect differences between languages and start to suggest their influence in perceiving and thinking about the speakers world (Swoyer 2011).

La lengua que hablamos afecta nuestro pensamientoLa pregunta es primero propuesta por Francis Boas (e.g. 1911/1966)

Desarrollada luego por Edward Sapir (e.g. 1924, 1929, 1949a, 1949b, 1954, 1985)

Formulada formalmente por Benjamin Whorf

Language affects thoughtBoas accepts the idea that thought and culture could influence language, but only scarcely, as for him language mirrored thought and culture. Sapir, on the other hand, recognizes that language could be a powerful tool that not only could shape the interpretation of experience, but also build it.

Sapir mentions that humans understand their world through the scope of language because this is the medium of communication; the reality is adjusted by the languageHuman beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their society. It is quite an illusion to imagine that one adjusts to reality essentially without the use of language and that language is merely an incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection (Sapir 1929, p. 209).

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. No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same worlds with different labels attached. (Sapir 1929, p. 209)

In Sapirs view, the reality that could be influenced by language reaches cognitive functions such as perceptionEven comparatively simple acts of perception are very much more at the mercy of the social patterns called words than we might suppose We see and hear and otherwise experience very largely as we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation (Sapir 1929, p. 209).

Boas, Sapir y WhorfBoas y Sapir crean las bases para el concepto de que cada lenguaje trae diferentes clasificaciones de la experiencia.

Diferencia entre los dos: Para Boas la influencia del lenguaje es pequea, e incluso, cultura y pensamiento pueden influir lenguaje. Sapir considera que la influencia del lenguaje en el pensamiento existe.

El trmino relativity: Acuado por Sapir

Pero Whorf desarrollada la idea, propone la hiptesis y describe investigacin emprica para demostrar su hiptesis. Benjamin WhorfIngeniero qumico, muy exitoso en su negocioSe interes en lingstica a travs de su experiencia en el trabajo, pero tarde en su vidaEmpieza estudiando la lengua nhuatl y los jeroglficos mayas en 1926. Se inicia inters por semnticaSus ideas florecern luego de atender y seguir a SapirSe especializar en la lengua amerindia Hopi

Benjamin WhorfWhorfs principle of relativity refers to the idea that the conceptual system in humans is relative due to their dependency of language. Benjamin WhorfWe are thus introduced to a new principle of relativity, which holds that all observers are not led by the same physical evidence to the same picture of the universe, unless their linguistic backgrounds are similar. Or can in some way be calibrated The relativity of all conceptual systems, ours included, and their dependence upon language stand revealed (Whorf 1956, p. 214).

Benjamin WhorfEsto sucede en lenguas marcadamente diferentes unas de otras. Si fueran similares, sus hablantes compartiran los mismos sistemas conceptuales:

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... no individual is free to describe nature with absolute impartiality but is constrained to certain modes of interpretation even while he thinks himself most free (Whorf 1956b, pp. 213-214). En la medida en que sus conceptos de gramtica y semntica evolucionan su principio parece ms especficoUsers of markedly different grammars are pointed by their grammars toward different types of observations and different evaluations of externally similar acts of observation, and hence are not equivalent as observers but must arrive at somewhat different views of the world (1956c, p.221)Sus inicios con su experiencia como inspector de incendiosGasoline drumsEmpty gasoline drumsPatrones gramaticales y su efecto en la cultura Estudio codificacin del tiempo, el espacio, la substancia y la materia en el Hopi y en las lenguas de OccidenteEstablece comparaciones lingsticas mostrando las diferenciasDescribe las diferencias culturales que se desprenden de estas diferencias lingsticas. Patrones gramaticales y su efecto en la cultura

Plurality and numeration in Hopi and in Standard Average EuropeanPlurality and cardinal numbers are applied in SAE to real and imaginary pluralsEg. Ten men, ten days (imaginary mentally constructed group)

Plurality and numeration in Hopi and in Standard Average Europeanten days (imaginary mentally constructed group) are objetified. They are counted as something

Plurality and numeration in Hopi and in Standard Average EuropeanEn Hopi: plurales y nmeros cardinales se usan solo para entidades que pueden formar un grupo objetivo. No hay plurales imaginarios sino ordinales usados con singulares

Nouns of physical quantities in Hopi and in SAESAE: individual nouns and mass nouns (agua, leche, harina)Individual nouns: definite forms A tree, una mesa, a hillMass nouns: homogenous continua without boundariesEnglish> mass nouns are not marked by pluralsSpanish and French > artculo partitivo Eg. Dos tazas de harina

Nouns of physical quantities in Hopi and in SAE

Nouns of physical quantities in Hopi and in SAE

Nouns of physical quantities in Hopi and in SAEHopi: all nouns have individual sense and both singular and plural forms

Nouns of physical quantities in Hopi and in SAE

Whorf observa otros aspectos gramaticales como la construccin lingstica del tiempo y aspecto

Todos ellos afectan el pensamiento de sus hablantes de diferentes formasHabitual thought

Habitual thought

Habitual thought

Critics: Lenneberg (1953) and Feuer (1953)Lenneberg ataca la metodologa:La traduccin hecha por Whorf: Algunas supuestas diferencias entre lenguas no son tales (eg. Breakfast as breaking a fast)Los eventos lingsticos y no-lingsticos debes ser tratados independientemente y descritos antes de ser correlacionados.Si no el principio es circular; la diferencia observada es solo lingstica

Feuer: no puede esperarse maneras diferentes de percibir aspectos de espacio, tiempo, causacin y elementos fundamentales del mundo fsico ya que son necesarios para la sobrevivencia

Para el momento de las crticas, haba muy poca investigacin hecha todavaLa diferencia observada s es solo lingstica

Destino de la hiptesisAlgunos estudios mostraron resultados poco inconclusos y con metodologas poco claros. Al mismo tiempo, la visin universalista y el surgimiento de la gramtica generativa cambiaran el inters de la linguistica y la psicolinguistica. Incluso, el conductivismo ser dejado a un lado cuando Chomsly refuta sus ms bsicas premisas. Chomsky (1972) primeramente cree en que todas las lenguas son generadas de un set finito de reglas y que incluso SEMANTICA se construye sobre la gramtica, y no al revs. Lo primordial pasa a ser buscar esas reglas y parmetros que prueben que todas las lenguas son lo mismo. Las diferencias entre lenguas, premisa de la LR, solo existe en la superficie y por tanto no es de inters. La LR es ampliamente criticada e incluso ridiculizada, y no propiamente entendida por un largo perodo (Cook 2011).

Destino de la hiptesisCook (2011): parte de la confusin es que cada quien parece tener interpretacin diferente de lo que quiso decir Whorf. Tambin, el debate ha sido simplificado por aquellos que no ven posible la hiptesis.

Pinker (1994) cita a Jerry Fodor en su libro The Language Instinct:The thing is: I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hateanything else, excepting, maybe, fiberglass powerboats. More to thepoint, I think that relativism is very probably false. What it overlooks,to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature (1994, p. 405)

En las ltimas dos dcadas ha habido un cambio radical en el inters por la hiptesis gracias a los nuevos descubrimientos y uso de tecnologas avanzadas en el estudio de la psicolingstica.Trabajos como los de Lucy, Gumperz, Levinson, Cook, entre otros, han revivido la hiptesis con excelentes resultados