The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis: Thinking Depends on Language (AQA GCSE Psychology)

• Piaget (see here) believed that language depends on thought i.e. it is not possible to have the words available or to understand language without context (thoughts being a context in which language can ‘take root’)
• The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (SWH) takes the opposite view i.e. language precedes (and in turn produces) thought
• There is a so-called ‘strong version’ of the SWH which goes as follows:
  • Language determines thought, therefore if the language you speak does not have specific words/vocabulary for an object/idea/event then you will not be able to think about such an object/idea/event
  • People from different cultures will think differently based on their cultural experiences - and this will be reflected in the language they use, which is known as linguistic relativity
  • The language a person uses determines their worldview and perspective i.e. language comes first and thoughts depend on the structure, content and quality of whichever language is learned from birth
  • An example of linguistic relativity is the Inuit Eskimos and their words for snow: qanik (falling snow); aputi (ground snow); aniu (drinking water snow) compared to the one word for snow in English

How many types of snow? The Inuit Eskimos have several different words for the English language word 'snow'.

• The ‘weak version’ of the SWH goes as follows: 
  • The language that someone speaks influences their thoughts, ideas, opinions etc
    • It does not insist that language determines thought
  • Language contributes to thought, but it does not 100% produce thought
    • It is possible to have a concept/thought about something without having direct experience of it e.g. most people will have words to describe the experience of being in prison - ‘banged up’, ‘screws’, ‘grass’ - without having ever been in prison
  • The example of Inuit ‘snow’ words is not a completely alien concept to a native English speaker: qanik (falling snow) is not difficult to visualise or understand i.e. language helps to shape thought
  • Sapir-Whorf and other theorists and researchers agree that the weak version of the SWH provides a better understanding of the relationship between language and thought

Does language determine thought or merely influence thought?

Evaluation of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

Strengths

• The weak version of the SWH has been supported by research e.g. Kay & Kempton (1984)
• The SWH has some external validity as it assumes that culture affects language and that this in turn influences thought i.e. it makes sense in terms of real-world experience

Weaknesses

• The issue of bilingualism/multilingualism highlights the limitations of the strong version of the SWH as people who speak more than one language fluently do not necessarily think differently per language
• The idea that the Inuit have many words for snow has been disputed plus it is also argued that there is more than one word for snow in English (hail, slush, sleet etc.) which makes the SWH lack validity to some extent (Pullum, 1989)