Implications of Sapir—Whorf Hypothesis for Language Learners： Taking the Example of Chinese and English

杜东生++梁晓灵

【Abstract】The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis（SWH） highlights Sapirs and Whorfs viewpoints of the relationship between language and thought. They hold that language and thought are somewhat interwoven. Language is not simply a way of voicing ideas， but is the very thing which shapes those ideas. This paper confirms Sapirs and Whorfs views on language and culture and discusses the implications of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis for Chinese-English learners. This paper also provides a contrast between English and Chinese characteristics.

【Key words】Sapir-Whorf hypothesis； linguistic determinism； linguistic relativity； Chinese -English learners

1. Introduction

Language is an indispensable carrier of culture. During the course of a second language acquisition， it is considerably significant to understand the connection between language and culture， in particular， language and thought. Among the theories concerning the relationship between language and thought， the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis might be the most significant yet controversial one， attracting much attention yet arousing great controversy. This paper aims to confirm the hypothesis by giving examples of Chinese-English learners. The content of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis will be put in the first place， What follows is the implications of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis for Chinese-English learners. Afterwards， a contrastive analysis between Chinese and English is taken on.

2. Content of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

As the name indicates that this hypothesis is put forward by noted American anthropological linguistics Edward Sapir， and his student Benjamin Lee Whorf， an amateur linguist. The hypothesis states：

“...Our language helps mould our way of thinking and， consequently， different languages may probably express speakers unique ways of understanding the world...the greater their structural differentiation is， the more diverse their conceptualization of the world will be” （胡壯麟， 2010， p.149）.

From this point of view， this hypothesis can be analyzed in two dimensions：language determinism and language relativity. Later， the original hypothesis has been decoded as two versions：the strong one and the weak one.

“The strong version emphasizes the decisive role of language to shape the thinking patterns； conversely， the weak one supposes that there is a correlation between language， culture and thought， but the cross-cultural differences thus produced in our ways of thinking are relative， rather than categorical” （胡壮麟， 2010， p.150-151）.endprint

The strong version has been a target of criticism， while the weak one is accepted with many conditions. Today， the hypothesis is usually referred to as the linguistic relativity hypothesis， Whorfian hypothesis， or simply Whorf， the reason of which may be that much of the claim owes to Whorf than it does to Sapir （Wardhaugh， 2007， p.222）.

Sapir-Whorf hypothesis， to some degree， has opened another door to inspire people to explore on the relationship between language and thought. Mostly， people debate this hypothesis in two aspects：Linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity.

2.1 Linguistic Determinism

According to the concept of linguistic determinism， one s thought or thinking is completely determined by his native language. When the Viaduct de Millau opened in the south of France in 2004， this tallest bridge in the world won worldwide compliments. German newspapers described how it“floated above the clouds” with“elegance and lightness” and“breathtaking” beauty. In France， papers praised the“immense concrete giant”. Was it mere coincidence that the Germans saw beauty where the French saw heft and power？ In German， the noun for bridge， Brücke， is feminine. In French， pont is masculine. German speakers saw female features； French speakers， masculine ones. Even a small fluke of grammar-the gender of nouns-can have an effect on how people think about things in the world.

2.2 Linguistic Relativity

According to Whorf， different categories and concepts used in different languages reflect the different ways of the speakers categorizing and analyzing the world. If language determines thought， speakers of different languages will never understand each other. But the fact is that not only do speakers of different languages understand each other well， but also the same linguistic framework may generate quite different world-view. That is to say， language cannot completely determine thought， but does exert influence on patterns of thinking.

3. Implications of Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis for Chinese- English Learners

3.1 On the Syntactical Level

Certainly language places some limitations on how a person can express their thoughts. For example， since verb tenses are a basic structural feature of the English language， almost any statement made by an English speaker must specify whether an event is happening now， has already happened， or will happen in the future. But a speaker of Chinese—which does not conjugate verbs according to number， person， or tense—is not forced to make the same kind of time specifications that are required in English. According to the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis， the structural contrasts between the two languages give English speakers different views about the nature of time. The English language stresses periodicity by dividing time into distinct categories of past， present， and future， whereas in Chinese， the form of verbs do not change according to number， person， or tense.endprint

3.2 On the Discourse Level

Being influenced by languages and cultures， English learners with different culture backgrounds have various expressions at logical level and discourse structure level. For example， English learners from Arab are likely to use repetition and parallel in English writing； while learners from Latin usually narrate in a digressed way. Chinese learners like to use induction in English writing. The inductive discourse model is a common， natural and unmarked discourse phenomenon； and Deductive discourse model is common in English culture.

4. A Contrastive Analysis Between Chinese and English

By examples that are mentioned above， we are aware that the language we use definitely to some extent shapes the way we think. But why the language we use can affect our thinking pattern？ There must be some characteristics in our language which influence the way we think.

4.1 Difference in Language Origin

Originated from the pictograph， Chinese language tends to arouse direct association in meaning just from the pattern of a character. Therefore， Chinese is instrumental in developing the concrete thinking of the language user. On the other hand， the English language belongs to alphabetic writing， featuring lack of direct connection between the word pattern and the meaning； specific grammatical and logical relationship between words is needed in order to clearly express ideas and convey information. So， an understanding of a certain notion must follow the thinking process of proceeding from defining to inferring， which facilitates the development of both abstract and logical thinking of English speakers.

4.2 Difference in Language Structure

Being a branch of Indo-European language family， English is characterized by compact structure. In which frequent use of logic connectives closely links up various clauses. In comparison， Chinese belongs to Sino-Tibetan language family； light use of logic markers gives the language a loose connection between sentences， so the smoothness of a passage depends on the coherence of meaning and comprehension of the connotation beyond the literal meaning. Thus， it follows that English language takes on an analytical thinking or logical thinking， whereas Chinese reveals more of an associative thinking rather than an analytical one.

5. Conclusion

The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis states that the way we think about the world is shaped by our language. Consisting of two parts—linguistic determinism and linguistic relativity. By comparing language characteristics between Chinese and English， we can draw a conclusion that different language structure and expressive habits to some degree do shape or influence our thinking pattern. This is the main finding of this paper. On the other hand， we should make greater efforts and， study the relationship between language， thought and culture from an empirical and dialectical perspective. There should be no such saying as certain languages are superior or inferior. This opinion is significant in preserving the endangered languages and helping creating a multicultural world.

References：

[1]Eugine，N.Language and culture context in translating[M].Shanghai：Shanghai Foreign Language Education Press，2007.

[2]Wardhaugh，R.Introduction to sociolinguistics[M].Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press，2007.

[3]胡壯麟.语言学教程[M].北京：北京大学出版社，2010.

[4]连淑能.英汉对比研究[M].北京：高等教育出版社，2010.

作者简介：

杜东生，太原科技大学外国语学院讲师。

梁晓灵，西安外国语大学英语语言文学专业在读研究生。endprint