Blog - P4Q2
The words and grammar of a language can directly shape the thoughts of its speakers according to linguistic determinism. Which states that the structure of a language determines the thought processes of its speakers. In the text, which is taken from the Stanford University online magazine, it refers to this hypothesis by questioning the link between language and our thoughts which can be seen by the title, “Can language shape how we think?”. This link can also be seen throughout the whole text as well.
Different cultures express their relationship to concepts like space, time and gender through language in different ways at times. This expression to those concepts can be seen in the text, “space, time or gender” when discussing how Boroditsky focuses on linguistic features that could inform more fundamental differences in how cultures convey their relationship to those concepts mentioned formerly. The quote shows how different languages include temporal (which is defined as relating to time in the text) information or space or gender in their language in order to express their relationship to those concepts.
Some languages such as Finnish or German, don’t require speakers to talk about the future in a distinct way. So instead of saying, “We shall/will go to the movies tomorrow” they say “We go to the movies tomorrow” which treats the concept of tomorrow as if it were today presently. These types of languages are described as being “present-tensed”. While other languages such as English or French (which do require temporal information to be included in every utterance) are also described as being “future-tensed”. Because of this change in grammar within each utterance it sets up a change in thinking in the speakers’ mind. Speakers of present-tense languages are more likely to engage in green behavior because of the fact that their language shapes their way of thinking. The language being present tense changes the speakers’ thoughts so that they don’t make a separate group in their minds for tasks that are immediate necessities that need to be done presently and another group for tasks that can be ‘put off’ to the last minute or can wait until later since they don’t require immediate attention.
Languages differ by the way that they construct their own meaning in language. For instance this could mean how languages construct their own meaning with what a sentence could mean based on the context. In the text, there is a question posed by the author that mentions a potential difference between languages in how they think of certain situations, for example by some languages playing the “blame game” during a situation. In English, if someone knocks a cup off the table even if it is only accidentally then the people around that person would likely respond with: “They broke the cup.” Which automatically assumes that the person intentionally knocked the cup off the table, seeking to obliterate it. Another example of this blame game that happens that changes the way the users of the language think would be headlines used by the media (news). Depending on how the headlines themselves are worded, it could change the meaning behind the sentences and would affect the thinking that the speaker of the language would have. For example, it could get them to think that someone got hurt accidentally or justifiably. Or it could get them to think that someone was hurt with malicious intent.
Linguistic determinism is the idea that the structure of a language determines the thought processes of its speakers. Linguistic relativity is the idea that the structure of language affects a person’s view of the world, either very directly, as in linguistic determinism, or as a much more indirect and weaker influence. This can be seen in the text by the various connections that the author tries to make between language and thought. For example, the text says that you couldn’t say “I make dinner” in different tenses such as past, present or future. The quote demonstrates that there is a relationship between language and thought. Since the language that is used for different tenses changes the way we think since having no such thing as a past present and future tense would only
Cory!
ReplyDeleteI love that you started off right to the point in your response. When looking at the AO1 rubric, I can see that you demonstrated a detailed understanding of the text in terms of the meaning, context, and audience. This is shown in your response when you relate outside information from your wider studies to the text and the prompt itself. It is all connected here and shows the level of understanding that you have. Additionally, you demonstrated an effective reference to specific points that were made throughout the text. For example, you discussed Boroditsky's thoughts and ideas and elaborated upon them. For this, I would award you 7 marks.
Under the AO2 rubric, I would say that you had an effective expression with only few minor errors that did not impede communication. Your ideas were structured in a clear and organized manner that makes it easier for examiners to examine. These minor errors are grammatical and are easily overlooked. Likewise, your content was relevant and, as I mentioned, your ideas were developed in an effective manner. Your response to the prompt is clear and easy for examiners to follow along with. I would award you 4 marks here.
Under the AO4 rubric, I would venture to say that you demonstrated a detailed understanding of the linguistic issues, concepts, methods and approaches that are represented in the text. This can be seen when you take a point made in the text, such as Boroditsky's idea regarding different tenses, and elaborate it - You do this when talking about Finnish and German languages. You also demonstrated effective references to your wider study of linguistic issues, concepts, methods and approaches. This awards you 7 marks.
Total: 18/25
Hey Cory, I liked reading your blog alot and I thought that It was very interesting and fun to read.
ReplyDeleteA01- While reading your blog, it is very obvious that you have a detailed understanding of the text. You understood the context, meaning, and the audience and referenced specific points like Linguistic determinism. You also showed understanding of context, meaning and audience by showing that there are “present-tense”languages as well as “future-tensed” languages Showing the difference in contexts. Due to this I give you a score of 8 marks
A02 - Your blog, although it had miniscule amount of errors, did not impede communication between you and the readers of it at all. You also had very well written ideas that were expanded on and developed clearly with good evidence. For example, your idea that “ Languages differ by the way that they construct their own meaning in language.“ I thought that this idea was good since it was introduced in a paragraph and all of the idea was developed in that paragraph, For this section I give you a score of 4 out of 5
A04- while reading your blog, It was very clear and obvious that you had understanding of the issues and concepts that were mentioned in the text as well as reference to wider study of linguistic issues and concepts. You proved this by talking about the German language and how it states things like ``We go to the movies tomorrow ”And how it influences language. For this section I give you a score of 8 marks
Total 20/25