Advanced

Language may indeed influence thought.

Zlatev, Jordan LU and Blomberg, Johan LU (2015) In Frontiers in Psychology 6.
Abstract
We discuss four interconnected issues that we believe have hindered investigations into how language may affect thinking. These have had a tendency to reappear in the debate concerning linguistic relativity over the past decades, despite numerous empirical findings. The first is the claim that it is impossible to disentangle language from thought, making the question concerning "influence" pointless. The second is the argument that it is impossible to disentangle language from culture in general, and from social interaction in particular, so it is impossible to attribute any differences in the thought patterns of the members of different cultures to language per se. The third issue is the objection that methodological and empirical... (More)
We discuss four interconnected issues that we believe have hindered investigations into how language may affect thinking. These have had a tendency to reappear in the debate concerning linguistic relativity over the past decades, despite numerous empirical findings. The first is the claim that it is impossible to disentangle language from thought, making the question concerning "influence" pointless. The second is the argument that it is impossible to disentangle language from culture in general, and from social interaction in particular, so it is impossible to attribute any differences in the thought patterns of the members of different cultures to language per se. The third issue is the objection that methodological and empirical problems defeat all but the most trivial version of the thesis of linguistic influence: that language gives new factual information. The fourth is the assumption that since language can potentially influence thought from "not at all" to "completely," the possible forms of linguistic influence can be placed on a cline, and competing theories can be seen as debating the actual position on this cline. We analyze these claims and show that the first three do not constitute in-principle objections against the validity of the project of investigating linguistic influence on thought, and that the last one is not the best way to frame the empirical challenges at hand. While we do not argue for any specific theory or mechanism for linguistic influence on thought, our discussion and the reviewed literature show that such influence is clearly possible, and hence in need of further investigations. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
consciousness, culture, discourse, language, relativity, thought, Whorf
in
Frontiers in Psychology
volume
6
publisher
Frontiers
external identifiers
  • wos:000364421200001
  • pmid:26582997
  • scopus:84947296281
ISSN
1664-1078
DOI
10.3389/fpsyg.2015.07631
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
2b5245d0-d508-4ce2-a456-0cae3835cd90 (old id 8235174)
date added to LUP
2015-12-07 15:41:04
date last changed
2017-07-30 04:13:52
@article{2b5245d0-d508-4ce2-a456-0cae3835cd90,
  abstract     = {We discuss four interconnected issues that we believe have hindered investigations into how language may affect thinking. These have had a tendency to reappear in the debate concerning linguistic relativity over the past decades, despite numerous empirical findings. The first is the claim that it is impossible to disentangle language from thought, making the question concerning "influence" pointless. The second is the argument that it is impossible to disentangle language from culture in general, and from social interaction in particular, so it is impossible to attribute any differences in the thought patterns of the members of different cultures to language per se. The third issue is the objection that methodological and empirical problems defeat all but the most trivial version of the thesis of linguistic influence: that language gives new factual information. The fourth is the assumption that since language can potentially influence thought from "not at all" to "completely," the possible forms of linguistic influence can be placed on a cline, and competing theories can be seen as debating the actual position on this cline. We analyze these claims and show that the first three do not constitute in-principle objections against the validity of the project of investigating linguistic influence on thought, and that the last one is not the best way to frame the empirical challenges at hand. While we do not argue for any specific theory or mechanism for linguistic influence on thought, our discussion and the reviewed literature show that such influence is clearly possible, and hence in need of further investigations.},
  articleno    = {1631},
  author       = {Zlatev, Jordan and Blomberg, Johan},
  issn         = {1664-1078},
  keyword      = {consciousness,culture,discourse,language,relativity,thought,Whorf},
  language     = {eng},
  publisher    = {Frontiers},
  series       = {Frontiers in Psychology},
  title        = {Language may indeed influence thought.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.07631},
  volume       = {6},
  year         = {2015},
}