Historical Background to the Study :
Man lives in the world about him principally, indeed exclusively as language presents it to him Wilhelm Von Humboldt [Quist Adade,209 ]
The idea of language influencing thought was first clearly expressed in 19 century by German philosopher and linguist Wilhelm von Humboldt. He states that the diversity of languages is not a diversity of and sounds but a diversity of views of the world It was later adopted by the emerging American Anthropologist, such as Franz Boas and his student Edward Sapir. Afterwards, Sapir's student Benjamin Lee Whorf added much to the study of linguistics relativity, also known as Sapir Whorf Hypothesis. He studied the structures of Aztec and Hopi languages and added the observations to the study of human thought and behavior:
Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis :
→ Sapir-Whorf hypothesis or linguistics relativity in the idea that the different cultural concepts that are inherent part of a language influences the cognitive ability of the speakers of that language .This effect on common us return changes the worldview of the people and because of that they think and behave differently. In other words, the language one speaks influences his/her thinking and perspective of the world.
The hypothesis is divided into two distinct domains : the strong version and the weak version. They are not called weak and strong because the string version is stronger in its claim and the weak version weaker, but that how much these versions intensify the relationship of language and thought. According to the strong version. or linguistic determinism, language determines our thoughts. It defines the world around us for us. The language which is habitually used by an individual will shape the thoughts of that person about the world. Whereas the weak version, or the linguistic relativity, states that Language only influences our thoughts about the world. The strong deterministic view was rejected as untenable because of its being an extreme and its failure to provide any empirical evidence for its theoretical background Whorf claims that though people of a language or culture must arrive at different interpretations of the world view, but,
"The background linguistic system (in other words the grammar] of each language is not merely a reproducing instrument for voicing ideas but rather is itself the shaper of ideas, the program and guide for the individual's mental activity for his analysis of impression for his synthesis of his mental stock in. trade (Whorf, 1956)
Sapir realizes the importance of a language in a society and regards it as not just a medium of communication but an essential tool for living. In his most quoted passage, he writes:
Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood but are very winch 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 on incidental means of solving specific problems of communication or reflection. The fact of the matter then the "real world" is to a large extent unconsciously built up on the language habits of the group He tee and hear and otherwise experience very largely at we do because the language habits of our community predispose certain choices of interpretation (Sapir, Selected Writings in Language. Culture and Personality, 1949)
Whorf's Contribution to the Study of Linguistic Relativity :
linguistics relativity states that every language is structurally unique and that the structure of the language.
Influence the way speakers of that language think or behave because they think, and behave according to their different language structures, the worldviews and the perspectives about the world of those speakers would also be different . As mentioned earlier, humans live in a world with the same concepts but with different labels attached, these labels help the speakers to look at the concepts differently. We have particular subjective concepts such as truth, beauty, and sin etc. which are interpreted by everyone differently. According to the hypothesis, we live in a subjective world, somewhat different worlds. The more dissimilar two languages are, the more difficult it would be to transfer cultural concepts for both languages Whorf talks about two problems in his relativity Principle [ Kempton ]
1:Are our concepts of time, space and matter by their experience the same as for other people? Or are they conditioned by the structures of our languages?
2. Is there any connection between
a : Cultural and behavioral norms.
b : Large-scale linguistic pattern
Whorf supports problem 1 by stating that different parts of language tend to change with time and with the development of the world. Thus, the lexical items referring to objects or ideas change and that brings a shift in the thinking as well. For example the modern technological references of the objects not only remain, let us say nouns but develop into other grammatical categories as well. Google is now not only a search engine, Google is a verb as in I don't know the meaning of this word Google it. It is an adjective too, as in "Don't argue with her That google can literally beat you with facts" And so we are not only using digital terms but are thinking digital too. Whorf says that a language limits the development of a culture.
That is to because a language is a systems, not just an assemblage of norms Language this represents the mass mind, it is affected by inventions and innovations, but affected little and slowly, whereas to inventors and innovators i legislates with the decree immediate. (Whorf, 1956)
Here we come to the problem 2 which is: if language forms ideas, it also plays a role in shaping the attitudes of individuals. Hence, individuals speaking different languages must have different worldviews and behaviors. The grammatical categories available in a particular language not only help the users of that language to perceive the world in a certain way but also at the same time limit such perception. You perceive only what your language allows you to perceive. Your language controls your worldview.
Fishman looks into some claims of Sapir-Whorf hypothesis Among these claims one is that, if speakers of one language have certain words to describe things and speakers of another language lack similar words, then speakers of the first language will find it easier to talk about those things (Hussein, 2012), Westerners can talk about impediments (legal bars to a marriage) and Pakhtuns will talk about " (khpay arts, when bride's family goes to groom's house for ring ceremony) but both will not understand what the other means until an explanation is made. There are certain thoughts of an individual in one language that cannot be understood by those who live in another language community.
