Editing Linguistic relativity (section)

{{Short description|Hypothesis of language influencing thought}}
{{Use American English|date=January 2019}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=January 2020}}

'''Linguistic relativity''' asserts that [[language]] influences [[worldview]] or [[cognition]]. One form of linguistic relativity, [[linguistic determinism]], regards peoples' languages as determining and influencing the scope of cultural [[perception]]s of their surrounding world.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Ottenheimer |first=Harriet |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/216940204 |title=The anthropology of language : an introduction to linguistic anthropology |year=2009 |publisher=Wadsworth|isbn=978-0-495-50884-7 |edition=2 |location=Belmont, CA |pages=33–34 |oclc=216940204}}</ref>

Various colloquialisms refer to linguistic relativism: the '''Whorf hypothesis'''; the '''Sapir–Whorf hypothesis''' ({{IPAc-en|s|ə|ˌ|p|ɪər|nbsp|ˈ|hw|ɔːr|f}} {{respelling|sə|PEER|_|WHORF}}); the '''Whorf-Sapir hypothesis'''; and '''Whorfianism'''.

The hypothesis is in dispute, with many different variations throughout its history.{{sfn|Leavitt|2010|p=3}}<ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Singh |first=Manvir |date=2024-12-23 |title=How Much Does Our Language Shape Our Thinking? |url=https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2024/12/30/how-much-does-our-language-shape-our-thinking?_sp=a1b1b272-87db-445d-bff8-a7a0ba78ec14.1735077073845 |magazine=The New Yorker |language=en-US |issn=0028-792X}}</ref> The ''strong hypothesis'' of linguistic relativity, now referred to as linguistic determinism, is that language ''determines'' thought and that linguistic categories limit and restrict cognitive categories. This was a claim by some earlier linguists pre-World War II;<ref name="langlog">{{cite news | url= http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/190 | date= 13–23 December 2010 | url-status= dead | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20120215074211/http://www.economist.com/debate/overview/190 |archive-date= 15 February 2012 | title= For and Against Linguistic Relativity | first1= Lera | last1= Boroditsky | first2= Mark | last2= Liberman | author-link2= Mark Liberman | author-link1= Lera Boroditsky | newspaper= [[The Economist]] | publisher= The Economist Newspaper Limited | access-date= 19 September 2019}} (a debate between university professors)</ref> 
since then it has fallen out of acceptance by contemporary linguists.<ref name=":0">{{Cite book |last=Ahearn |first=Laura M. |url=https://www.worldcat.org/oclc/729731177 |title=Living language : an introduction to linguistic anthropology |year=2012 |isbn=978-1-4443-4056-3 |location=Chichester, West Sussex, U.K. |pages=69 |oclc=729731177}}</ref>{{request quotation|date=August 2024}} Nevertheless, research has produced positive [[empirical evidence]] supporting  a ''weaker'' version of linguistic relativity:<ref name=":0" /><ref name="langlog" /> that a language's structures influence a speaker's perceptions, without strictly limiting or obstructing them.

Although common, the term ''Sapir–Whorf hypothesis'' is sometimes considered a [[misnomer]] for several reasons. [[Edward Sapir]] (1884–1939) and [[Benjamin Lee Whorf]] (1897–1941) never co-authored any works and never stated their ideas in terms of a hypothesis. The distinction between a weak and a strong version of this hypothesis is also a later development; Sapir and Whorf never used such a dichotomy, although often their writings and their opinions of this relativity principle expressed it in stronger or weaker terms.{{sfn|Hill|Mannheim|1992}}<ref name=":1">{{cite book | last=Kennison |first=Shelia M. |title=Introduction to language development  | publisher=Sage | year=2013 | isbn=978-1412996068 | edition=1 | location=Los Angeles | page = 207 | quote = Scholars have noted that Sapir's view may have reflected a weaker version of the hypothesis than the view of Whorf (Rollins, 1980). However, others point out that Whorf's own writings suggest that his view may have fluctuated between the weak and strong versions (Carroll, 1956).}}</ref>

The principle of linguistic relativity and the relationship between language and thought has also received attention in varying academic fields, including [[philosophy]], [[psychology]] and [[anthropology]]. It has also influenced works of fiction and the invention of [[constructed language]]s.