Interesting article about language and thought

[NickM]

"...we gave people sets of pictures that showed some kind of temporal progression (e.g., pictures of a man aging, or a crocodile growing, or a banana being eaten). Their job was to arrange the shuffled photos on the ground to show the correct temporal order. We tested each person in two separate sittings, each time facing in a different cardinal direction. If you ask English speakers to do this, they'll arrange the cards so that time proceeds from left to right. Hebrew speakers will tend to lay out the cards from right to left, showing that writing direction in a language plays a role.3 So what about folks like the Kuuk Thaayorre, who don't use words like "left" and "right"? What will they do?

The Kuuk Thaayorre did not arrange the cards more often from left to right than from right to left, nor more toward or away from the body. But their arrangements were not random: there was a pattern, just a different one from that of English speakers. Instead of arranging time from left to right, they arranged it from east to west. That is, when they were seated facing south, the cards went left to right. When they faced north, the cards went from right to left. When they faced east, the cards came toward the body and so on."

from: http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/boroditsky09/boroditsky09_index.html

In other words, for these people time is represented by its position vis-a-vis sunrise and sunset. Wonderful!

The article is a model of clarity, too

 

[Twenty Inch]

From the opening paragraph:

"For a long time, the idea that language might shape thought was considered at best untestable and more often simply wrong."

I would say that this proposition could only be considered wrong by monoglots. I speak several languages to a high standard, and it is quite clear to me that I think and behave differently in each one. Sometimes that's because I'm adapting to local conditions, eg speaking more emphatically in Spanish, sometimes it's because I have a set of cultural reference points in one language that I don't have in another eg film quotations in Russian. My wife struggles endlessly with definite and indefinite articles, and as Chomsky will tell you, the part of the brain that deals with them has not developed in her brain as it has in mine.

This article of course goes a lot deeper than those superficial differences. Nice find, Nick, thanks. I shall read at leisure.

 

[NickM]

Heading rapidly for the oblivion that is Page 2 while people wax lyrical over last night's telly, I see

 

[Chuffy]

Um, I read it and thought, 'yeah, and?'....

I'd be interested to know what would they do in a closed room with no way of telling where East and West were.

 

[theclaud]

Heading rapidly for the oblivion that is Page 2 while people wax lyrical over last night's telly, I see

I read it Nick - it's very interesting. Although the topic reminds me of a tedious university lecturer who used to bang on incessantly about Hopi Indians (they're the ones with no tenses in their language). As you've put this in the Cafe, I might also mention that they are also, apparently, responsible for that ear-candle nonsense.

 

[Chuffy]

I read it Nick - it's very interesting. Although the topic reminds me of a tedious university lecturer who used to bang on incessantly about Hopi Indians (they're the ones with no tenses in their language). As you've put this in the Cafe, I might also mention that they are also, apparently, responsible for that ear-candle nonsense.

No, that's the Hippee Indians.

 

[marinyork]

It is interesting, but it's a really difficult question to answer. You might have got more replies in P&L as that's where the linguist obsessives hang out.

I'd be more interested if they picked something other than time. The problem is time may well be a construct, so it'd be interesting if they could run an experiment with something that doesn't have that problem. OTOH you could argue that makes it a good choice (I doubt they do).

 

[theclaud]

No, that's the Hippee Indians.

 

[swee'pea99]

"How does an artist decide whether death, say, or time should be painted as a man or a woman? It turns out that in 85 percent of such personifications, whether a male or female figure is chosen is predicted by the grammatical gender of the word in the artist's native language. So, for example, German painters are more likely to paint death as a man, whereas Russian painters are more likely to paint death as a woman."

Fascinating stuff - thanks for that.

 

[yello]

You might have got more replies in P&L as that's where the linguist obsessives hang out.

Really? I did Linguistics at undergraduate level and 'language and thought' became my favourite area, even though it was only really touched on. If I were to do any form of further degree course or research, it would be on that subject. But I obsessively stay away from P&L!

I shall give the linked article a read because I'll be genuinely interested in what they have to say. I do find some views on the subject can get confused though. That is to say that just because a language has - or doesn't have - a grammatical feature that's not to say that this means the speakers of that language think differently as a result. Thoughts may be expressed differently but they are not incomprehensible across languages. Equally, clearly their can be cultural differences between speakers of different languages but this is quite a different thing to saying they think differently.

 

[vernon]

Are we missing something here?

Is it not the spoken language that affects the temporal arrangement of the cards but the written language?

How do other non written languages affect the arrangement of the cards?

 

[Crackle]

A truly interesting article, thanks Nick.

 

[Andy in Sig]

A very good general start point about this sort of thing aimed at the intelligent lay reader is The Language Instinct by Stephen Pinker. Very readable and stimulating.