This week’s topic of investigating the effects of language on the way we think was very interesting. I had several ‘Ah Ha’ moments this week in completing this week’s readings and viewings, most on reflection were not that revolutionary, they should have made a great deal of sense. What made them ‘Ah Ha’ moments was that I hadn’t taken the time to identify and seriously consider these ideas before.
Dr. Boroditsky, in both her article How Language Shapes Thought (2011) and in her 2017 lecture to the School for Advance Research provides many thought-provoking ideas around the relationship between the languages we speak and how we think. One of the things that stuck with me with for several of the causal relationships she identifies is whether it is language, or culture that creates the differences in how we think. For me it raises the question, is it culture that influences language, or language that influences culture? A chicken versus egg type conundrum. Both language and culture evolve over time and there is definitely a correlation between the changes in language and the changes in culture, but, if it exists, which side is causal, or does it change depending on circumstances?
[06:36 – 8:20]
Dr. Boroditsky discusses how the language we speak influences how we process information, what we pay attention to in our lives in order to be able to speak about it and that the information we need to pay attention to differs depending on the language we speak (SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017).
I had always believed that it was the culture we lived in placing emphasis, or value, on different types of information in our daily lives. After listening to Dr. Boroditsky’s lecture and reading How Language Shapes Thought, it makes a great deal of sense given the differing tenses and articles unique to each language (Boroditsky, 2011; SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017).
With the growth of near constant video surveillance and so much of our lives being recorded, by us and others, as photos and videos I wonder how this might affect our observations as we no longer need to rely on memory, or written text to relay the events of our day. Will we simply rely on technology to provide these details and nuances for us?
[18:37]
As someone who struggles to learn languages, I was really surprized to read in How Language Shapes Thought (2011) and hear in her 2017 lecture to the School for Advanced Research Dr. Boroditsky describe how language has a causal effect on the thought processes of multilingual people.
First off, I am jealous of anyone who can speak more than one language, the neuroplasticity that people who speak multiple languages must have is incredible. I have come to the realization that my brain is not meant to learn multiple, or even two, languages – my strengths lie elsewhere.
The fact that a person’s thinking fundamentally changes based on which language they speak is amazing (Boroditsky, 2011; SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017)! As I have mentioned before, after reading and listening to Dr. Boroditsky’s lecture it makes a lot of sense, I had just not questioned that the thought processes would differ from language to language. It makes sense that with tenses, articles, possessives, etc. differing between languages that multilingual people would have to think differently to be able to be understood in each language. Even the shift to a different dialect of the same language can result in differences in tone, inflection and cadence as Christine de Luca shows in her recitation of one of her poems that transitions from English to Shetlandic (Wikitongues, 2014). If this change occurs in derivations of the same language is makes sense that even larger differences between dissimilar languages would require a difference in how the speaker thinks.
[19:00]
The idea humans see colour differently, not just describe it differently, depending on the language we speak as Dr. Boroditsky suggests is mind blowing (SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017).
I had always believed that our ability to see colour was determined by our biology, namely the rods and cones in our eyes. That differences in how two or more people saw colour was due differences in the rods and cones in their respective eyes and their personal tastes. The fact that is based on language, as Dr. Boroditsky asserts in both her article and lecture, and the words available to describe, or define, colours changing how the brain perceives them seems almost improbable (2011; SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017). One would think that new words and descriptions would be developed to describe these ‘new’ colours outside of existing descriptions, though I suppose it goes back to the cultural influence, if there is not a value placed on describing and characterizing a wider array of colours, it won’t happen. This again raises the question of causation.
[25:00]
Dr. Boroditsky discusses that authorities were considering discontinuing the use of female names in naming hurricanes and other tropical storms as residents were not taking them as seriously as storms with male names (SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017).
This for me is an example of the question I raised above, of the influence of language versus culture, is there something inherently sexist in the English and Spanish languages that creates this difference in perception or is it rather a bias that exists in the cultures of these regions whose populations happen to speak English and Spanish that creates this perception or is it something altogether more universal. I am not sure how you would test this relationship, how to isolate the variables – would it work to have people learn English or Spanish outside of regions where English or Spanish are the dominant language(s) and see if these new language speakers adopted this same preconception that storms with female names are not as destructive?
[34:00]
Perhaps one of the biggest disruptions in how I perceive the world around me this week isn’t necessarily to do with language, at least how I used to perceive of it, but rather has to do with mathematics. Dr. Boroditsky states that mathematics is not a universal language, as is commonly believed (SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017).
I had to stop the lecture for a moment to consider this, I am not a mathematics scholar or even all that good at mathematics but I, as likely many others, have always heard of mathematics being a universal language, a level playing field across the different languages. In fact, working with English Language Learners (ELL) in the classroom, as well as those who though fluent are not native English speakers they have told me Math was one of the easier courses for them as it didn’t require the processing of a new language to comprehend that material, ‘math is math’.
After resuming the lecture Dr. Boroditsky explains it well that many cultures and languages respectively have a different numbering system (SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017). The base 10 numbering system I have grown up with is quite common around the world, but not ubiquitous. I have only worked with students, be they ELL students or those fluent in English but not native speakers who have come from cultures and languages that use the base 10 system.
[55:20]
In responding to a question about if there are languages that are easier for babies to learn, Dr. Boroditsky explains that a newborn is not pre-linguistic, that they have in fact grown accustomed to the tones and cadences of the language heard through their mother’s womb (SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017).
I had a surprizingly emotional reaction to this statement; I couldn’t help but think of foreign adoptions and surrogate children and the struggles that they would encounter. I would have previously thought that it would be easier for them to learn the language of their adoptive parent(s) the younger they were when the adoption occurred. The fact that they are disadvantaged instead, coupled with the likelihood in a foreign adoption of growing up in family where they have a different skin colour from their parents and the potential identity crisis that can cause is heartbreaking adding a whole new level of challenge for both child and parent(s).
A Lingering Question:
To return to my question above regarding the causal nature of the relationship between language and culture, one of many questions I am ending the week with relates to how different languages and cultures layout the sequence of events.
Though I didn’t include it in my list above, it is something that intrigues me. Both in How Language Shapes Thought (2011) and in her lecture at the School for Advanced Research (2017, 11:30) Dr. Boroditsky describes the different concepts of progression and how speakers of these languages lay out a progression of events. Dr. Boroditsky uses the examples of English speakers going from left-to-right, while Hebrew or Arabic speakers go from right-to-left like words on the page even using the amusing anecdote of the Nestle baby formula label being confusing in Arabic regions for apparently showing a regression of life stages (2011; SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017, 11:50). She also uses the example of Kuuk Thaayorre speakers sequencing events from east to west, along the path of the sun (Boroditsky, 2011; SAR School for Advanced Research, 2017). For the Kuuk Thaayorre speakers this is an element of their culture as, to my knowledge, they do not have a written language to influence progression as with English or Arabic, my question then is how deeply encultured is the left-to-right and right-to-left progression of time in English or Arabic speaking areas? Would communities of English or Arabic speaking people who are not literate still lay out the progression of events in the same left-to-right or right-to-left progression? Or, is the left-to-right and right-to-left writing style a result of a cultural concept of progression meant to ease understanding of the written word?
References:
Boroditsky, L. (2011). How Language Shapes Thought. Scientific American, 304(2), 62-65. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26002395
SAR School for Advanced Research. (2017, June 7). Lera Boroditsky, how the languages we speak shape the way we think [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/iGuuHwbuQOg
Wikitongues. (2014, September 21). WIKITONGUES: Christine speaking Shetlandic [Video]. YouTube. https://youtu.be/m0EwquC6wBU