Linguistic Relativity

[@TheMrfont]

From chile I say " you are one of the greatest teacher ever" If we could have teachers like you...everything will be easier for us...LOVE YOU AND GOD BLESS U

[@user-uy1ko9ob5j]

After all these years your video is still helping people out. Amazing explanation, thank you professor!

[@alicechance]

You are SUCH a gifted teacher. Thank you so much for the clarity, depth, and humour in this video. You've honestly got me excited to write an essay I was dreading. Can't wait to check our your other work!

[@mytparty]

On the topic of Inuit language(s) having multiple words for snow, I remember David Peterson pointing out in a talk he gave that it seems like such an interesting fact for a language to have multiple words for the same (or a similar) concept, but it becomes significantly less interesting when you realize English does the same thing. He said, for example, that he mentioned the "fun fact" to producers that one of the languages he developed, Dothraki, has several words for horse. However, so does English (horse, pony, mount, colt, mare, filly, steed, etc). It just seems really cool when you don't think about it.

[@davlatalishekhvaliev321]

That was the best way of explaining, especially for non-native speakers Sincerely from Moscow!

[@vemamimlinguarussa]

Привет из Бразилии

[@rocknroll909]

Seriously one if the best linguistics teachers I've seen on KZbin, thank you

[@unneeudayakumar]

A nicely structured explanation, you're a good tutor!

[@ChuckHaney]

As a speaker of English only, when I heard "The bottle floated into the cave" it sounded dry, factual and I was already past it and really had no interest in it. But when I heard "The bottle entered the cave floating" I was more interested in the bottle and the bottle's story. Visually when I heard the English version the bottle was small and insignificant, but the Spanish version had me seeing the bottle up close and bobbing the water and I was aware that it was headed somewhere.

[@jonaslacungan2034]

Hi,I am a linguistic student in Philippines.I love this video.It is very helpful for the beginner like me.It is very informative.I found out I can learn here.THANK YOU so much for uploading this video.

[@jiayou11]

Hello Professor, thank you very much for explaining very very well the Linguistic Relativity in a very easy way. ❤ You are a wonderful teacher!

[@dr.abdulkhaleqaliahmedal-r599]

I am a linguistic student in indonesia and I found this video and all your videos are very helpful for linguistic students and English language learners as well. Your way of explaining is amazing. I would like to be one of your students.

[@anyatsitova5345]

Thank you for the informative video. The weak version is more popular and reasonable. The world around us is the same but we render it in different ways. Though we have some examples of the strong theory in artificial languages. Like in 1984, the language (Newspeak) didn't allow people to think critically of a government. Or artificial language Loglan that was made to develop logical thinking. It succeeded :) Greetings from a Belarusian linguist!

[@TheAtos1984]

Thank you for your awesome pronunciation. It is very clear for non native speakers.

[@NgaNguyen-sw2jc]

I watched your video at another channel, and then I searched your name on google and I found you here. Very lucky for me. I like your videos very much. You are brilliant.

[@baraaal-hakmani4201]

hello Evan I really liked your videos, they help me on my studying they are simple, fast and easy looking forward to your next video

[@Lightuser20201]

Wow!!! Fantastic presentation!! I’m so grateful for this as well as your speaking abilities. Just superb.

[@sherlydwiptr]

i just found about your channel last week and i already loved with the way you give the explanations. you're such a great tutor. please come back soon, we missed you!

[@ProfSF]

You are one of my favourite persons. I value your greatness 💖 I am also a teacher of linguistics ... But you deserve more love and respect ❤️💖❤️💖

[@ProfSF]

Thanku so much dear sir.. I was just waiting for Ur heart .❤️

[@deadman746]

I'm a cognitive linguist who implements natural language understanding on computers. It occurs to me that there is another effect, and I am not quite sure if it's different. That is, the process that the brain goes through when interpretactically converting and harmonizing thought with language also changes thinking. In particular, the process of correcting a prior belief from information obtained through language raises all sorts of issues, including such things as balancing evidence on epistemology because of its origin (trust, institutional facts, authority, etc.) may affect basic human reasoning, which is not based on predicates but more on motor programs in brains.

[@vadimislearningguitar4977]

Fascinating - i am italian - i have been teacher of English - and i am sure Whorf is right - English and Italian are two different planets - and to travel from one planet to the other - is a hard task - yes of course you can translate one into the other - but it is just when you translate that you notice how different they are - and that certain concept that go with words remain ofter untranslated - perception of course in perception for an italian and for an english person - fact is that English divides perception and concepts in a different way from italian - and that is a FACT.

[@petej011]

Evan, you should cover all the hypothesis of great philosophers. Your overview of linguistic relativity offered an easy to follow listening of your presentation though difficult to recall some of the exact details but I captured the essences of your thoughts on this subject. I enjoyed replaying your presentation to nail down some of the terms. Thanks so much.

[@sami.malik6794]

v informative n comprehensive lessons.... helps me a lot in learning

[@odalyscastro4833]

thank you so much for the clarification of this hypthesis!

[@Khalid-94]

what a great lesson Mr. Evan looking forward for more lessons.

[@TheDesperateHousewife]

Did you know that we are watching your videos on our Institute's lectures in Russia? Hahah))) thank you so much, really!

[@yomilala8929]

Hello Great video! But i have a note as a mexican guy. In the first example of the bottle and the cave we actually would use a preposition. In Spanish we would say "La botella entró *a* la cueva flotando" "A" means "to"

[@mansouralqafri9996]

It is really a great lecture and you clarify a lot of vague ideas ....i hope you will deliver another lecture about Bernstein theory😊

[@noreenakhtar5912]

why are you not making more videos ???? you are a good teacher sir ........this video is 4 year ago ???

[@sukriyekaraca6147]

thank you!! it was really helpful, and you made it easy to understand

[@jasmincolette6489]

incredibly useful, thank you so much!!

[@takecommandproject6853]

Thank you for an excellent, step-wise video to describe Linguistic Relativity! How has Dr. Lera Boroditsky's work influenced your thoughts around the strong version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis?

[@alonsos.v9272]

Hey, I have a suggestion for you. My mother tongue is Spanish. Let me help you with the utterance you used to explain the prepositions. If you translate the English one, tu get this: La botella entró "a" la cueva flotando. Look at the word highlighted with this linguistic feature "" that is the equivalent preposition in Spanish. If you say: "La botella entró la cueva flotando" there's something missing here. The sentence means that the bottle brought the cave and that does not make sense. With my deepest respect and because I admire the way you explain, I decided to make this suggestion. The sentence does require a preposition in Spanish.

[@ericmedina680]

Very well presented.

[@sarahassoray2180]

You are the best!!

[@relaxationmusicsoothingrel6660]

hi evan. I really enjoy watching your videos, the are helping. I wonder if you can do a video about transformational generative grammar introduced by chomsky. thank you in advance.

[@mellzv5137]

la botella entró a la cueva, is the proper translation... and it is not as clear as the video says... because in the preposition and undefined article we also have a certain explanation of how the bottle moved.... entró a la cueva... so it means the verb entró need the article a to clarify where did the bottle go, la botella.

[@sheydadastournejad3489]

Thanks. Very helpful. just the words on the whiteboard are not as clear. Maybe using color markers or writing bigger would help. Anyway, amazing job, and thank you so much.

[@yoyo12314]

I must say, as a native Spanish speaker, I have never heard "entrar" without "a" in that kind of context; for me, it doesn't sound correct. It should be "la botella entró a la cueva flotando". I've also looked for examples on internet and nothing comes up without "a".

[@norbertocardenales3083]

Wow, I think that we have to work a bit on prepositions Beatriz. It would be nearly impossible to use the preposition "en" in this example because in Spanish is not implying location BUT direction. So it would be common to say (way more common, and I say common because maybe you know a different Spanish variation) "entró A", no "entró EN" because if you say the second, you'd be saying that someone entered "ON' something.

[@norbertocardenales3083]

Beatriz, eso se llama GRAMÁTICA PRESCRIPTIVA, o sea, que no toma en cuenta el uso de los hablantes sino que da reglas de CÓMO se deberían hacer (que en el estudio de la lingüística, es sumamente MAL VISTO). Es innecesario escribir toda esa retahíla de reglas que, de todas maneras, no definen el peso semántico de la preposición de la que se está hablando en inglés, ni validan tu punto en cuestión. La gramática prescriptiva dice cómo se debería decir o la manera "correcta" de decir las cosas. La lengua NO es así. Se adapta a la situación del hablante, su perspectiva y sus experiencias. NUEVAMENTE, lo normal o, debería decir, lo que se escucharía comúnmente de un hablante nativo, EN CONVERSACIONES REALES Y NO LIBROS O TELEVISIÓN, es la preposición "a" y no "en". Puede que hayan variaciones dialectales. Hay que dejar esa vida de seguir lo que la Real Academia dice y prestar más atención a lo que realmente se dice. Hay que estudiar un poco de lingüística Beatriz. Lo peor es que en la sección que pones de "Clasificación Semántica" que pones, te contradices con la primera sección que dice ESPACIALES DE UBICACIÓN, y colocas "en" en esa sección pero no en la sección de desplazamiento (que por consecuencia, no implica movimiento o desplazamiento). Beatriz, la RAE y la gramática prescriptiva no lo es todo... en la realidad de los casos, nosotros los lingüistas, la odiamos porque no representan la lengua en su realidad.

[@gulifroldanxiv6312]

+Norberto Cardenales +Norberto Cardenales aunque estoy de acuerdo en que la lingüística es descriptiva y no prescriptiva, creo que en este caso particular la observación está más que justificada ya que el chico del vídeo está usando un ejemplo que induce a confusión (sobre todo si el que ve el vídeo no tiene conocimientos previos de lingüística, lo que sería normal porque es de carácter divulgativo) entrar no es transitivo, al menos con esa acepción, y aunque entrar la cueva sea un uso habitual en algunas variedades geolectales, en otras tantas, se hace más habitual emplear un sintagma preposicional para remarcar el carácter intransitivo del verbo. Y no quiero entrar en cuestiones de estándar o agramaticalidad e incorrección, pero es muy normal que Beatriz se cuestione la veracidad de la teoría o que no la comprenda explicada en este vídeo (insisto, vídeo de carácter divulgativo y no científico) si el primer ejemplo que usa el chico para ilustrar las diferencias en el sistema del españoñ y del inglés es en sí bastante problemático. Y ahora personalmente, Norberto, qué haces dando lecciones de lingüística básica a la primera persona que plantea una duda en youtube? menuda respuesta no? qué humos, como si fueras el único filólogo que ve vídeos en KZbin. Sal del didactismo y entra EN la humildad de vez en cuando

[@camilo.decaro]

YOYO GLVZ Both forms are possible

[@nohisocitutampoc2789]

We will miss your videos. I have seen several times. I would like you think to insist in theses issues. Whatever, many thanks.

[@Irena_regista]

Thank you very much! You are a brilliant guy! Please, smile more often! :-)

[@davidmcmurray1102]

Prof. Ainsworth, I enjoyed your video very much. However, in reference to directional systems, wouldn’t it be impossible for Australian aboriginals to act out in unison a dance like the hokey pokey (as you suggested)? I say that because, if they are facing each other or are in a circle, then they do not all refer to their legs using the same directional terms. For instance, when the caller said “Now put your west leg in” those on, say, the north side of the circle will put what we would consider their “right leg” in, but those on the south side would put their “left leg” in. See what I mean? I don’t think your example works for a group responding to dance directions, unless they are all lined up facing the same direction.

[@om5335]

Fantastic

[@joudatebrahim3987]

Thank you Sir!

[@tayluvofficial]

If only i had this kinda teacher in my class. xD

[@dianajetson8914]

You mentioned on 4:51 that Strong version is false, I'd like to discuss this. If your language has a limited vocabulary how effect can you learn? If we were at work and we only had the vocabulary of a 3rd grader, how effectively could we explain how to use the computer, how to do the paper work, etc? If tonal languages have an effect on the auditory development of a child when exposed at a age prior to nine, it can result in more opportunities in music and a musical perspective that can not be shared when such tones are experienced after the age of nine. I think this theory could use more discussion before it is completely negated. I will add to this, I recall a time early in my life where I had a limited vocabulary. It impacted the level of my cognitive development. I say this because as a person ages, their cognitive abilities diminish (as in dementia and other) if they are constantly exposed to stimuli that is of reading, writing, word puzzles, they can in many cases reverse this and improve memory. It would be interesting to see if such neurological studies in music and in elderly patients could be looked into from a linguistic perspective that might not totally discard the theory of language impacting our brains, the way we think and learn. I think language does impact our brains significantly, limits of our language, limits our world. Brainwashing uses language to shape a person's thinking and perspective of the world, even their learning abilities, making them highly suggestable, instead of rational or logical.

[@evanashworth490]

Hi Diana. Thanks for watching. I think what researchers on linguistic relativity have observed--and what Boas and Sapir explicitly argued--is that languages don't so much limit what a speaker can say (language as a prison) as they constrain how something is expressed (language as a lens). For example, as mentioned in the video, any speaker of any language can perceive differences in the color spectrum (disabilities notwithstanding), but languages constrain how color categories are expressed in any given language, so while a language like Hungarian might seem more "advanced" or contain a "richer" color vocabulary than a language like English because the former has more basic color terms than the latter, speakers of both languages are still able to see the same colors. Similarly, if a language has no original term for, say, computer chip, that doesn't mean that a speaker of that language can't understand what it is or how it functions. As to the research on speakers of tonal languages and their abilities to understand musical scales, etc., I had not heard about it, but it would make sense to me! Lastly, I would submit that while brainwashing requires the use of language, it isn't the language's fault that someone gets brainwashed.

[@thelingman2544]

We need You Back Sir we missed you

[@RanBe-k6y]

thank you for this great explanation. you really made it no more difficult to understand. but you did not mention how language influence culture. I wish that you will answer me

[@evanashworth490]

Thanks for watching! Linguistic relativity really only examines the extent to which language affects cognition, but it is absolutely true that language affects culture. For example, many people from indigenous communities in North America (and around the world) explicitly state that language has such a strong role in influencing culture that they may make statements such as "if you lose your language, you lose your culture". Some of this is addressed in my video on language endangerment.

[@CHILLI7777]

Great tutor.

[@Moonlight-wv1vz]

Hey ! i can't wait for your new videos :)

[@fisherseoul]

Great Video. Thanks

[@lydielukeba6281]

Hello, professor Evan Ashworth, I am always interested by all your KZbin videos which make linguistics easy to understand and I hope with you I can become a real experienced linguist. Would you mind making a video by explaining OT in linguistics? What is Optimality Theory? It's still hard to understand , the notion of constraints , what is it really about when linguists talk about constraints , what is it please. I beg you more Help !

[@evanashworth490]

Hi Lydie. I may make a video on OT in the future. It is also difficulty for me!

[@lydielukeba6281]

@@evanashworth490 Thanks Professor, I will be so thankful and among the first ones to watch that video, May God Bless you , you are the best one.

[@letitflowkaren]

Excellent class! Tks!!!!!

[@yingyingl7829]

Thank you a lot for this vedio! It is so interesting and really helps me a lot. I was wondering is grammar system shapes the way people think (detail-oriented or pay more attention to general picture) , like in German verbs are more precise as they change in contexts frequently, while language like Chinese have no affix to indicate time and aspect.

[@beatrizeugeniaalvarezklein8397]

La botella entró en la cueva flotando / La botella entró a la cueva flotando.

[@lanamiletic1]

I just saw your videos, I would like some more :)

[@vadimislearningguitar4977]

thanks for your like - i'd like to say something about taboo words - it is quite strange how in italian we refer to the male sexual organ with the word - uccello - which is bird - and the female sexual organ with the word -- passera --- which is a specific bird - something like a robin - so all jokes end up revolving around flying animals also becoming very corny and predictable - i really don't know where that comes from. When watching movies with subtitles and observing how englih and italian are translated you really see how jokes taboo words and humor are so different.

[@evanashworth490]

That gives new meaning to the expression "the birds and the bees"

[@Antropololo]

Very good lecture but there are some mistakes here. The Dani language is neither Austronesian - It is a member of Trans-New-Guinea linguistic family - nor it's spoken in Papua New Guinea - actually it is used in the Highlands of the Indonesian province of Papua (former Irian Jaya) on the island of New Guinea.

[@yacineyacino905]

thank you, that was comprehensive.

[@thefamilitchichannel1341]

I'm bilingual but my family doesn't speak English. It's awful for me . I wish they did because I feel like I'm a different person when speaking English

[@cesimkilic]

Hello Evan. I love ur Teaching style. Thank you for videos. Im an English translation student and I want to Share your videos on instagram. Before sharing those, I wanted to ask for your permission. Pls respond if you are around. Thanks a lot.

[@gausgrin649]

Hi Evan - First off I'll echo others and say that your communication is impeccable and I'm thankful for this video. Is there research (or does this theory cross apply) to slang / sub-cultural language? While linguistic patterns may determine how a group frames and categorizes reality and by consequence, their reaction to that reality, slang represents dissemination in between cultural elements and represents more subjective shifts. Does Linguistic Relatively apply or is that better looked at through a different modal?

[@evanashworth490]

Hello! You have raised a good question. The thing about linguistic relativity is that researchers tend to be more interested in the grammatical categories used in a language or lexicalization in a language (what can or cannot be a word in a language and boundaries of meaning of individual words in that language), because focusing on these elements will yield more observable differences in how one's language shapes their way of thinking. However, with slang, because it is principally used to reinforce in-group membership, I think it is a more useful window into sociolinguistic concepts rather than cognitive ones.

[@muhammadnaumanfaisal3714]

Sir plz make video on semantics and pergmatics

[@aroobakhan176]

Your interpretation is very good plus the way u are explaining the things is awesome. you should do some videos on other theories of linguistics too

[@dandeliongirl108]

Mi amas ĉi tiun. Dankon. Bonvolu fari pli. Ĉu vi parolas Esperanton? Mi studis Esperanton kun Duolingo por unu jaro i ĵove this. Thank you. please make more. Do you speak Esperanto? I studied it for one year with Duolingo.

[@StreetN1ckel]

Our thoughts and ideas are limited by the structure of our language. And when was the last time you had a nonlinguistic thought?

[@evanashworth490]

A few moments ago, when I glanced at a painting I like

[@kittiekattiepattie]

Hey Evan! I really enjoy your videos they have very good and easy explanations. I'm studying English in Argentina and i have my first test coming up. I have a hard time understanding the terms of weak vowels, protected and unprotected vowels and selection slots. Do you think it's possible to make a video about this? Can't find anything on youtube. Greeting from Katrine

[@evanashworth490]

kittiekattiepattie Hi, Katrine! Unfortunately, I won't be making a video on those topics--at least not anytime soon. My apologies. Best of luck!

[@tayluvofficial]

Hope your test went well omg. This was in 2016. It's 2024 now and I'm studying English at University:( wish I could go back to 2016. Maybe one day I'll be back here after 10 years? Haha :)

[@Teacherof_Balance]

@EvanAshworth can you do one about PARSE?

[@k4eru20]

on some king shit here ily and thank u

[@malakabdullah8316]

why just why don't you upload more videos.

[@eslem.4]

you aged like a wine

[@jameshutto3047]

"Language shapes thinking" that statement is why Evan doesnt make videos anymore. He was killed for stating that vital truth.

[@evanashworth490]

"The rumors of my death are greatly exaggerated."

[@jameshutto3047]

@@evanashworth490 clone? Jk. Good to hear

[@vvnqn5749]

Please, can you explain the phrase in English and the phrase in general? Or can you direct me to someone who explains it in a simple and clear way like you, as well as , number gender and case please i have exam tomorrow

[@evanashworth490]

My apologies for my late response, but if you are still interested in phrases, you might consider checking out my videos on syntax. I am planning future videos on topics relating to number, gender, and case but there are certainly videos on this topic on KZbin.

[@rouwaidaabdullwahed7048]

So did Sapir say that language determines our thoughts??

[@evanashworth490]

No, as far as I know, he did not say that, but recognized that language, at the very least, influences thought.

[@cheonhoyeop6843]

I have a bit of knowledge on Japanese so I am curious - how does Japanese use classifiers?

[@evanashworth490]

Hi Cheonho. For example, [ko] is a classifer used to refer to small, round objects, so if you say that you would like a few apples in Japanese, you would have to include that [ko] classifer in your utterance. At least--that is my understanding--I'm certainly no expert in Japanese!

[@cheonhoyeop6843]

@@evanashworth490 Thanks for the reply! If I am not mistaken the classifiers used in Japanese are usually counter words that immediately follow the nouns they describe

[@adawiajabar3499]

Why the hypothesis has two versions? Deleting the strong version sounds better due to the weakness it has . So why it has two versions?

[@evanashworth490]

The strong version came first, before the cognitive revolution of the 1960s. After this time, researchers increasingly recognized that "the language one speaks determines one's thinking" is unnecessarily constraining, and so many accepted that one's language does affect one's thinking, but preferred "influence" instead of a "determine". As I mentioned though, I tend to think that "influence" (the weak version) is true and that "determine" (strong) is false, so researchers have to work in that vast middleground between "influence" and "determine" to arrive at the truth of the matter.

[@ChuckHaney]

It would seem to me that English, having one word for snow, as compared to Inuit having "four to six" would reflect the notion that English speakers are,... in a hurry. We want to move things along, not ponder all the complexities of snow. Having one word allows us to consolidate and move the story along. And since we have other words to get into more detail, it suggests that perhaps, our interest in speeding things up did not work so well. So they language developed ways to start again when the speedy method was inadequate. We don't want to slow down but we are forced to at times. English speakers get frustrated when they have to start again and explain what they just said with more complex wording. (Just some thoughts, I have no formal education in the subject whatsoever.)

[@aidenwinter1117]

10:27 Women are hot but also dangerous

[@petej011]

I just realized your a linguists not a philosopher ;).