week 2 Flashcards
Saussure’s distinction of language and parole
langue: idealized system- the object of study of linguistics grammar rules, patterns crystallized at a given point in time ideal speaker-hearer
language “inside the circle
parole: messy, imperfect actual speech; language is use fleeting, variable idiosyncratic
language “outside the circle”
Saussure’s structuralism
meaning of a sign depends on its position relative to other signs: things are defined by relationships of opposition to other things within a larger system; relationships between things form structures - categories, oppositions
broader philosophy structuralism
fundamental structures that underlie human cognition shape society
more extreme version: structures (beyond consciousness & control of individuals) determine human behavior
syntagmatic and paradigmatic relationships
syntagmatic: relationship to signs “in other slots” (adjectives, nouns, verbs) - these words have different roles
paradigmatic: relationship to things that can go in the “same slot” in a sentence (nouns) - the fill the same roll
synchronic and diachronic linguistics
synchronic: study of a language system at particular point in time (how does it work as a system)
diachronic: study of changes in a language system through time (historical linguistics)
prescipritve/descriptive linguistics
prescriptive: how people should speak (defining “correct language”) standards, rules
descriptive: describing language as it is actually used
language ideology
the mediating link between linguistic and social differences; how different ways of speaking are linked to different social identities
what people believe about language: overtly expressed beliefs, beliefs implicit in actions
beliefs about what is and what isn’t socially valued
linguistic relativism- SapirWhorf Hypothesis
language affects how you see the world; different languages predispose you to interpret the world in different ways
users of diff grammars - pointed toward diff types of observations and evaluations of similar acts - not equivalent as observers but arrive at diff views of the world
cultural relativism
linguistic forms influence thought
different languages do not all have the same logic (diversity of knowledge and worldview)
languages as repositories of knowledge
languages are linked to identities and rights
people should judge a language/culture on its own terms
sapir-whorf hypothesis: determinism/relativism
determinism: extreme form of relativism (Strong Whorf); our language determines how we see the world (we can’t see things another way) not testable, makes bilingualism and translation impossible
relativism: our language predisposes us to see the world in certain ways (weak whorf)
whorf’s examples of linguistic relativism
connotations of words led people to think of things as not a fire hazard:
- “empty” gasoline drums
- pool of “waste water”
- “scrap lead”
examples of language influencing thought
area of more experience - pets, cars, sports, academics - expertise and vocab make certain differences more meaningful
1 word for love in English, 2 in Ukrainian: liubov (general) kokhannia (romantic)
language helps us give diff meanings to what we see, it influences how we interpret the world
ex: if you use same word for sister and cousin, are you likely to have closer relationships with your cousin
language shapes thought - shaped by how we use it (feedback loop)
theory of mind
conceptualizing the mental states of others
language in general
does having it or not having it affect cognition
linguistic structures
grammatical categories shape thought