對薩丕爾—沃爾夫假說的評論

摘要：薩丕爾—沃爾夫假說是20世紀在西方語言學界的頗具影響的理論假說，該假說又稱為語言相對論其核心內(nèi)涵是，人類不僅生活在客觀世界里，也生活在主觀世界里，不同的語言有不同的語言結(jié)構(gòu)主要是語法，不同的語言結(jié)構(gòu)會影響使用者的思維習慣，導致他們用不同的方法去觀察世界，從而導致他們對世界具有不同的感知、對世界產(chǎn)生不同的看法，語言不僅是思維的工具，它同時也強烈影響和制約著思維。從語言和思維關系的角度探討薩丕爾—沃爾夫假說，并試探性地給出作者的觀點。

關鍵詞：語言；思維；薩丕爾—沃爾夫假說

中圖分類號：H0 文獻標志碼：A文章編號：1673-291X（2011）22-0259-02

一、Introduction

The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis is perhaps the most hotly debated topic in academic speculations on thinking. In the 1920s and 1930s，the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has caused controversy and spawned research in a variety of disciplines including linguistics，psychology，philosophy，anthropology，and education.Until today it has not been completely disputed or defended or proved，the hypothesis has continued to intrigue researchers around the world.

二、Review on Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

1.Review on the Strong Version—Linguistic Determinism.Linguistic determinism claims that language determines thought，and has been strongly opposed.

We have seen four major doctrines of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis found in the critical literature.They are accused of the following：a)espousing causal determination；b)espousing that language shapes color perception；c) espousing absolute nontranslatability between different languages because of the lack of lexical items；and d) presenting only linguistic data，which leads to circularity of evidence(Alford 1980). However，until now，there exist experiments to support the strong version.Let us look at Peterson and Siegal's study involving deaf children.Their study revealed two naturally occurring groups-deaf children of hearing parents and deaf children of deaf parents——which allow for a within culture test of linguistic relativity and their results offer direct evidence that language molds thought.

2.Review on the Weak Version—Linguistic Relativity. Many now accept a “weak” version，more moderate relativity hypothesis，namely that the ways in which we see the world may be influenced by the kind of language we use.

Despite all these controversies facing the linguistic determinism，there have been several studies performed that support at least the weak linguistic relativity hypothesis.In 1954，Brown and Lenneberg tested for color codability，or how speakers of one language categorize the color spectrum and how it affects their recognition of those colors.Their finding is clearly in support of the limiting influence of linguistic categories on cognition”(Penn 1972：16).However，there are two problems concerning the linguistic relativity.Firstly，to what extent does language shape our thought and culture? Secondly，which should be regarded as the first cause，language patterns or cultural norms （劉潤清、封宗信，2002：164）?

三、Conclusion

Here，I simply give my comments as follows：

1.partly due to the different emphasis on the language structure，easterners and westerners have different thinking modes.Easterners pay special attention to concrete，comprehensive，and subjective and inductive thinking；while westerners prefer thinking abstractly，analytically，objectively and inversely and deductively.On some extent，our languages determine our thinking.

2.the common phenomenon in our life is that before baby can speak any language，he can think.If the baby is hungry and asking milk to drink，at this time，if you give him a toy，the baby would cry to refuse the toy.We can say that，without language，baby is able to think.The case can also be applied on the dumb person.

3.we must admit that language is one of the principal ways in which we experience and interact with the world.Thus，we can say language does influence our thinking modes.

4.if language determines thought，people who speak different language will at least distort the objective facts about the nature.Then we live in a confusing world，perhaps in a world filled with war，because the headquarters of the world would never reach a consensus about the dispute.

5.if we still want to know whether language influence thought or to some extent，maybe it requires a measurement of human thought.For the time being，some researchers are testing human brain with some special kind of machines，but no definitely results produced.Perhaps，we may dissect human brain to study the brain organization and how it functions，so as to further understand how the brain woks.However，this is inhuman.

6.maybe the last choice，we maybe resort to God，thanks to God’s perfect and mystery creation to settle this unending research.

Bibliography：

[1] Birk-Seligson，Susan，1990.The Bilingual Courtroom：Court Interpreters in the Judicial Process.Chicago：The University of Chicago Press.

[2] Dan Moonhawk Alford，1980.The Great Whorf Hypothesis Hoax：Sin，suffering and Redemption in Academe. California：Phoenix Associates.

[3]David G.Mandelbaum，1958.Sapir，Edward：Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language，Culture and Personality.Berkeley：University of California Press.

[4] John B.Carroll，1956.Whorf，Benjamin Lee.Language，Mind and Reality：Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf.Massachusetts：M.I.T.Press.

[5]竇衛(wèi)霖.思維方式差異對語言交往的影響[J].上海大學學報，2004，(4).

[6]梁海英.從語言與思維的角度再論薩丕爾—沃爾夫假說[J].甘肅聯(lián)合大學學報，2005，(2).

[7]林新華.對薩丕爾—沃爾夫假說的再認識[J].外語教學，1998，(4).

[8]馬壯寰.對語言與思維關系的幾點思考[J].外語與外語教學，1996，(1).

[9]劉潤清，封宗信.語言學理論與流派[M].南京：南京師范大學出版社，2002.

Review on Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

HU Ju-qin

（China University of Mining Technology，Xuzhou 221000，China）

Abstract：Do all human beings think the same way regardless of the way they speak，or is the way people think influenced by the language they speak? This paper intends to review on Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis from the perspective of the relationship between language and thought，and tentatively give my comments on this great hypothesis.

Key words：language；thought；Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis[責任編輯 王曉燕]