The relationships between linguistic communication, thought and civilization have been one of the myths of linguistic communication for centuries. This paper will measure the power of linguistic communication and the common influence between linguistic communication and civilization by detecting knowledge of different linguistic communication talkers.

The purpose of this essay is to happen out the influence they have on each other, and to measure the relationship between linguistic communication and civilization. The common influence between linguistic communication and civilization will be the major focal point of this essay. The chief statement would be discoursing whether linguistic communication truly influences civilization or it merely reflects civilization.

One of the definitions for linguistic communication was established by Harcourt ( 2005 ) : “ communicating of ideas and feelings through a system of arbitrary signals, such as voice sounds, gestures, or written symbols. Such a system includes its regulations for uniting its constituents, such as words. Such a system as used by a state, people, or other distinguishable community ; frequently contrasted with idiom ” ( p. 633 )

Thinking is frequently understood as an intra-mental activity inside an single head. In the procedure of thought, linguistic communication is used as a tool with interior address stand foring vocalized thought. Language is hence possible to be a variable influencing idea. The grammar, sentence structure, restrictions and traits of a linguistic communication may determine the thought manner of the linguistic communication talkers.

Anthropology theories/concepts ( 200-250 words )

In this thesis, ethnolinguistics, the survey of the relationships between linguistic communication and civilization, and how they reciprocally influence and inform each other ( Haviland, 1999 ) , will be the chief focal point. Two anthropological theories, lingual relativity and historical particularism ( historicism ) , will be discussed as the first is the chief theory of this survey and the 2nd one will work as a backup.

Linguistic relativity

The chief theory, lingual relativity, is the thought that differentiations encoded in one linguistic communication are alone to that linguistic communication ( Haviland, 1999 ) . Under the theory of lingual relativity, users of markedly different grammars are pointed by their grammars toward different types of observations and different ratings of externally similar Acts of the Apostless of observation, and therefore are non tantamount as perceivers but must get at slightly different positions of the universe ( Whorf and Caroll, 1956 ) . In other words, people speak in different linguistic communications would hold different thought manners and knowledge of the universe.

Furthermore, the schools of idea can be represented by two extremes, lingual determinism and universalism. There are two signifiers of lingual relativity harmonizing to their reading of the power of linguistic communication, lingual determinism and lingual relativism, while universalism is an opposite thought to lingual relativity. These constructs will take to the chief statement of this thesis.

Determinism is the strongest signifier of lingual relativity. It suggests that linguistic communication can impact thought, lingual relativity holds that talkers of different linguistic communications think otherwise. Relativism is the modest signifier of lingual relativity. Its thought is that, linguistic communication can impact thought, lingual relativity holds that talkers of different linguistic communications think otherwise ( Wolff and Holmes, 2010 ) . In contrast, universalism is an opposite construct. In the thought of universalism, civilizations, or at least linguistic communications, vary in countless ways ; but there are forms of fluctuation that reflect cosmopolitan belongingss that we might name the nature of linguistic communication ( Croft, 2010 ) .

Apart from lingual relativity, the theory of historical particularism will be used as a backup theory in this thesis.

Historical particularism

Historical particularism is a school of anthropology prominent in the first portion of the 20th century that insisted on the aggregation of ethnographic informations ( through direct fieldwork ) prior to doing cross-cultural generalisations ( Ferraro and Andreatta, 2011 ) . It emphasizes that each civilization is a alone consequence of its typical yesteryear, which makes cross-cultural generalisations questionable ( Bailey, G. A. and Peoples, J. , 2010 ) .

Culture influences linguistic communication

Harmonizing to historical particularism, each civilization has its ain form and is partly composed of traits diffused from other civilizations since each society has their ain yesteryear and they are a representation of that alone yesteryear. Since that civilization and history are interrelated, and linguistic communication is a tool to record and transport frontward the history of a society.

There is an often-cited illustration of lingual relativism, “ Eskimo words for snow ” . It is a claim stating that Eskimos have an remarkably big figure of words for snow in their linguistic communication. In English, we add adjectival, participials or preposition phrases to modify the word “ snow ” , like “ falling snow ” , “ snow on the land ” , “ snow packed difficult like ice ” , “ slushy snow ” , “ wind-driven flight snow ” , etc. However, the word “ snow ” is excessively inclusive to an Eskimo, they use different words for different sorts of snow alternatively.

From the “ Eskimo words for snow ” claim, it was discovered that some linguistic communications may rich in words and looks depicting a specific thing. And the vocabulary of a linguistic communication can be a spyhole for us to look into that civilization.

The construct of “ jade ” in Chinese literature

In literary Chinese civilization, “ jade ” has some metaphorical significances. The construct of jade immensely appears in assorted contexts of Chinese poesy and parlances. Even among most of the common vehicles of Chinese metaphors, “ jade ” deserves particular attending. The literary construct and image Chinese attached to the word “ jade ” ( cZ‰ ) reflect Chinese jade civilization in their tradition.

The construct of jade has appeared in the content of assorted types of Chinese literature, such as poesy and parlance. In Chinese linguistic communication, there are many parlances linked with “ jade ” . The usage of jade in those parlances normally is to typify beautiful and all right things. The followerss are some illustrations:

Parlances

e±?c®?cZ‰???

e¦™??«cZ‰e»Y

???c‘??‡·cZ‰

a†°??…cZ‰??”

?‹‹c?sa?•cZ‰

Deductions of jade

luxury

beauty

endowment

stainlessness

valuable parts

Additionally, there are 100s jade-related characters take jade ( cZ‰ ) group, despite “ jade ” ( cZ‰ ) itself. Most of those characters have descriptive significances of some specific sort of jadei??c‘?i??c‘?i??c?¦i??etc.i?‰ , strike harding sound of, the colour of or even the discolorations on a jadei??c‘?i??c’ˆi??c‘• respectivelyi?‰ .

Jade-related characters

c‘?

c??

c‘¤

cZ¦

cZ?

c‘z

significances

all right jade

articulation jade

cherished jade

panannular jade ring

tinkling of pieces of jade

jade used as tally

From the above illustrations of the literary usage of “ jade ” , we can detect that the construct of “ jade ” is attached with numerours “ good characteristics ” and enjoys a high place ( as Chinese people created a batch of jade-related characters ) in Chinese civilization.

It is said in the Book of Rites, one of the Chinese Five Classicss of the Confucian canon, that “ since antediluvian clip, all gentlemen wear pendents of jade-stones, ” and that they should “ ne’er be without them unless there is sufficient ground ” ( c¦®e??A·cZ‰e-» ) . Jade has played a really of import function in traditional Chinese civilization. ( Yang, 2011 )

The above illustration about literary construct of “ jade ” in Chinese literature shows civilization ‘s influence on linguistic communication. It evidences that linguistic communication is a contemplation of civilization.

Nipponese footings for rain

Similar with the “ Eskimo words for snow ” claim, there is another word myth in Nipponese. There are remarkably many different footings which can be used to show different types of rain in Nipponese. These footings categorize the rain into different types, by strength, season, continuance and even features.

Here are some looks of rain or related to rain in Nipponese.

Types of rain in Nipponese

Pronunciation in Nipponese

Meanings

c™?e›?

hakuu

rain shower

a?„e›?

niwakaame

rain shower

a?±e›?

jakuu

weak rain

a°?e™?a‚S

koburi

visible radiation rain

a°?c? e›?

konukaame

all right rain

c…™e›?

enu

misty rain

e›??°·

uhyou

stop deading rain

?™?a??e›?

harenochiame

clear so rain

?°·e›?

hisame

really cold rain or hail

a¤?e›?

yau

dark rain

??…e›?a‰?c·s

baiuzensen

seasonal rain

???e?-

shun rin

spring rain

c·‘e›?

ryokuu

early-summer rain

a??e›?

juuu

reviewing rain one time in 10 yearss

??µe›?

keiu

welcome rain

a¤©???

tenkyuu

rain from a cloudless sky

?™?a?ˆ?™‚a°?e›?

hareichijikosame

brief light rain

e?-

nagame

long rain

e?-e›?

rinu

long rain

e™°e?-

inrin

long rain

a¤•c«‹

yuudachi

sudden eventide rain

The above looks for rain in Nipponese reflect the rain civilization in Japan. Nipponese society and civilization are affected by the clime at that place. Frequent rain is a outstanding characteristic of Japan ‘s clime. Japan has a high precipitation. The mean rainfall in Tokyo is about 1,800 millimeters, about double the planetary norm of 1,000 millimeter. The strength of rain is besides strong and varies from season to season. It rains a great trade in Japan, hence the society, civilization and even linguistic communication of Japan are affected by rain.

Harmonizing to the theory of lingual relativity, phenomena and things that play of import functions in a given society and civilization are frequently subdivided into assorted types and described utilizing a broad assortment of specialised footings.

By the illustrations of “ jade ” in Chinese literature and “ rain ” in Nipponese linguistic communication, the thought that civilization influences linguistic communication is evidenced. Sing civilization to be a merchandise of human idea, we can infer that linguistic communication is influenced by human idea, but non one-sidedly influencing civilization ( lingual determinism ) . The theory of lingual relativism is fundamentally proved, but how about “ linguistic communication influences civilization ” ? Does linguistic communication merely reflect civilization? In the undermentioned paragraphs, the thought that linguistic communication influences civilization will be discussed to happen out whether linguistic communication and civilization truly have common influence on each other ( lingual relativism ) or linguistic communication does non make much in civilization.

Language influences civilization

The thought that the manner we view and feel the universe is, to a certain extent, dependant on the linguistic communication we use. Each linguistic communication contains a peculiar and alone universe position, which causes talkers of that linguistic communication to see and believe in a characteristic manner, different from the talkers of other linguistic communications. This has become known as the rule of linguistic communication relativity.

In this portion, different knowledges of different linguistic communication talkers will be shown as illustrations of linguistic communication ‘s influence on civilization ( linguistic communication forms thought )

Percept of eye-witness memory and incrimination

There is a survey conducted by Caitlin Fausey at Stanford. In that survey, Fausey found that eye-witness memory differ depending on the linguistic communication one speaks. The manner that a individual records events is depending on the linguistic communication who speaks. The grammatical construction of a linguistic communication affects our thought form and even our eye-witness memory. In that paper, a cross-linguistic difference in how English and Spanish talkers describe the same events is identified, a corresponding cross-linguistic difference in eye-witness memory is besides found.

For talkers of an agentive linguistic communication like English, if they see person by chance brush against a flower vase and the vase ends up in pieces on the floor, they can easy retrieve who broke it. When asked about what happened, they might state, “ Person ( the agent ) broke the vase. ” They can easy detect the agent of an action. In agentive linguistic communications, descriptions like this are typical and appropriate for clearly inadvertent events. By contrast, non-agentive linguistic communication talkers ‘ description of the same event/action frequently sounds evasive. Even if they see the same event, when asked about what happened, they might non retrieve who did it, and merely reply “ The vase is broken ”

Furthermore, the influence of linguistic communication is non merely on eye-witness memory, but even on incrimination. A canonical non-agentive description ( e.g. , the vase is broken ) is intransitive and does non put the individual as the topic for the change-of-state event. Peoples are sensitive to this differentiation between agentive and non-agentive frames. Linguistic framing influences one ‘s judgement about incrimination and penalty. In fiscal liability, agentive descriptions will take to 30 % -50 % more in requested fiscal amendss than non-agentive descriptions do. Judgments and fault can be affected by lingual frame.

Tetraphobia in Southeast Asiatic states.

Tetraphobia refers to the fright of four. It is a common superstitious notion throughout Southeast Asiatic states, for illustrations, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Taiwan, Singapore and Malaysia. The fright of the figure 4 is merely come from its pronunciation in Southeast Asiatic linguistic communication. In Mandarin, its pronunciation of 4 is really near to that of the word for decease, as both of them are pronounced as shi. And in Nipponese and Korean, the two words are even absolutely homophonous.

The superstitious notion of tetraphobia has permeated all facets of society in these states, from architecture to communicating norms. Here are some illustrations of tetraphobia ‘s impact:

Many edifice in Hong Kong are typically built without 4-related floors, including offices, infirmaries, hotels, flats and skyscrapers. One celebrated illustration is the Vision City in Hong Kong, which is losing floors 40 through 49

The Chinese avoid phone Numberss and references with 4s, particularly when they ‘re combined with another figure that changes the significance. Example: “ 94 ” could be interpreted as being dead for a long clip.

The figure four was banned from licence home bases and can merely be used one time in ID Numberss in Taiwan.

The official sound of 4 in Nipponese linguistic communication is shi, but Nipponese people normally use the surrogate pronunciation, yon, that far off from its official sound, when speaking about phone Numberss and day of the months.

The names of military aircraft and vehicles in China frequently start with the figure 5. And South Korean and Chinese naval forcess besides avoid 4 when calling their ships.

“ Table 4 ” is frequently eliminated at battles, nuptialss, birthdays and other jubilations. Peoples in society in this civilization ever avoid utilizing 4 in verbal address during vacations and when a loved one is ill or deceasing.

From the above illustrations, the theory of lingual relativism is farther evidenced. The power of linguistic communication is important for certain. The linguistic communication a individual uses can determine whose idea. The idea of a group people forms civilization. The linguistic communication of a topographic point is brooding to the civilization of that topographic point, at the same clip, linguistic communication promotes the civilization of at that place.

Decision ( 400-500 words )

Form this survey, it is clear that lingual relativism is an evidenced theory. The relationships between linguistic communication and civilization are bilateral.

Language is created to carry through homo ‘s demand. Therefore different society created there linguistic communications in different ways. The traits of a linguistic communication are shaped by the civilization of a society that created the linguistic communication. The communicating manners, vocabulary, grammar of a linguistic communication, are all able to reflect a alone civilization of a topographic point. Language can be the prototype of a civilization, and even a society.

Language is a tool to show human idea and dispersed civilization. The traits and restrictions of a linguistic communication affects the thought manner and knowledges of its talkers. When clip goes by, it can determine the civilization of a individual topographic point.

Language shapes human idea and brings civilization to society while it is besides attached with civilization ‘s influence.