{"id":834,"date":"2024-01-31T20:38:36","date_gmt":"2024-02-01T04:38:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/linguamonium.com\/?p=834"},"modified":"2024-02-01T08:14:39","modified_gmt":"2024-02-01T16:14:39","slug":"language-shape-thought-new-color-study","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/linguamonium.com\/?p=834","title":{"rendered":"Does language shape thought? A new study on color terms"},"content":{"rendered":"

Linguists, psychologists, anthropologists, and others have been arguing for at least a century over the provocative question, \u201cdoes language shape thought?\u201d New research out of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology adds fresh fuel to the fire. An MIT News article summarizes the study: \u201cHow \u2018blue\u2019 and \u2018green\u2019 appeared in a language that didn\u2019t have words for them\u201d<\/a>.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

If you\u2019re really strapped for time, here\u2019s a summary of that summary (although I recommend you read the article!):<\/p>\n

The investigation deals with basic color terms <\/strong>\u2013 single, common words for colors used by speakers of a particular language. Researchers who studied the Tsimane\u2019 people living in the Bolivian Amazon rainforest found that speakers who had also learned Spanish began using two different Tsimane\u2019 words to refer to blue and green \u2013 which monolingual speakers do not do. They concluded: \u201cthe way that a language divides up color space can be influenced by contact with other languages.\u201d<\/p>\n

Tsimane\u2019 members generally use only three color terms, corresponding to black, white, and red. They also have several words to indicate yellow or brown shades, and two words, used interchangeably, for either blue or green (shandyes<\/em> and yush\u00f1us<\/em>). Not everyone in their society uses the additional color terms though. MIT professor of brain and cognitive sciences and study co-author Edward Gibson infers: \u201cLearning a second language enables you to understand these concepts that you didn\u2019t have in your first language.\u201d<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Your brain on language: The Linguistic Relativity vs. Universalism controversy<\/strong><\/h3>\n

The statement by Gibson above points to a wider debate in linguistics and the anthropological\/psychological\/cognitive sciences. The debate pits a theory called linguistic relativity <\/strong>(a.k.a. the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis<\/strong>) against another theory, Universalism<\/strong>. The questions these approaches pose have captivated me for years.<\/p>\n

A very simplistic definition of linguistic relativity<\/a><\/strong> is that your native language shapes the way you think, perceive, and even act. There are strong <\/strong>and weak <\/strong>versions of this theory.<\/p>\n