北科大语言学内部教学教案9考研必备.docx

北科大语言学内部教学教案9考研必备.docx

《北科大语言学内部教学教案9考研必备.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《北科大语言学内部教学教案9考研必备.docx（12页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

北科大语言学内部教学教案9考研必备

Lecture9Language,CultureandSociety

Todaywe’llbedealingwiththestudyoflanguagefromanewperspective,thatis,therelationshipbetweenlanguageandotheraspectsofhumanlife.Inparticular,wewillfocusourdiscussionontherelationshipbetweenlanguageandcultureandthatbetweenlanguageandsociety.

9.1Languageandculture

Everyonewillagreethatlanguageandculturearecloselyrelatedwitheachother.Butbeforewetakeacloselookattheirrelationship,wehavetofirstmakeclearonequestion:

Whatisculture?

9.1.1Whatisculture?

Broadlyspeaking,culturemeansthetotalwayoflifeofapeople,includingthepatternsofbelief,customs,objects,institutions,techniques,andlanguage.Inanarrowsense,culturereferstothelocalorspecificpractice,beliefsorcustoms.

Thefirstlinguistswhobegantodealwiththerelationshipbetweenlanguageandculturearethosewhoareinterestedinaculturalstudyoflanguageandwecalltheselinguistsanthropologicallinguists.ImportantfiguresamongtheseforerunnerincludeMalinowskiandFirthinEngland,Boas,SapirandWhorfintheUnitedStates.Thenlet’sbrieflyexaminetheircontributiontothestudyoflanguageandculture.

Malinowski,inhisfieldworkineasternNewGuinea,observedthatthemeaningofaworkgreatlydependeduponitsoccurrenceinagivencontext,orrather,uponareallanguagesituationinlife.Language“isamodeofactionandnotaninstrumentofreflection”（1923:

312）.Theexamplehegivesis“wood”.Intheprimitivesocietyhestudies,thiswordnotonlymeansthesolidmaterialofatree,itisalsousedtorefertoacanoe.Thissecondmeaning,asMalinowskinoticed,wasspecialtothespeechcommunityinwhichitisusedanddifficultforanoutsidertocatch.

FirthwasaleadingfigureoftheLondonSchool,whodevelopedthetheoryofcontextofsituation,orcontextualtheoryofmeaning,bywhichhearguesthatlanguageismixedwiththephysicalobjectspresentduringaconversationtoascertainthemeaninginvolved.Itcanbesummarizedas:

A.Therelevantfeaturesoftheparticipants:

persons,personalities:

（i）Theverbalactionoftheparticipants.

（ii）Thenonverbalactionoftheparticipants.

B.Therelevantobjects.

C.Theeffectsoftheverbalaction.

HereFirtharesuggestingtwothings:

1）Individualsuselanguagecreativelyandindifferentways;2）languageusedependsontheparticipants（whotowhom）,thevariety（whatlanguage）,thesituation（when）andpurpose（towhatend）.

Thenifwewanttosummarizetherelationshipbetweenlanguageandculture,wemaysay:

Languageexpressesculturalreality,forexample,aluckydogvs.狗仗人势；languageembodiesculturalidentity,forexample,fromaperson’suseofcertainvocabulary,weknowwhereheisfrom;languagesymbolizesculturalreality,thatis,peopleareidentifiedbytheiruseoflanguage;languagehelpsperpetuatetheculture–itisthroughlanguagethatcultureispasseddownfromgenerationtogeneration,fromoneplacetoanother.Tosumup,wemaysaytherelationoflanguagetocultureisthatofparttowhole,forlanguageispartofculture.Theknowledgeandbeliefsthatconstituteapeople’sculturearehabituallyencodedandtransmittedinlanguage.

9.1.2TheSapir-Whorfhypothesis

NorthAmericananthropologicallinguistsmadetheircontributiontothestudyoflanguageandcultureintheireffortstoreconstructAmericannativelanguages,mostlyAmericanIndianlanguages.Firstlet’slookattheirpicturesandthenI’llsharewithyouthestoryaboutBenjaminLeeWhorf.

Whorf（1897~1941）wasachemicalengineerbyprofession.Hehadbeenworkingforaninsurancecompanysincehisgraduationfromcollegetillhisdeath.Hewasinchargeoffirecontroltechniques,particularlyhisjobwastofindoutthecausesoffire.Inhiswork,hefoundthattherewereobjectivecausesandalsosubjectivecauseswhichwasconcernedwithlanguageunderstanding.Forexample,nearthestorehouseswhichweremarked“gasolinedrums”（汽油罐）,peopletendedtobeverycarefulwiththeirbehaviourinordernottosetfiretothem.However,nearthestorehousesmarked“emptygasolinedrums”（空油罐）,peopletendedtobecomecasual,smokingandthrowingawaycigaretteends.Infact,“empty”gasolinedrumsareevenmoredangerousthan“full”ones,foremptyonesarefullofexplosivegas.Asalanguagemarker,“empty”doesn’tgivetheinformationofdanger.ManysimilarcasesdroveWhorftotherealizationthatlanguagehasmuchinfluenceandcontroloverthethinkingandbehaviourofhumanbeings.Therefore,dopeoplespeakingdifferentlanguagesthinkindifferentways.Hethusbecamemuchinterestedinlanguage,andbegantodoliteraturereviewandfieldworkonIndianlanguagesinhissparetime.In1931,whenthefamousanthropologicallinguistSapirwenttoteachinYaleUniversity,WhorfwentthereandstudiedthecoursesgivenbySapironAmericanIndianlanguagesandwiththelatter’ssupporthefurtheredhisstudiesondifferentIndianlanguages.

InhisinvestigationWhorffoundthatmanyIndianlanguagesarefundamentallydifferentfromIndo-EuropeanlanguagesrepresentedbyEnglish.Suchdifferencesinstructurecorrespondtodifferentwaysofperceivingtheworld.Forexample,Englishsentencesconsistoftwomainparts,thesubjectandthepredicate.Theexpressionofeverythingisdividedintoanagent（主体）andanaction（动作）.SomeIndianlanguages,forexample,Hopi,doesn’tmakethissubject-predicatedivision,i.e.,anverbcanexistoroccurindependentofasubject.InEnglishwesayAlightflashed,whileinHopithesamemeaningisexpressedbyonesimplewordrehpi,flash（occurred）.Theactionofflashingandtheagentoflightarecombinedtogether.WhatEnglishspeakerperceiveismainlyanactionwhiletheHopiperceivesthestate.

AnotherexamplecomesfromtheNootka,inwhichthereisnosuchthingasthedifferentpartsofspeech.Theonlysentencepatternissubjectandpredicatecombinedtogether.（ThepictureinLanguageandLogic.）ThereisasimpleNootkasentence“ti´imshya´isita´itlma.WhentranslatedintoEnglish,Heinvitespeopletoafeast,itdividesthedescriptionintoanagentHeandanactioninvites.ButintheoriginalNootka,thereisnotsuchdivision.

Thepictureshowsthatthetwodifferentlanguage,EnglishandNootka,cutthesamethingupdifferentlyandtheorderindescriptionisalsodifferent.Whorfbelievesthatasubject-predicatelanguageisinfactabipolarworldview.Throughlayersofanalysisandabstraction,thingsaredividedintosmallerandsmallerparticleswhileasubject-predicatecombinedsentencepatternisaholisticandsyntheticworldview.Thisdifferenceisworldviewisnotabstractedfromtheexternalworld,butpre-conditionedbydifferentlanguages.Peoplespeakingacertainlanguagewillhavetofollowthelogicofthislanguageintheirthinking.Theywillhavedifferentperceptionsoftheworldbecausetheyspeakdifferentlanguages.

AccordingtoWhorf,languageclassifiesitemsofexperiencedifferently.TheclasscorrespondingtoonewordandonethoughtinlanguageAmayberegardedbylanguageBastwoormoreclassescorrespondingtotwoormorewordsandthoughts.HerehegavetheexampleofHopiandEskimo.InEnglishwehave3respectivewordsforairplane,dragonflyandpilot,butinHopitheyarejustoneword:

MASA’YTAKA.InEnglish,wehaveonewordforsnow,butEskimohas3or4differentwordsforsnow.Upontheseobservationsheintroducedthelinguisticrelativityprinciple:

Allobserversarenotledbythesamephysicalevidencetothesamepictureoftheuniverse,unlesstheirlinguisticbackgroundsaresimilar,orcaninsomewaybecalibrated.Inanotherarticle“LinguisticsasanExactScience”publishedinDecember1940,hemadeamoreexplicitstatementoflinguisticrelativity:

Usersofmarkedlydifferentgrammarsarepointedbytheirgrammarstowarddifferenttypesofobservationsanddifferentevaluationsofexternallysimilaractsofobservation,andhencearenotequivalentasobserversbutmustarriveatsomewhatdifferentviewsoftheworld.

TheideasofWhorfcanbeconcludedtotwomainpoints.First,peoplespeakingdifferentlanguageshavedifferentthinkingpatterns.People’sperceptionoftheworldisrelativetothestructuresofthelanguagetheyspeak.Second,languagedeterminesthought.Thinkingcannottakeplaceindependentofthought.Theformeriscalled“linguisticrelativity”andthelatter“linguisticdeterminism.”LaterpeoplereferthetwoingeneralasWhorfianhypothesisorSapir-Whorfhypothesis,forthetheorywascompletedbyWhorfbydevelopingSapir’sideasandSapirsupportedandtookpartinhistheoreticalconstruction.

Theoriginalclaimsthehypothesissuggestshavebeencriticizedbymanylinguistsandtheyarereferredtoasthestrongversionofthehypothesis.Thisversionremainscontroversialaswellasinfluentialeventotoday.Thereisalsoamodifiedversionofthishypothesis,whichisgenerallyaccepted.Thisweakversiongoeslikethis:

Thereisacorrelationbetweenlanguage,culture,andthought,butthecross-culturaldifferencesthusproducinginourwaysofthinkingarerelative,ratherthancategorical.

9.1.3Linguisticevidenceofculturaldifferences

Sincelanguageandculturearecloselyrelatedwitheachother,theninwhataspectoflanguageusecanwefindculturaldifferences?

First,theaddressterms.ThinkaboutthewaysyouaddressyourChineseteachersandyourforeignteacher.Youmusthavebeentoldthatyoucannotaddressyourforeignteacherby“TeacherX”.Instead,yourforeignteachersmayhavetoldyoutoaddressthembytheirfirstname,whileyouwillneverdothistoyourChineseteachers.

Jennifer