The relation of language and mind has interested philosophers for many centuries. (46) The Greeks assumed that the structure of language had some connection with the process of thought, which took root in Europe long before people realized how diverse languages could he.
Only recently did linguists begin the serious study of languages that were very different from their own. Two anthropologist-linguists, Franz Boas Edward Sapir, were pioneers in describing many native languages of North and South America during the first half of the twentieth century. (47) We are obliged to them because some of these languages have since vanished, as the peoples who spoke them died out or became assimilated and lost their native languages. Other linguists in the earlier part of this century, however, who were less eager to deal with bizarre data from“exotic” language, were not always so grateful. (48) The newly described languages were often so strikingly different from the well-studied languages of Europe and Southeast Asia that some scholars even accused Boas and Sapir of fabricating their data. Native American languages are indeed different, so much so in fact that Navajo could be used by the US military as a code during World War Ⅱ to send secret messages.
Sapir's pupil, Benjamin Lee Whorf, continued the study of American Indian languages. (49) Being interested in the relationship of language and thought, Whorf developed the idea that the structure of language determines the structure of habitual thought in a society. He reasoned that because it is easier to formulate certain concepts and not others in a given language, the speakers of that language think along one track and not along another. (50) Whorf came to believe in a sort of linguistic determinism which, in its strongest form, states that language imprisons the mind, and that the grammatical patterns in a language can produce far-reaching consequences for the culture of a society. Later, this idea became to be known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, but this term is somewhat inappropriate. Although both Sapir and Whorf emphasized the diversity of languages, Sapir himself never explicitly supported the notion of linguistic determinism.
希腊人认为语言的结构与人们思维的过程有关,这一想法早在人们认识到语言的多样性之前就已经在欧洲根深蒂固了。
我们感谢他们是因为这些语言在此之后,已经不复存在了。因为说这些语言的人或以消亡,或被同化,又或已经丢失了他们的母语。
近来被描述的语言与已经得到充分研究的欧洲和东南亚地区的语言存在显著的差别,甚至有些学者指责博厄斯和萨丕尔编造了数据。
出于对语言和思维关系的兴趣,沃尔夫提出了这样的观点:在社会中,语言结构决定习惯思维结。
沃尔夫开始相信某种语言决定论的观点,这种言论最强烈的表述是语言禁锢了思想,而语言中的语法模式会对社会文化产生深远的影响。