Language amd culture
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17184/eac.anthropen.017Keywords:
Linguistic relativism, Experimental psycholinguistics, Deixis, Ethnography of communication, Thinking to speakAbstract
The entry presents different conceptions and approaches to the relation problem between language and culture since the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis and shows how, after a phase of retreat in the 1960s, the issue has re-emerged separately in psycholinguistics, linguistics, and anthropology in works that uncover certain cognitive, interactional, and social implications, respectively, of linguistic diversity.
References
Berlin, B. et P. Kay (1969), Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution, Berkeley et Los Angeles, University of California Press.
Bickel, B. (2000), «Grammar and social practice». Dans S. Niemeier et R. Dirven (dir.), Evidence for Linguistic Relativity, Amsterdam, Benjamins, p.161-190.
Carroll, J. B. (dir.) (1956), Language, thought, and reality:Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, Cambridge (MA), Technology Press of Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Choi, S. et M. Bowerman (1991), «Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns», Cognition, n°41, p.83-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(91)90033-Z
Duranti, A. (2012), «Comments to Sidnell, J. et N.J. Enfield, Language diversity and social action: a third locus of linguistic relativit», Current Anthropology, vol.53, n°3, p.321-322.
Gumperz, J. J. (1989), Engager la conversation, Paris, Minuit.
Gumperz, J J. et D. Hymes (1964), «The Ethnography of Communication», American Anthropologist, vol.66, n°6, 2e partie.
Gumperz, J J. et S. C. Levinson (1996), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
Hanks, W. (1990), Referential Practice: Language and Lived Space among the Maya, Chicago, The University of Chicago Press.
Jackendoff, R. (2007), Language, Consciousness, Culture, Cambridge, MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4111.001.0001
Kristiansen, G. et D. Geerearts (2007), «On non-reductionnist intercultural pragmatics and methodological procedure». Dans I. Kecskes et L. E. Horn (dir.), Explorations in Pragmatics, Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter, p.257-285.
Lucy, J. (1992), Language Diversity and Thought: A Reformulation of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620843
B. C. Malt et A. Majid (2013), «How thought is mapped into words», WIREs Cognitive Science, n°4, p.583–597. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1251
Sidnell, J. et N. J. Enfield (2012), «Language diversity and social action: a third locus of linguistic relativity», Current Anthropology, vol.53, n°3, p.302-333. https://doi.org/10.1086/665697
Slobin, D. I. (2003), «Language and thought online: cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity». Dans D. Gentner et S. Goldin-Meadow (dir.), Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, Cambridge, MIT Press, p.157-192. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/4117.003.0013
Wierzbicka, A. (1991), Cross-Cultural Pragmatics: The Semantics of Human Interaction, Berlin/New York, Mouton de Gruyter.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Categories
License
Copyright (c) 2016 Anthropen
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Unless otherwise stated, content comprised on this website, including text, photographs, illustrations, trademarks, logos, audio or video clips, is protected by copyright law. All rights, titles and interests in the content belong exclusively to Anthropen. With the exception of works licensed under CC BY NC ND 4.0 any copying, reproduction, distribution, total or partial modification is strictly prohibited without the written permission of Anthropen and may expose the offender to legal sanctions.