LANGUAGE, THOUGHT AND CULTURE

1. LANGUAGE, THOUGHT AND CULTURE

2. How words shape our views • Advertisements – „weasel words” • „unsurpassed”, „ultimate • „enriched” and „fortified” food • „medium”, „large”, „extra large”, „jumbo eggs”

4. Language and memory Sentence structuring (Loftus, 1976) Did you see the broken headlight? Vs. Did you see a broken headlight? Shape recognition

5. Political correctness • Rest rooms, unmentionables • Sanitary engineer, bogármérnök • Manager assistant, gazdasági levelező

6. Negro – Black – Afro-American vs. Gipsy – Roma • Mentally (horizontally/vertically??) challenged vs. Szellemi fogyatékos • Receiving waters and assimilative capacity • Substandard dwellings vs. Slums

7. Does language reflect or shape our world view? • Four main views

8. Linguistic universalism • Inborn linguistic universals • Expressions of time and place • I hunt and my child sees me. • I will hunt.

9. Lingusitic universals Example: SVO components in sentences - 75% of the world's languages: SVO (English, French, Vietnamese) or SOV (Japanese, Tibetan, Korean) - 10 - 15% VSO ( Welsh) or VOS (Malagasy) - 10 - 15% free word order (Latin, Hungarian), but SOV common: Márta tortát evett. • NP and VP as main organising sentence components

10. Cognitive universalism Universal principles of thinking reflect • the conditions and limitations of mental operations • the similar physical and natural environment influence linguistic representation as well.

11. Structuring old and new information in sentences (theme – rheme) • There is a chair in the corner. • A chair is in the corner. • The chair is in the corner.

12. Lexis „a fellegekben járt” „over the moon”, „on top of the world” • Colours

13. Linguistic relativismThe Whorfian hypothesis „We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native languages. The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organised by our minds - and this means largely the linguistic system in our minds.” (Whorf, 1956:212) Determinism vs. Relativism

14. Organising reality: Time • Hungarian, Russian, Romanian, German Jó reggelt Jó napot Jó estét Bună dimineaţa Bună ziua Bună seara Guten Morgen Guten Tag Guten Abend • English Good morning Good afternoon Good evening • French Bonjour Bonsoir

15. Organising reality: Social relations English • „You” + address forms: John Aunt Polly could you sign this? Mr. Jones • No syntactic marking of verbs

16. Russian and French: 2 distinctions • BЫ + 2nd person plural (no distinction betw. Sg./Pl.) • Vu+2nd person plural (no distinction betw. Sg./Pl.) • German: 2 distinctions • Sie + verb in 3rd. Person pl. (no distinction betw. Sg./Pl.) • Romanian: 2 distinctions • Dumneavoastră + 2nd pers./pl. Dumneata +2nd pers./sing.

17. Social relations: Hungarian • Formal/distant: • Between strangers • From younger adult to older adult • Address forms: „Ön”, „Maga” • + 3rd. Person sing./pl. Ön is a buszra vár?

18. Formal/familiar: • From child to adult, young to old • Family, acquaintances, strangers • Address forms: „Anna néni”, „Pista bácsi” + (tetszik, tessék) + infinitive • El tetszik tudni jönni?

19. Informal: • Between friends and intimates • Often not reciprocal • Increasingly between strangers of the same age in public places • Address forms: „Te”, „Ti” + 2nd. Pers./ sing. and pl. Láttad már az új fiút?

20. Differences • Distancing or bringing closer? • English: democratic or „keeping everyone at arm’s length”? (Wierzbicka, 1985) • Russian, French, Romanian: • 2nd pers./pl. formal reference: someone present, accessible, less distant. • German, Hungarian: • 3rd pers./sing./pl. indicate someone distant, not accessible. • Hungarian formal/familiar „tetszik”: • indicates respect and choice (do you like it?)

21. Resulted in ethnocentric evaluations of cultures • "whether the Japanese are capable of using logical arguments to the degree that other people are" ( Hazen, 1986, p.232) • Arab rhetoric is characterised by "ideational vagueness and formalistic rigidity" (Koch, 1987 as cited in Hatim, 1997, p. 52)

22. Grounds for criticism • Translation • Circumlocution (e.g. Hungarian „szalonnasütés”, „pogácsa”) • Possibility of acquiring the logical and conceptual system of another language.

23. Cognitive relativism Different cultural experiences and ways of life result in different conceptualisations of reality • Lexis reflecting different physical, natural and cultural objects • Lexis reflecting values, attitudes • Másfél szobás lakás/ Two-room flat • Go white • The other half of my orange

24. Attitude to money • American English: MAKE money • British English: EARN money • Russian: 3APAƂATЫBATЪ EARN money • German: VERDIENEN EARN money • Hungarian: KERES SEARCH for money • Francia: GAGNER WIN/EARN money • Romanian: CÂSTIGA WIN money

25. Attitude to life and death Hungarian • „sírva vígad” • „majd meghal a nevetéstől/örömtől” • „halálosan jó/vicces” • „boldogan éltek, amíg meg nem haltak” German • „und wenn sie nicht gestorben sind, dann leben sie noch heute” • English • „tickled to death” • „and they lived happily ever after”

26. Culture-based intellectual traditions influencing rhetoric • Culture-based rhetoric (Kaplan, 1966, 1997)

27. Weak version of the Whorfian Hypothesis: Language does not determine thought, but probably influences the way we capture and remember distinctions.

28. Second language – second culture „No man is an island …” (Donne, 1924)

29. Culture • „collective mental programming of the mind” (Hofstede, 1994:5) • „the know-how a person has to own to be able to cope with the tasks of everyday life” (Wardhaugh, 1995:192) • „the way a group of people solve their problems” Trompenaars, 1995:6) • „varieties of common knowledge” Holden, 2002:99

30. Layers of culture • 1st layer: material culture • Literature, architecture, music, etc. • Food, drinks, clothes, hair stlye, etc. • 2nd layer: mental culture • Symbols, values, expectations, etc. (Hofstede, 1994)

31. Types of culture • Uncertaintyavoidance • Power distance • Social collectivism • In-group collectivism • Gender equality • Assertivity • Future-orientation • Achievement orientation • Human orientation (GLOBE 1993-2002)

32. Power distance • IKEA Hungary • IKEA Germany • „the boss will tell” • Carl Gustav’s Christmas

33. Gender • Gillette Férfiasan tökéletes

34. Uncertainty avoidance • Low: lack of religious and ethnic tolerance • High: Mobility • Valued knowledge in education • Knowledge-demonstration • Knowledge-transformation

35. Universalism/particularism • Driving with a friend (Trompenaars, 1995)

36. Attitudes • German language – history • Russian language – ideology • Italian language – climate, life style • American English- economic and cultural dominance

37. Second culture acquisition • Culture shock • Excitement and euphoria • Culture shock • Recovery (anomie) • Assimilation or adaptation

38. Social distance • Schumann (1976) • Dominance • Integration • Cohesiveness • Congruence • Permanence • Acton (1979) Perceived social distance

39. Conclusion • Language and culture influence our interpretation and representation of reality through • Lexis (objects, attitudes) • Discourse patterns • Pragmatics • Rhetoric Wardhaugh (1976): “it is possible to talk about anything in any language.” • New language – new culture –second language ego