Language and Its Cultural Influence
We begin our preview of language by noting that it is impossible to separate our
use of language from our culture. In its most basic sense, language is a set of symbols
and the rules for combining those symbols that are used and understood by a large
community of people. When we study another language, we soon discover that not
only are the symbols (words) and sounds for those symbols different, but so are the
rules (phonology, grammar, syntax, and intonation) for using those symbols and
sounds.
Word differences are obvious in various languages. In English, we live in a house.
In Spanish, we live in a casa. In Thai, we live in a ban. Grammatical structures are
unique to each language as well. In English, verb tenses express contrast between past,
present, and future acts, but in Vietnamese, the same verb reflects all three and the
time of the action is inferred from the context. Syntax, or the word order and structure
of sentences, also varies depending on the language. The normal word order for
simple sentences in Filipino is the reverse of the word in English. For example, the
English sentence “The teacher died” would be “Namatay ang guro” or “Died the
teacher” in Filipino. In English, the subject is followed by a verb and then an object,
but in Korean, the subject is followed by the object and then the verb. So in English
we might say, “The cat ate the mouse,” but in Korean, “Cat mouse ate” would be
correct.
These examples indicate that if we want to communicate in another language, it is
important for us to know not only the symbols（words）of that language, but also the
rules for using those symbols. As you know, language is much more than a symbol
and rule system that allows us to communicate with another person–language also
shapes the process by which people become introduced to the order of the physical
and social environment. Language, therefore, would seem to have a major impact on
the way an individual perceives and conceptualizes the world.
Language and its cultural influence are exemplified in the theoretical
formulations of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which in essence states that language is a
guide to “social reality.” This hypothesis implies that language is not simply a means
of reporting experience but, more important, it is a way of defining experience. Sapir
wrote:
Human beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the
world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but are very much at the
mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression
for their society… The real world is to large extent unconsciously built up on
the language habits of the group. No two languages are ever sufficiently
similar to be considered as presenting the same social reality. The worlds in
which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same world
which different labels attached.
Here is an excellent example of the Sapir-Whorf concept in practice:
If my language has only one term –brother-in-law –that is applied to my sister’s
husband, husband’s sisters’ husbands, I am led by my language to perceive all of these
relatives in a similar way. Vocabulary, through what it groups together under one label
and what it differentiates with different labels, is one way in which language shapes
our perception of the world.
Another instance of how language defines experience can be seen in the Navaho
Language, which emphasizes the nature and direction of movement. Rather than
saying, “One dresses,” the Navaho would say, “One moves into clothing.” Instead of
saying, “One is young,” the Navaho would say, “One moves about newly.” Language
is one aspect of the Navaho culture that coincides with the notion of a universe in
motion.
Although complete acceptance of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis may be
controversial, its application to culture and language is clear: language is a reflection
of culture and culture is a reflection of language. We have seen that culture influences
language by way of symbols and rules as well as our perceptions of the universe.
Equally important is the fact that meaning shifts from culture to culture.
As children, most of us asked our parents, “What does that word mean?” This
suggests that we tend to look for meaning in words themselves, but we are incorrect if
we think that words possess meaning. It is more accurate to say that people possess
meaning and that words elicit these meanings. We can have different meanings for the
same word. For instance, to one person, the word grass might mean something in
front of the house that is green, has to be watered, and must be mowed once a week;
to another person, grass may mean something that is rolled in paper and smoked. All
people, drawing on their backgrounds, decide what a word means. People have
similar meaning only to the extent that they have had or can anticipate similar
experience.
Culture teaches us both the symbol and what the symbol represents. When you
are communicating with someone from your own culture, the process of using words
to represent your experiences is much easier because within a culture people share
may similar experiences. But when communication is between people from distinct
cultures, different experiences are involved and the process is more troublesome.
Objects, events, experiences, and feelings have the labels or names they do because a
community of people arbitrarily decided to so name them. If we extend this notion to
the intercultural setting, we can see that diverse cultures can have both different
symbols and different responses.