A language is defined as a system of communication used by a particular nation or people group (Gessner 2017). There is no consensus on the over 100 definitions of culture by anthropologists, but it is widely accepted as “a web of meaning which human beings weave and in which are suspended” (Ottenheimer 2013). Culture includes both knowledge and learned behavior that is transmitten through the generations and is considered to be crucial to the human experience (Silver & Miller 1997). Numerous modern studies in this field of research points towards culture affects the language that people speak. Languages are different, arbitrary systems so learning one language will not allow the speaker to predict the patterns of another language, hence the world is seen differently by different people (Gessner 2017)
Taxonomies are the classification and categorization of related items by a particular culture, each item is arranged within a tree with nodes and branches (Gessner 2017). Animal and plant taxonomies classify objects in the natural world are a good indicator of cultural domains in folk taxonomy (Ottenheimer 2013). A folk taxonomies & science (Thicke 2014) investigation revealed that while Musqueam people of Canada classify all ‘trout’ and ‘salmon’ as just ‘salmon’, English speakers have different names for them. It was found that trout was genetically similar to salmon and is biologically a type of salmon.
Ethnosemantics is the study of how words fit into cultural categories in languages (Gessner 2017). One of the areas studies (Gessner 2017) in this area is child language acquisition. There are generally two trains of thought under this umbrella; the semantic feature theory where children are believed to acquire conceptual categories with members sharing discrete features, and the prototype theory where children are believed to know core members of the group first before expanding to other members. Both of these theories are heavily based on the child’s ability to conceptualize, further encouraging the belief that culture affects language.
On the other end of the argument, the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (1929, 1940) seemed to show that language affects a person’s thought processes. The first key piece of evidence used where workers thought “empty” gasoline drums were safe because the word “empty” implied there was nothing inside, when in fact an empty drum had hazardous gas vapors that were more dangerous than gasoline. As a result, accidents and fires were caused due to carelessness. The second piece of evidence used compared the notions of time between Standard Average European (SAE) time and Hopi speakers (indigenous language in America). It was shown that while SAE users had distinct words for hours, days, months, and years that were deeply embedded in their cultural habits, Hopi has lack of temporal distinctions viewing time as a process instead of concrete segments. The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis seemed to show that language affected culture.
There are, however, several criticisms of this theory. Malokti (1983) found that Hopi does in fact have words for days and seasons with a solar calendar, invalidating the Sapir-Whorf argument. Bowerman (1973) notes that language does not equal to thought, bringing in evidence from child language acquisition and aphasia to show that cognitive processes are independent of linguistic abilities. Gessner (2017) also explains that Sapir-Whorf is based on circular reasoning with no concrete evidence of causality. One might also anecdotally note that while all languages in Europe can accommodate the temporal distinctions for SAE, not all European cultures have the same respect for time. While a German may appear at a social appointment five minutes early, a Spaniard may think that they are expected to arrive an hour after the stated time. These pieces of evidence show that the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis is not completely concrete.
Levinson (1992) studied three languages to investigate distinctions to relativistic and absolutist space. English speakers used relativist space, talking about objects relative to their own position (left, right, front, behind). Guugu-Yimithirr (an indigenous language in Australia) uses absolutist compass directions (north, south, east, west) when talking about space, where the direction used is relative to the earth and not the user. When they were brought to a new location, speakers of Guguu-Yimithirr were found to have excellent accuracy when asked to point out other locations when compared to the inaccurate English speakers.
Although Levinson’s study may seem to show concrete ties that language affects the way its speakers see the world, there are several criticisms of this study – the study did not account for variables in occupation, accustomed environment, or situational context, it assumed that the only factor affecting performance was linguistic.
A study on the size of London taxi driver’s hippocampi (Maguire et al. 2000) found that they had larger hippocampi than people of other occupations. The size of the hippocampi also increased with the number of years they worked as a taxi driver. Perrin & Spencer (1980) conducted a study based on Asch’s (1951) conformity study on professionals in the fields of medicine, engineering, and mathematics. Out of nearly 400 trials only one participant conformed to the bigger group. This shows that occupational differences may lead to differences in performance. Those in the transportation industry may also be more likely to be aware of absolutist directions than those of other occupations.
Rosenthal (1987) studied the situation effects of a person’s environment and found that people living in low levels of sunlight (near the poles) had higher levels of melatonin. This caused Seasonal Affective Disorder with symptoms such as depression, showing that environmental factors can lead to biological changes that may affect performance not accounted for in Levinson’s study.
In addition to occupational and environmental factors, the living environment may also affect one’s ability to navigate in unfamiliar spaces. North American cities are much more likely to have grid layouts in cities than in the UK or India, all of which have majority English-speaking populations. Hence, North Americans English speakers may be more accustomed to using absolutist directions than their European or Asian English speakers.
The context in which direction is used also varies in English. For example, if one was to talk about the location of a toilet they may say “down the corridor, second door to your left”, but the same person might also say “head down West Hastings, go north across Lion’s Gate, and use westbound highway one to get to Park Royal” when giving driving directions. So the situation may affect whether or not one gives relativistic or absolutist directions. Levinson has assumed that linguistics is the sole factor affecting performance where there is a possibility that there were other factors unaccounted for.
Moving on, the classification of colors are a clear example of how culture affects diction available in a language. The Hanoó Case (Gessner 2017) found that the Hanoó language in the Philippines only had four language terms: white, black, green (to reflect freshness), and red (to reflect dryness). This showed that the importance of plants and their conditions affected the local language.
A study on universal color terms (Berlin & Kay 1969) extended to 110 languages sought basic color terms (BCT) in different langauges, plot their focal point on the Munsell color chart, and determined BCT boundaries for each category of color. They found eleven focal colors across the languages with an evolutionary sequence for the emergence of color lexicon.
Black/White to Red to Yellow/Green to Blue to Brown to Purple/Grey/Pink/Orange
The emergence of BCT among languages shows that language terms can be somewhat universal and develop according to the needs of the culture in question. Reinforcing the idea that cultures can affect languages.
The IBM Cultural Dimensions study by Hofstede in 1967 involved 60 000 employees in over 50 countries for 10 years. He found four main bipolar dimensions that varied across cultures:
- Inidividualism-Collectivism
- Masculinity-Femininity
- Power Distance (High-Low)
- Uncertainty Avoidance (High-Low)
Hofstede’s cultural dimensions are well-established and have been used in numerous research studies. Kashima & Trandis conducted a study on attribution bias in 1968 between Japanese and American students to examine whether or not culture affected behavior. They found that Japanese students had modesty bias and were likely to attribute failure to dispositional factors whereas American students had self-serving bias and were likely to attribute failures to situational factors. This is affected by the individualism-collectivism dimension where Japanese are collectivists and Americans are individualists.
Bond & Smith (1996) conducted a meta-analysis on Asch’s (1951) conformity study across different cultures. They found that individualists have lower rates of conformity and collectivists had a higher rate of conformity. This emic approach factored in cultural differences of the participants by looking at the culture’s own perspective.
Gessner (2017) reminds us that systems of culture shapes people’s perception, but it is humans that create those systems in the first place. People always exist in a system on meaning in the form of culture, but are always open to learning new languages that open them up to new cultures and perspectives. Current research to date strongly suggests that culture affects the language used by a particular people.
Currently, studies only show that culture affects language, but does not specify which dimension of culture has what kinds of effects in language. In the future, researchers may want to find out how certain cultural dimensions affect language with a systematic analysis between cultures. They may also want to control for factors such as occupation, environment, and situational factors to find out to what degree culture, in its own right, affects language.
