It’s not always about strategy when it comes to getting these questions correct.
To argue that linguistic relativity is not an accurate hypothesisĭ. To provide an example of linguistic relativityĬ. To prove that linguistic relativity is a viable hypothesisī. Why does the professor talk about the word ‘ambivalent’?Ī. You can predict what someone is thinking based on their languageĢ. How linguistic relativity shapes the way we thinkĭ. The idea that language affects our experiencesĬ. If certain words don’t exist in your language, there’s a reasonī. Essentially, the hypothesis argues, if a person can’t describe the experience, the person is not having the experience. Studies have shown, for instance, that unless people have access to the word ‘ambivalent’ they don’t recognize an experience of uncertainty due to conflicting positive and negative feelings about one issue which is the definition of ambivalent. The hypothesis, which has also been called linguistic relativity, states that language shapes thought.
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is based on the idea that people experience their world through their language, and that they therefore understand their world through the culture embedded in their language.