The correlation of language, culture, and the way people think has been an issue of heated discussions for quite a long time and no definite answer has been found yet. The idea that language can reflect the speaker’s culture and individuality was first introduced by the German language scholar Wilhelm von Humboldt who “asserted that man perceives the world essentially through the medium of language” (Wilhelm, baron von Humboldt, n.d.). Later on, American linguists Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf went on developing the idea and insisted that “speakers of different tongues may think differently” (Boroditsky, 2011, p. 63). There are also opponents to these ideas who think that language is just a code – a set of symbols used by people to communicate. Such views on language have become popular due to more active interaction of cultures in the time of globalization leading to the spread of bilingualism. However, bilingualism can have both pros and cons. Psychological researches have shown that though bilinguals display native-like accuracy on grammaticality judgments, they have slower reaction times, which proves that they are not native-like in the speed at which they process language (Foursha, Austin, and Van de Walle, 2005). At the same time bilinguals are said to have better executive and conflict resolution skills. Besides, no one would disagree that the knowledge of several languages could provide more opportunities for communication and acquisition of new cultures, though it does not necessarily mean that a bilingual person is bicultural.
Very illustrative examples of how language can influence the way speakers think are given in Lera Boroditsky’s research. She asserts that different languages can impart different cognitive skills (Boroditsky, 2011, p. 63). The researcher presents the results of her studies which show that the languages influence the way people describe events and remember things. Boroditsky says that some languages, for example English, presuppose naming the agent of the action described while others, such as Spanish or Chinese, do not pay so much attention to agents and, therefore, speakers of these languages do not tend to describe events agentively (Boroditsky, 2011, p. 65). The researcher’s studies also show that languages can influence how fast children can acquire the concept of gender or how easily they can indicate the cardinal direction – north, south, east, and west. For instance, Kuuk Thaayorre speakers, a small Aboriginal community on the western edge of Cape York in northern Australia, see the world in cardinal directions rather than spatial terms, i.e. left or right, because it is predetermined by their language. Therefore, even a five-year old speaker of Kuuk Thaayorre does not need a compass to say where north is whereas the cleverest representatives of the civilized world fail to do the same (Boroditsky, 2011, p. 64).
Many modern researchers underline that language should not be seen as territory-bound and, thus, it should not be locked in a certain national universe (Risager, 2005, p. 185). However, even these researchers agree that languages are always cultural in some respect. Actually, they are also a significant part of culture. Owing to the history of the linguistic community within which they developed, languages have peculiarities which represent the way their speakers view the world. These peculiarities can be reflected both in lexical and grammatical characteristics of the language. For instance, some languages can have more words verbalizing the Christianity topic if they developed in deeply religious communities. Besides, languages tend to reproduce the culture of a certain linguistic community. Therefore, translators often face problems when they deal with words denoting cultural phenomena which exist in one culture and are not known to representatives of another culture. So, learning a second language is always an experience into a new culture – a linguaculture, as Karen Risager names it (Risager, 2005, 185).
Researchers have also studied how the knowledge of more than one language affects speakers’ thinking abilities. Numerous experiments have been conducted to see the differences between monolinguals and bilinguals – their expertise both in linguistic tasks and in different mental tasks. The results show that in general both monolinguals and bilinguals can cope with linguistic tasks with equal excellence, though bilinguals need a little more time for doing this since they have to switch from one language to another (Marian & Shook, 2012). At the same time this practice of switching from one language code to another and choosing an appropriate one teaches bilinguals to make decisions quicker. Besides, the necessity of choosing an appropriate language code requires attention to detail, which can also be of help in decision-making. Therefore, bilinguals are said to be more capable of solving problem efficiently and better at executive tasks. All these differences are reflected in bilinguals’ brain structure as well. They have “higher gray matter volume in the left inferior parietal cortex” (Marian & Shook, 2012). Moreover, in response to the sound, bilinguals have higher blood flow, which is a marker for neuronal activity. As a result, bilinguals are characterized by better auditory attention. Finally, it has been proved that bilinguals can learn new languages easier than monolinguals because they have good experience in code switching, paying attention to details, and focusing on the most important things by reducing inhibiting interferences.
So, it is obvious that language, culture, and thought are the concepts which are undoubtedly interconnected. By learning a language, people get acquainted with the culture within which the language developed. It does not mean that if a person learns a second language, he/she necessarily becomes bicultural. But it does mean that with the language the person learns the peculiarities of how the speakers of the language see the world around them. Without understanding these peculiarities, perfect acquisition of the language is impossible.
References
Boroditsky, L. (2011, February). How language shapes thought. Scientific American, 63-65.
Foursha, C.D., Austin, J.B., & Van de Walle, G.A. (2005). Is language processing identical in monolinguals and early, balanced bilinguals? Boston University Conference on Language Development. Retrieved from http://www.bu.edu/bucld/files/2011/05/30-FourshaBUCLD2005.pdf
Marian, V., & Shook, A. (2012, October 31). The cognitive benefits of being bilingual. Cerebrum. Retrieved from http://dana.org/Cerebrum/2012/The_Cognitive_Benefits_of_Being_Bilingual/
Risager, K. (2005). Languaculture as a key concept in language and culture teaching. In B. Preisler, A. Fabricius, H. Haberland, S. Kjaerbeck, & K. Risager (Eds.), The Consequences of Mobility (pp.185-196). Roskilde: Roskilde University, department of Language and Culture.
Wilhelm, baron von Humboldt. (n.d.). Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved from http://www.britannica.com/biography/Wilhelm-baron-von-Humboldt
