Although we will talk about the role of intercultural communication in a later chapter,
it is important to note the relationship between language and culture here. Culture
may be defi ned as all of the socially transmitted behavior patterns, beliefs, attitudes,
and values of a particular period, class, community, or population. We often think of
the culture of a country (Greek culture), institution (the culture of higher education),
organization (the IBM culture), or group of people (the Hispanic culture). Culture and
language are thus related as the transmission of culture occurs through language.
The relationship between culture and language is not as simple as it might fi rst
appear, however. Let us take the example of women and men and communication.
Several years ago, books and articles were written on the differences between women
and men in their communicative practices. As this research further developed, gender
was expanded to refer to a complex social construct rather than simple biological
sex. Some authors argued that gender was just as important as social class in
understanding variations in communication (Schilling-Estes, 2002).
Language and culture are related in a second way. Culture creates a lens through
which we perceive the world and create shared meaning. Language thus develops
in response to the needs of the culture or to the perceptions of the world. Edward
Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf were among the fi rst to discuss the relationship
between language and perception. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, as their theory has
become known, states that our perception of reality is determined by our thought
processes and our thought processes are limited by our language and, therefore, that
language shapes our reality (Whorf, 1956). Language is the principal way that we
learn about ourselves, others, and our culture (Bakhurst & Shanker, 2001; Cragan
& Shields, 1995; Wood, 1997).
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has been illustrated in multiple cultures (Samovar
& Porter, 2000; Whorf, 1956). The Hopi language serves as an early example. The
Hopi people do not distinguish between nouns and verbs. In many languages, nouns
are given names that suggest that they remain static over time. For example, we
assume that words like professor, physician, lamp, and computer refer to people or
objects that are relatively unchanging. Verbs are action words that suggest change.
When we use words like heard, rehearsed, spoke, and ran, we assume alterations and
movement. The Hopi, by avoiding the distinction between nouns and verbs, thus
refer to people and objects in the world as always changing.
Other examples come from the terms that we use for various colors. For instance,
the color spectrum allows us to understand colors as blending into each other and
allowing an infi nite number of colors, but leading scientists agree on only seven component
colors of white light: red, orange, yellow, green, blue, indigo, and violet.
People who use color in their work (artists, designers) probably use many more
color terms than do those for whom color is not so important (fi refi ghters, police
offi cers). The fi rst group might readily describe persimmon, puce, lavender, and fuchsia
while the second group limits their vocabulary (and thus their perceptions) to
orange, red, purple, and pink.
People who speak different languages also have different color terms from those
who speak English. The color blue is familiar to most English speakers—both in
their vocabulary and as a recognized color. English speakers use the word blue to
refer to shades ranging from cyan to sky to navy to midnight blue. In Vietnamese
and in Korean, a single word refers to blue or green. Japanese people use the word
ao to refer to blue, but the color they are referencing is (for English speakers) actually
(to us) green. Finally, Russian speakers do not have a single word for the range
of colors that English speakers denote as blue; instead, they have one color for light
blue and another for dark blue.
Waquet and Howe (2001) wrote an enlightening treatise on this same topic. In
Latin: A Symbol’s Empire they trace the domination of Latin in the civic and religious
worlds of Europe. Its infl uence on the entire world followed as scholars, educational
institutions, and the Roman Catholic Church adopted Latin as their offi cial
language. Latin, like any other language, affects perception and the development of
culture. The domination of the language has surely shaped the cultures of many
Western countries.
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, while complex, is not universally accepted by
people who study language. For example, critics point out that Inuits may have a
large number of words for snow because of their view of snow or because they actually
have more varieties of snow in their world. Artists may have more color terms,
and printers more words for different fonts, simply because of their work and environment.
Thus, the critics note, thought and language may not be intimately related,
but experience and language are. Our need to describe our environment and the
items within it cause us to create language to do so.
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
A theory that our
perception of reality
is determined by our
thought processes and
our thought processes
are limited by our
language and, therefore,
that language shapes our
reality.