The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis says that language determines thought. Chomsky's theory states that cognition and language are independent systems.

Biliguals have an advantage in several areas of cognition(abstraction, task switching) (Marian & Shook, 2012).

Could this be used as proof of the independence theory. To illustrate, having to switch between languages makes you think more abstractly, subsequently you improve at this ability. Such a hypothesis would make language a layer on top of cognition, designed for communication.

Marian, V., & Shook, A. (2012). The Cognitive Benefits of Being Bilingual. Cerebrum: The Dana Forum on Brain Science, 2012. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3583091/

  • 3
    You're misrepresenting both Sapir-Whorf and Chomsky, but also why would that be proof of your version of Chomsky rather than the opposite?
    – Cairnarvon
    May 24 '20 at 11:11
  • My reasoning assumes that bilingualism makes you think more abstractly and therefore trains cognition that is independent of language. I suppose you could make the counter-argument that two languages will determine more cognitive abilities than just one.
    – Borut Flis
    May 25 '20 at 7:20
  • 1
    It's the sort of argument that will only convince someone who is already convinced, I think. I can see what you're saying although my first reaction was that if they are independent then one can hardly affect the other. Perhaps the idea is more that they are separate but interrelated.
    – rchivers
    May 25 '20 at 12:35
  • I agree even if the assumptions of my reasoning hold there is still an influence of language and hence one cannot infer the two systems are completely independent. I suppose most evidence go against stronger versions of both the independence hypothesis as well as the sapir whorf hypothesis.
    – Borut Flis
    May 28 '20 at 6:55

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.