text:
Linguistic relativity
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The principle of linguistic relativity holds that the structure of a language affects its speakers' world view or cognition. Popularly known as the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis, or Whorfianism, the principle is often defined to include two versions. The strong version says that language determines thought, and that linguistic categories limit and determine cognitive categories, whereas the weak version says that linguistic categories and usage only influence thought and decisions.
The term "Sapir–Whorf hypothesis" is considered a misnomer by linguists for several reasons: Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf never co-authored any works, and never stated their ideas in terms of a hypothesis. The distinction between a weak and a strong version of this hypothesis is also a later invention; Sapir and Whorf never set up such a dichotomy, although often in their writings their views of this relativity principle are phrased in stronger or weaker terms.[1][2]
The idea was first clearly expressed by 19th-century thinkers, such as Wilhelm von Humboldt, who saw language as the expression of the spirit of a nation. Members of the early 20th-century school of American anthropology headed by Franz Boas and Edward Sapir also embraced forms of the idea to one extent or another, including in a 1928 meeting of the Linguistic Society of America,[3] but Sapir in particular wrote more often against than in favor of anything like linguistic determinism. Sapir's student, Benjamin Lee Whorf, came to be seen as the primary proponent as a result of his published observations of how he perceived linguistic differences to have consequences in human cognition and behavior. Harry Hoijer, one of Sapir's students, introduced the term "Sapir–Whorf hypothesis",[4] even though the two scholars never formally advanced any such hypothesis.[5] A strong version of relativist theory was developed from the late 1920s by the German linguist Leo Weisgerber. Whorf's principle of linguistic relativity was reformulated as a testable hypothesis by Roger Brown and Eric Lenneberg who conducted experiments designed to find out whether color perception varies between speakers of languages that classified colors differently. As the study of the universal nature of human language and cognition came into focus in the 1960s the idea of linguistic relativity fell out of favor among linguists. A 1969 study by Brent Berlin and Paul Kay demonstrated the existence of universal semantic constraints in the field of colour terminology which were widely seen to discredit the existence of linguistic relativity in this domain, although this conclusion has been disputed by relativist researchers.
From the late 1980s, a new school of linguistic relativity scholars has examined the effects of differences in linguistic categorization on cognition, finding broad support for non-deterministic versions of the hypothesis in experimental contexts.[6][7] Some effects of linguistic relativity have been shown in several semantic domains, although they are generally weak. Currently, a balanced view of linguistic relativity is espoused by most linguists holding that language influences certain kinds of cognitive processes in non-trivial ways, but that other processes are better seen as arising from connectionist factors. Research is focused on exploring the ways and extent to which language influences thought.[6] The principle of linguistic relativity and the relation between language and thought has also received attention in varying academic fields from philosophy to psychology and anthropology, and it has also inspired and coloured works of fiction and the invention of constructed languages.
Contents
[hide]
1 Forms
1.1 Linguistic determinism
1.2 Linguistic influence
2 History
2.1 German Romantic philosophers
2.2 Boas and Sapir
2.3 Benjamin Lee Whorf
2.4 Eric Lenneberg
2.5 Universalist period
2.6 Joshua Fishman's "Whorfianism of the third kind"
2.7 Cognitive linguistics
2.7.1 Parameters
2.7.2 Rethinking Linguistic Relativity
2.8 Refinements
3 Empirical research
3.1 Structure-centered
3.2 Domain-centered
3.3 Behavior-centered
3.4 Color terminology
4 Other domains
4.1 Science and philosophy
4.2 Therapy and self-development
4.3 Artificial languages
4.4 Programming languages
4.5 In popular culture
5 See also
6 Notes
7 References
8 Further reading
Forms[edit]
Linguistic determinism[edit]
Main article: Linguistic determinism
The strongest form of the theory is linguistic determinism, which holds that language entirely determines the range of cognitive processes. The hypothesis of linguistic determinism is now generally agreed to be false.[8]
Linguistic influence[edit]
This is the weaker form, proposing that language provides constraints in some areas of cognition, but that it is by no means determinative. Research on weaker forms have produced positive empirical evidence for a relationship.[8]
History[edit]
The idea that language and thought are intertwined is ancient. Plato argued against sophist thinkers such as Gorgias of Leontini, who held that the physical world cannot be experienced except through language; this made the question of truth dependent on aesthetic preferences or functional consequences. Plato held instead that the world consisted of eternal ideas and that language should reflect these ideas as accurately as possible.[9] Following Plato, St. Augustine, for example, held the view that language was merely labels applied to already existing concepts. This view remained prevalent throughout the Middle Ages.[10] Roger Bacon held the opinion that language was but a veil covering up eternal truths, hiding them from human experience. For Immanuel Kant, language was but one of several tools used by humans to experience the world.
German Romantic philosophers[edit]
Wilhelm von Humboldt
In the late 18th and early 19th centuries, the idea of the existence of different national characters, or "Volksgeister", of different ethnic groups was the moving force behind the German romantics school and the beginning ideologies of ethnic nationalism.
In 1820, Wilhelm von Humboldt connected the study of language to the national romanticist program by proposing the view that language is the fabric of thought. Thoughts are produced as a kind of internal dialog using the same grammar as the thinker's native language.[11] This view was part of a larger picture in which the world view of an ethnic nation, their "Weltanschauung", was seen as being faithfully reflected in the grammar of their language. Von Humboldt argued that languages with an inflectional morphological type, such as German, English and the other Indo-European languages, were the most perfect languages and that accordingly this explained the dominance of their speakers over the speakers of less perfect languages. Wilhelm von Humboldt declared in 1820:
The diversity of languages is not a diversity of signs and sounds but a diversity of views of the world.[11]
Boas and Sapir[edit]
Franz Boas
Edward Sapir
The idea that some languages are superior to others and that lesser languages maintained their speakers in intellectual poverty was widespread in the early 20th century. American linguist William Dwight Whitney, for example, actively strove to eradicate Native American languages, arguing that their speakers were savages and would be better off learning English and adopting a civilized way of life.[12] The first anthropologist and linguist to challenge this view was Franz Boas.[13] While undertaking geographical research in northern Canada he became fascinated with the Inuit people and decided to become an ethnographer. Boas stressed the equal worth of all cultures and languages, that there was no such thing as a primitive language and that all languages were capable of expressing the same content, albeit by widely differing means. Boas saw language as an inseparable part of culture and he was among the first to require of ethnographers to learn the native language of the culture under study and to document verbal culture such as myths and legends in the original language.
Boas:
It does not seem likely [...] that there is any direct relation between the culture of a tribe and the language they speak, except in so far as the form of the language will be moulded by the state of the culture, but not in so far as a certain state of the culture is conditioned by the morphological traits of the language."[14]
Boas' student Edward Sapir reached back to the Humboldtian idea that languages contained the key to understanding the world views of peoples. He espoused the viewpoint that because of the differences in the grammatical systems of languages no two languages were similar enough to allow for perfect cross-translation. Sapir also thought because language represented reality differently, it followed that the speakers of different languages would perceive reality differently.
Sapir:
No two languages are ever sufficiently similar to be considered as representing the same social reality. The worlds in which different societies live are distinct worlds, not merely the same world with different labels attached.[15]
On the other hand, Sapir explicitly rejected strong linguistic determinism by stating, "It would be naïve to imagine that any analysis of experience is dependent on pattern expressed in language."[16]
Sapir was explicit that the connections between language and culture were neither thoroughgoing nor particularly deep, if they existed at all:
It is easy to show that language and culture are not intrinsically associated. Totally unrelated languages share in one culture; closely related languages—even a single language—belong to distinct culture spheres. There are many excellent examples in Aboriginal America. The Athabaskan languages form as clearly unified, as structurally specialized, a group as any that I know of. The speakers of these languages belong to four distinct culture areas... The cultural adaptability of the Athabaskan-speaking peoples is in the strangest contrast to the inaccessibility to foreign influences of the languages themselves.[17]
Sapir offered similar observations about speakers of so-called "world" or "modern" languages, noting, "possession of a common language is still and will continue to be a smoother of the way to a mutual understanding between England and America, but it is very clear that other factors, some of them rapidly cumulative, are working powerfully to counteract this leveling influence. A common language cannot indefinitely set the seal on a common culture when the geographical, physical, and economics determinants of the culture are no longer the same throughout the area."[18]
While Sapir never made a point of studying directly how languages affected thought, some notion of (probably "weak") linguistic relativity underlay his basic understanding of language, and would be taken up by Whorf.
Drawing on influences such as Humboldt and Friedrich Nietzsche, some European thinkers developed ideas similar to those of Sapir and Whorf, generally working in isolation from each other. Prominent in Germany from the late 1920s through into the 1960s were the strongly relativist theories of Leo Weisgerber and his key concept of a 'linguistic inter-world', mediating between external reality and the forms of a given language, in ways peculiar to that language.[19] Russian psychologist Lev Vygotsky read Sapir's work and experimentally studied the ways in which the development of concepts in children was influenced by structures given in language. His 1934 work "Thought and Language"[20] has been compared to Whorf's and taken as mutually supportive evidence of language's influence on cognition.[21] Drawing on Nietzsche's ideas of perspectivism Alfred Korzybski developed the theory of general semantics that has been compared to Whorf's notions of linguistic relativity.[22] Though influential in their own right, this work has not been influential in the debate on linguistic relativity, which has tended to center on the American paradigm exemplified by Sapir and Whorf.
Benjamin Lee Whorf[edit]
Main article: Benjamin Lee Whorf
More than any linguist, Benjamin Lee Whorf has become associated with what he called the "linguistic relativity principle".[23] Studying Native American languages, he attempted to account for the ways in which grammatical systems and language use differences affected perception. Whorf also examined how a scientific account of the world differed from a religious account, which led him to study the original languages of religious scripture and to write several anti-evolutionist pamphlets.[24] Whorf's opinions regarding the nature of the relation between language and thought remain under contention. Critics such as Lenneberg, Black and Pinker attribute to Whorf a strong linguistic determinism, while Lucy, Silverstein and Levinson point to Whorf's explicit rejections of determinism, and where he contends that translation and commensuration is possible.
Although Whorf lacked an advanced degree in linguistics, his reputation reflects his acquired competence. His peers at Yale University considered the 'amateur' Whorf to be the best man available to take over Sapir's graduate seminar in Native American linguistics while Sapir was on sabbatical in 1937–38.[25] He was highly regarded by authorities such as Boas, Sapir, Bloomfield and Tozzer. Indeed, Lucy wrote, "despite his 'amateur' status, Whorf's work in linguistics was and still is recognized as being of superb professional quality by linguists".[26]
Detractors such as Lenneberg, Chomsky and Pinker criticized him for insufficient clarity in his description of how language influences thought, and for not proving his conjectures. Most of his arguments were in the form of anecdotes and speculations that served as attempts to show how 'exotic' grammatical traits were connected to what were apparently equally exotic worlds of thought. In Whorf's words:
We dissect nature along lines laid down by our native language. The categories and types that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented in a kaleidoscope flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds—and this means largely by the linguistic systems of our minds. We cut nature up, organize it into concepts, and ascribe significances as we do, largely because we are parties to an agreement to organize it in this way—an agreement that holds throughout our speech community and is codified in the patterns of our language [...] all observers are not led by the same physical evidence to the same picture of the universe, unless their linguistic backgrounds are similar, or can in some way be calibrated.[27]
Whorf's illustration of the difference between the English and Shawnee gestalt construction of cleaning a gun with a ramrod. From the article "Science and Linguistics", originally published in the MIT Technology Review, 1940.
Among Whorf's best-known examples of linguistic relativity are instances where an indigenous language has several terms for a concept that is only described with one word in European languages (Whorf used the acronym SAE "Standard Average European" to allude to the rather similar grammatical structures of the well-studied European languages in contrast to the greater diversity of less-studied languages).
One of Whorf's examples was the supposedly large number of words for 'snow' in the Inuit language, an example which later was contested as a misrepresentation.[28]
Another is the Hopi language's words for water, one indicating drinking water in a container and another indicating a natural body of water. These examples of polysemy served the double purpose of showing that indigenous languages sometimes made more fine grained semantic distinctions than European languages and that direct translation between two languages, even of seemingly basic concepts such as snow or water, is not always possible.
Another example is from Whorf's experience as a chemical engineer working for an insurance company as a fire inspector.[28] While inspecting a chemical plant he observed that the plant had two storage rooms for gasoline barrels, one for the full barrels and one for the empty ones. He further noticed that while no employees smoked cigarettes in the room for full barrels, no-one minded smoking in the room with empty barrels, although this was potentially much more dangerous because of the highly flammable vapors still in the barrels. He concluded that the use of the word empty in connection to the barrels had led the workers to unconsciously regard them as harmless, although consciously they were probably aware of the risk of explosion. This example was later criticized by Lenneberg[29] as not actually demonstrating causality between the use of the word empty and the action of smoking, but instead was an example of circular reasoning. Pinker in The Language Instinct ridiculed this example, claiming that this was a failing of human insight rather than language.
Whorf's most elaborate argument for linguistic relativity regarded what he believed to be a fundamental difference in the understanding of time as a conceptual category among the Hopi.[24] He argued that in contrast to English and other SAE languages, Hopi does not treat the flow of time as a sequence of distinct, countable instances, like "three days" or "five years," but rather as a single process and that consequently it has no nouns referring to units of time as SAE speakers understand them. He proposed that this view of time was fundamental to Hopi culture and explained certain Hopi behavioral patterns. Malotki later claimed that he had found no evidence of Whorf's claims in 1980's era speakers, nor in historical documents dating back to the arrival of Europeans. Malotki used evidence from archaeological data, calendars, historical documents, modern speech and concluded that there was no evidence that Hopi conceptualize time in the way Whorf suggested. Universalist scholars such as Pinker often see Malotki's study as a final refutation of Whorf's claim about Hopi, whereas relativist scholars such as Lucy and Penny Lee criticized Malotki's study for mischaracterizing Whorf's claims and for forcing Hopi grammar into a model of analysis that doesn't fit the data.[30]
Whorf died in 1941 at age 44, leaving multiple unpublished papers. His line of thought was continued by linguists and anthropologists such as Hoijer and Lee who both continued investigations into the effect of language on habitual thought, and Trager, who prepared a number of Whorf's papers for posthumous publishing. The most important event for the dissemination of Whorf's ideas to a larger public was the publication in 1956 of his major writings on the topic of linguistic relativity in a single volume titled Language, Thought and Reality.
Eric Lenneberg[edit]
In 1953, Eric Lenneberg criticised Whorf's examples from an objectivist view of language holding that languages are principally meant to represent events in the real world and that even though languages express these ideas in various ways, the meanings of such expressions and therefore the thoughts of the speaker are equivalent. He argued that Whorf's English descriptions of a Hopi speaker's view of time were in fact translations of the Hopi concept into English, therefore disproving linguistic relativity. However Whorf was concerned with how the habitual use of language influences habitual behavior, rather than translatability. Whorf's point was that while English speakers may be able to understand how a Hopi speaker thinks, they do not think in that way.[31]
Lenneberg's main criticism of Whorf's works was that he never showed the connection between a linguistic phenomenon and a mental phenomenon. With Brown, Lenneberg proposed that proving such a connection required directly matching linguistic phenomena with behavior. They assessed linguistic relativity experimentally and published their findings in 1954.
Since neither Sapir nor Whorf had ever stated a formal hypothesis, Brown and Lenneberg formulated their own. Their two tenets were (i) "the world is differently experienced and conceived in different linguistic communities" and (ii) "language causes a particular cognitive structure".[32] Brown later developed them into the so-called "weak" and "strong" formulation:
Structural differences between language systems will, in general, be paralleled by nonlinguistic cognitive differences, of an unspecified sort, in the native speakers of the language.
The structure of anyone's native language strongly influences or fully determines the worldview he will acquire as he learns the language.[33]
Brown's formulations became widely known and were retrospectively attributed to Whorf and Sapir although the second formulation, verging on linguistic determinism, was never advanced by either of them.
Since Brown and Lenneberg believed that the objective reality denoted by language was the same for speakers of all languages, they decided to test how different languages codified the same message differently and whether differences in codification could be proven to affect behavior.
They designed experiments involving the codification of colors. In their first experiment, they investigated whether it was easier for speakers of English to remember color shades for which they had a specific name than to remember colors that were not as easily definable by words. This allowed them to compare the linguistic categorization directly to a non-linguistic task. In a later experiment, speakers of two languages that categorize colors differently (English and Zuni) were asked to recognize colors. In this way, it could be determined whether the differing color categories of the two speakers would determine their ability to recognize nuances within color categories. Brown and Lenneberg found that Zuñi speakers who classify green and blue together as a single color did have trouble recognizing and remembering nuances within the green/blue category.[34] Brown and Lenneberg's study began a tradition of investigation of linguistic relativity through color terminology.
Universalist period[edit]
Main articles: Universalism and Universalism and relativism of color terminology
Lenneberg was also one of the first cognitive scientists to begin development of the Universalist theory of language that was formulated by Chomsky in the form of Universal Grammar, effectively arguing that all languages share the same underlying structure. The Chomskyan school also holds the belief that linguistic structures are largely innate and that what are perceived as differences between specific languages are surface phenomena that do not affect the brain's universal cognitive processes. This theory became the dominant paradigm in American linguistics from the 1960s through the 1980s, while linguistic relativity became the object of ridicule.[35]
Examples of universalist influence in the 1960s are the studies by Berlin and Kay who continued Lenneberg's color research. They studied color terminology formation and showed clear universal trends in color naming. For example, they found that even though languages have different color terminologies, they generally recognize certain hues as more focal than others. They showed that in languages with few color terms, it is predictable from the number of terms which hues are chosen as focal colors, for example, languages with only three color terms always have the focal colors black, white and red.[36] The fact that what had been believed to be random differences between color naming in different languages could be shown to follow universal patterns was seen as a powerful argument against linguistic relativity.[37] Berlin and Kay's research has since been criticized by relativists such as Lucy, who argued that Berlin and Kay's conclusions were skewed by their insistence that color terms encode only color information.[38] This, Lucy argues, made them blind to the instances in which color terms provided other information that might be considered examples of linguistic relativity.
Other universalist researchers dedicated themselves to dispelling other aspects of linguistic relativity, often attacking Whorf's specific points and examples. For example, Malotki's monumental study of time expressions in Hopi presented many examples that challenged Whorf's "timeless" interpretation of Hopi language and culture.[39]
Today many followers of the universalist school of thought still oppose linguistic relativity. For example, Pinker argues in The Language Instinct that thought is independent of language, that language is itself meaningless in any fundamental way to human thought, and that human beings do not even think in "natural" language, i.e. any language that we actually communicate in; rather, we think in a meta-language, preceding any natural language, called "mentalese." Pinker attacks what he calls "Whorf's radical position," declaring, "the more you examine Whorf's arguments, the less sense they make."[40]
Pinker and other universalists have been accused by relativists of misrepresenting Whorf's views and arguing against strawmen.[41][38][31]
Joshua Fishman's "Whorfianism of the third kind"[edit]
Joshua Fishman argued that Whorf's true position was largely overlooked. In 1978, he suggested that Whorf was a "neo-Herderian champion"[42] and in 1982, he proposed "Whorfianism of the third kind" in an attempt to refocus linguists' attention on what he claimed was Whorf's real interest, namely the intrinsic value of "little peoples" and "little languages".[43] Whorf had criticized Ogden's Basic English thus:
But to restrict thinking to the patterns merely of English […] is to lose a power of thought which, once lost, can never be regained. It is the 'plainest' English which contains the greatest number of unconscious assumptions about nature. […] We handle even our plain English with much greater effect if we direct it from the vantage point of a multilingual awareness.[44]
Where Brown's weak version of the linguistic relativity hypothesis proposes that language influences thought and the strong version that language determines thought, Fishman's 'Whorfianism of the third kind' proposes that language is a key to culture.
Cognitive linguistics[edit]
In the late 1980s and early 1990s, advances in cognitive psychology and cognitive linguistics renewed interest in the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis.[45] One of those who adopted a more Whorfian approach was George Lakoff. He argued that language is often used metaphorically and that languages use different cultural metaphors that reveal something about how speakers of that language think. For example, English employs conceptual metaphors likening time with money, so that time can be saved and spent and invested, whereas other languages do not talk about time in that way. Other such metaphors are common to many languages because they are based on general human experience, for example, metaphors likening up with good and bad with down. Lakoff also argued that metaphor plays an important part in political debates such as the "right to life" or the "right to choose"; or "illegal aliens" or "undocumented workers".
Parameters[edit]
In his book Women, Fire and Dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind,[31] Lakoff reappraised linguistic relativity and especially Whorf's views about how linguistic categorization reflects and/or influences mental categories. He concluded that the debate had been confused. He described four parameters on which researchers differed in their opinions about what constitutes linguistic relativity:
The degree and depth of linguistic relativity. Perhaps a few examples of superficial differences in language and associated behavior are enough to demonstrate the existence of linguistic relativity. Alternatively, perhaps only deep differences that permeate the linguistic and cultural system suffice.
Whether conceptual systems are absolute or whether they can evolve
Whether the similarity criterion is translatability or the use of linguistic expressions
Whether the locus of linguistic relativity is in language or in the brain
Lakoff concluded that many of Whorf's critics had criticized him using novel definitions of linguistic relativity, rendering their criticisms moot.
Rethinking Linguistic Relativity[edit]
The publication of the 1996 anthology Rethinking Linguistic Relativity edited by Gumperz and Levinson began a new period of linguistic relativity studies that focused on cognitive and social aspects. The book included studies on the linguistic relativity and universalist traditions. Levinson documented significant linguistic relativity effects in the linguistic conceptualization of spatial categories between languages. Separate studies by Bowerman and Slobin treated the role of language in cognitive processes. Bowerman showed that certain cognitive processes did not use language to any significant extent and therefore could not be subject to linguistic relativity. Slobin described another kind of cognitive process that he named "thinking for speaking" – the kind of process in which perceptional data and other kinds of prelinguistic cognition are translated into linguistic terms for communication. These, Slobin argues, are the kinds of cognitive process that are at the root of linguistic relativity.
Refinements[edit]
Researchers such as Boroditsky, Lucy and Levinson believe that language influences thought in more limited ways than the broadest early claims. Researchers examine the interface between thought (or cognition), language and culture and describe the relevant influences. They use experimental data to back up their conclusions.[46][47] Kay ultimately concluded that "[the] Whorf hypothesis is supported in the right visual field but not the left".[48] His findings show that accounting for brain lateralization offers another perspective.
Psycholinguistic studies explored motion perception, emotion perception, object representation and memory.[49][50][51][52] The gold standard of psycholinguistic studies on linguistic relativity is now finding non-linguistic cognitive differences in speakers of different languages (thus rendering inapplicable Pinker's criticism that linguistic relativity is "circular").
Recent work with bilingual speakers attempts to distinguish the effects of language from those of culture on bilingual cognition including perceptions of time, space, motion, colors and emotion.[53] Researchers described differences between bilinguals and monolinguals in perception of color,[54] representations of time[55] and other elements of cognition.
Empirical research[edit]
Lucy identified three main strands of research into linguistic relativity.[56]
Structure-centered[edit]
The "structure-centered" approach starts with a language's structural peculiarity and examines its possible ramifications for thought and behavior. The defining example is Whorf's observation of discrepancies between the grammar of time expressions in Hopi and English. More recent research in this vein is Lucy's research describing how usage of the categories of grammatical number and of numeral classifiers in the Mayan language Yucatec result in Mayan speakers classifying objects according to material rather than to shape as preferred by English speakers.[57]
Domain-centered[edit]
The "domain-centered" approach selects a semantic domain and compares it across linguistic and cultural groups. It centered on color terminology, although this domain is acknowledged to be sub-optimal, because color perception, unlike other semantic domains, is hardwired into the neural system and as such is subject to more universal restrictions than other semantic domains.
Space is another semantic domain that has proven fruitful for linguistic relativity studies.[58] Spatial categories vary greatly across languages. Speakers rely on the linguistic conceptualization of space in performing many ordinary tasks. Levinson and others reported three basic spatial categorizations. While many languages use combinations of them, some languages exhibit only one type and related behaviors. For example, Yimithirr only uses absolute directions when describing spatial relations — the position of everything is described by using the cardinal directions. Speakers define a location as "north of the house", while an English speaker may use relative positions, saying "in front of the house" or "to the left of the house".[59]
Behavior-centered[edit]
The "behavior centered" approach starts by comparing behavior across linguistic groups and then searches for causes for that behavior in the linguistic system. Whorf attributed the occurrence of fires at a chemical plant to the workers' use of the word 'empty' to describe the barrels containing only explosive vapors. Bloom noticed that speakers of Chinese had unexpected difficulties answering counter-factual questions posed to them in a questionnaire. He concluded that this was related to the way in which counter-factuality is marked grammatically in Chinese. Other researchers attributed this result to Bloom's flawed translations.[60] Strømnes examined why Finnish factories had a higher occurrence of work related accidents than similar Swedish ones. He concluded that cognitive differences between the grammatical usage of Swedish prepositions and Finnish cases could have caused Swedish factories to pay more attention to the work process while Finnish factory organizers paid more attention to the individual worker.[61]
Everett's work on the Pirahã language of the Brazilian Amazon[62] found several peculiarities that he interpreted as corresponding to linguistically rare features, such as a lack of numbers and color terms in the way those are otherwise defined and the absence of certain types of clauses. Everett's conclusions were met with skepticism from universalists[63] who claimed that the linguistic deficit is explained by the lack of need for such concepts.[64]
Recent research with non-linguistic experiments in languages with different grammatical properties (e.g., languages with and without numeral classifiers or with different gender grammar systems) showed that language differences in human categorization are due to such differences.[65] Experimental research suggests that this linguistic influence on thought diminishes over time, as when speakers of one language are exposed to another.[66]
A study published by the American Psychological Association’s Journal of Experimental Psychology claimed that language can influence how you estimate time. The study focused on three groups, those who spoke only Swedish, those who spoke only Spanish and bilingual speakers who spoke both of those languages. Swedish speakers describe time using distance terms like "long" or "short" while Spanish speakers do it using volume related terms like "big" or "small". The researchers asked the participants to estimate how much time had passed while watching a line growing across a screen, or a container being filled, or both. The researches stated that "When reproducing duration, Swedish speakers were misled by stimulus length, and Spanish speakers were misled by stimulus size/quantity." When the bilinguals where prompted with the word “duración” (the Spanish word for duration) they based their time estimates of how full the containers were, ignoring the growing lines. When prompted with the word “tid” (the Swedish word for duration) they estimated the time elapsed solely by the distance the lines had traveled.[67][68]
Color terminology[edit]
Main article: Linguistic relativity and the color naming debate
Research continued after Lenneberg/Roberts and Brown/Lenneberg. The studies showed a correlation between color term numbers and ease of recall in both Zuni and English speakers. Researchers attributed this to focal colors having higher codability than less focal colors, and not with linguistic relativity effects. Berlin/Kay found universal typological color principles that are determined by biological rather than linguistic factors.[36] This study sparked studies into typological universals of color terminology. Researchers such as Lucy,[69] Saunders[70] and Levinson[71] argued that Berlin and Kay's study does not refute linguistic relativity in color naming, because of unsupported assumptions in their study (such as whether all cultures in fact have a clearly-defined category of "color") and because of related data problems. Researchers such as Maclaury continued investigation into color naming. Like Berlin and Kay, Maclaury concluded that the domain is governed mostly by physical-biological universals.[72][73]
Other domains[edit]
Linguistic relativity inspired others to consider whether thought could be influenced by manipulating language.
Science and philosophy[edit]
The question bears on philosophical, psychological, linguistic and anthropological questions.[clarification needed]
A major question is whether human psychological faculties are mostly innate or whether they are mostly a result of learning, and hence subject to cultural and social processes such as language. The innate view holds that humans share the same set of basic faculties, and that variability due to cultural differences is less important and that the human mind is a mostly biological construction, so that all humans sharing the same neurological configuration can be expected to have similar cognitive patterns.
Multiple alternatives have advocates. The contrary constructivist position holds that human faculties and concepts are largely influenced by socially constructed and learned categories, without many biological restrictions. Another variant is idealist, which holds that human mental capacities are generally unrestricted by biological-material strictures. Another is essentialist, which holds that essential differences[clarification needed] may influence the ways individuals or groups experience and conceptualize the world. Yet another is relativist (Cultural relativism), which sees different cultural groups as employing different conceptual schemes that are not necessarily compatible or commensurable, nor more or less in accord with external reality.[74]
Another debate considers whether thought is a form of internal speech or is independent of and prior to language.[citation needed]
In the philosophy of language the question addresses the relations between language, knowledge and the external world, and the concept of truth. Philosophers such as Putnam, Fodor, Davidson, and Dennett see language as representing directly entities from the objective world and that categorization reflect that world. Other philosophers (e.g. Wittgenstein, Quine, Searle, Foucault) argue that categorization and conceptualization is subjective and arbitrary.
Another question is whether language is a tool for representing and referring to objects in the world, or whether it is a system used to construct mental representations that can be communicated.[clarification needed]
Therapy and self-development[edit]
Main articles: General semantics and Neurolinguistic Programming
Sapir/Whorf contemporary Alfred Korzybski was independently developing his theory of general semantics, which was aimed at using language's influence on thinking to maximize human cognitive abilities. Korzybski's thinking was influenced by logical philosophy such as Russell and Whitehead's Principia Mathematica and Wittgenstein's Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus.[75] Although Korzybski was not aware of Sapir and Whorf's writings, the movement was followed by Whorf-admirer Stuart Chase, who fused Whorf's interest in cultural-linguistic variation with Korzybski's programme in his popular work "The Tyranny of Words". S. I. Hayakawa was a follower and popularizer of Korzybski's work, writing Language in Thought and Action. The general semantics movement influenced the development of neurolinguistic programming, another therapeutic technique that seeks to use awareness of language use to influence cognitive patterns.[76]
Korzybski independently described a "strong" version of the hypothesis of linguistic relativity.[77]
We do not realize what tremendous power the structure of an habitual language has. It is not an exaggeration to say that it enslaves us through the mechanism of s[emantic] r[eactions] and that the structure which a language exhibits, and impresses upon us unconsciously, is automatically projected upon the world around us.
—  Korzybski (1930) [78]
Artificial languages[edit]
Main articles: Constructed languages and Experimental languages
In their fiction, authors such as Ayn Rand and George Orwell explored how linguistic relativity might be exploited for political purposes. In Rand's Anthem, a fictive communist society removed the possibility of individualism by removing the word "I" from the language, and in Orwell's 1984 the authoritarian state created the language Newspeak to make it impossible for people to think critically about the government.
Others have been fascinated by the possibilities of creating new languages that could enable new, and perhaps better, ways of thinking. Examples of such languages designed to explore the human mind include Loglan, explicitly designed by James Cooke Brown to test the linguistic relativity hypothesis, by experimenting whether it would make its speakers think more logically. Speakers of Lojban, an evolution of Loglan, report that they feel speaking the language enhances their ability for logical thinking[citation needed]. Suzette Haden Elgin, who was involved in the early development of neurolinguistic programming, invented the language Láadan to explore linguistic relativity by making it easier to express what Elgin considered the female worldview, as opposed to Standard Average European languages which she considered to convey a "male centered" world view.[79] John Quijada's language Ithkuil was designed to explore the limits of the number of cognitive categories a language can keep its speakers aware of at once.[80] Similarly, Sonja Lang's Toki Pona was developed according to a Taoist point of view for exploring how (or if) such a language would direct human thought.[81]
Programming languages[edit]
APL programming language originator Kenneth E. Iverson believed that the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis applied to computer languages (without actually mentioning it by name). His Turing award lecture, "Notation as a tool of thought", was devoted to this theme, arguing that more powerful notations aided thinking about computer algorithms.[82]
The essays of Paul Graham explore similar themes, such as a conceptual hierarchy of computer languages, with more expressive and succinct languages at the top. Thus, the so-called blub paradox (after a hypothetical programming language of average complexity called Blub) says that anyone preferentially using some particular programming language will know that it is more powerful than some, but not that it is less powerful than others. The reason is that writing in some language means thinking in that language. Hence the paradox, because typically programmers are "satisfied with whatever language they happen to use, because it dictates the way they think about programs".[83]
In a 2003 presentation at an open source convention, Yukihiro Matsumoto, creator of the programming language Ruby, said that one of his inspirations for developing the language was the science fiction novel Babel-17, based on the Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis.[84]
In popular culture[edit]
Ted Chiang's short story Story of Your Life developed the concept of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis as applied to an alien species which visits Earth. The aliens' biology contributes to their spoken and written languages, which are distinct. In the 2016 American film Arrival, based on Chiang's short story, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the premise. The protagonist explains that "the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the theory that the language you speak determines how you think".[85]
In his science fiction novel The Languages of Pao the author Jack Vance describes how specialized languages are a major part of a strategy to create specific classes in a society, to enable the population to withstand occupation and develop itself.
See also[edit]
Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution
Eskimo words for snow
Ethnolinguistics
Hypocognition
Language planning
Language and thought
Linguistic anthropology
Linguistic determinism
Psycholinguistics
Relativism
Terministic screen
Notes[edit]
Jump up ^ Hill & Mannheim (1992)
Jump up ^ Kennison, Shelia (2013). Introduction to language development. Los Angeles: Sage.
Jump up ^ Koerner, E. F. Konrad (December 1992). "The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis: A Preliminary History and a Bibliographical Essay". Journal of Linguistic Anthropology. 2 (2): 180. |access-date= requires |url= (help)
Jump up ^ "The Sapir–Whorf hypothesis", in Hoijer 1954:92–105
Jump up ^ This usage is now generally seen as a misnomer. As Jane Hill and Bruce Mannheim write: Yet, just as the Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire the "Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis" is neither consistent with the writings of Sapir and Whorf, nor a hypothesis (Hill & Mannheim 1992, p386)
^ Jump up to: a b Koerner, E.F.K."Towards a full pedigree of the Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis: from Locke to Lucy" Chapter in Pütz & Verspoor (2000:17)"
Jump up ^ Wolf & Holmes (2011)
^ Jump up to: a b Ahearn 2011, p. 69.
Jump up ^ McComiskey, Bruce (2002). Gorgias and the New Sophistic Rhetoric. SIU Press. ISBN 978-0-8093-2397-5.
Jump up ^ Gumperz & Levinson 1996, p. 2.
^ Jump up to: a b Trabant, Jürgen."How relativistic are Humboldts "Weltansichten"?" in Pütz & Verspoor 2000
Jump up ^ Seuren 1998, p. 180.
Jump up ^ Seuren 1998, p. 181.
Jump up ^ Boas, Franz (1911). Handbook of American Indian languages. 1. Bureau of American Ethnology, Bulletin 40. Washington: Government Print Office (Smithsonian Institution, Bureau of American Ethnology).
Jump up ^ Sapir, Edward (1929), "The status of linguistics as a science", Language, 5 (4): 207, JSTOR 409588, doi:10.2307/409588
Jump up ^ Sapir, Edward; Swadesh, Morris (1946). American Indian Grammatical Categories. pp. 100–107.
Jump up ^ Sapir 1921, p. 213–4.
Jump up ^ Sapir 1921, p. 215.
Jump up ^ For a critique of Weisgerber, see, for example: Beat Lehmann (1998), ROT ist nicht ″rot″ ist nicht [rot]. Eine Bilanz und Neuinterpretation der linguistischen Relativitätstheorie. Gunter Narr, Tübingen. pp. 58–80; Iwar Werlen (2002), 'Das Worten der Welt', in: Lexikologie ... Ein internationales Handbuch, ed. by D. Alan Cruse et al., Walter de Gruyter, Berlin & New York, 1. pp. 380–391.
Jump up ^ Vygotsky, L. (1934/1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Jump up ^ Lucy & Wertsch 1987.
Jump up ^ Pula 1992.
Jump up ^ Whorf 1956, p. 214.
^ Jump up to: a b Whorf 1956.
Jump up ^ Darnell 1990, p. 380-81.
Jump up ^ Lucy 1992b, p. 25.
Jump up ^ Whorf 1956, p. 212–214.
^ Jump up to: a b Pullum 1991.
Jump up ^ Lenneberg 1953.
Jump up ^ Lee 1996 Lee 1996 Leavitt 2011, pp. 179–187 Lucy 1992b, p. 286 Lucy 1996, p. 43 Dinwoodie 2006
^ Jump up to: a b c Lakoff 1987.
Jump up ^ Brown & Lenneberg 1954, p. 455,457.
Jump up ^ Brown 1976, p. 128.
Jump up ^ D'Andrade 1995, p. 185.
Jump up ^ Gumperz & Levinson 1996, p. 3, 6.
^ Jump up to: a b Berlin & Kay 1969.
Jump up ^ Gumperz & Levinson 1996, p. 6.
^ Jump up to: a b Lucy 1992a.
Jump up ^ Malotki 1983.
Jump up ^ Pinker 1994, p. 60.
Jump up ^ Casasanto 2008.
Jump up ^ Fishman 1978.
Jump up ^ Fishman 1982, p. 5.
Jump up ^ Whorf 1956, p. 244.
Jump up ^ Seidner 1982.
Jump up ^ Gentner, Dedre; Boroditsky, Lera (2001). "Individuation, relativity, and early word development". In Melissa Bowerman and Stephen Levinson. Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development. Cambridge University Press. pp. 215–256. ISBN 978-0-521-59659-6.
Jump up ^ Levinson, Stephen (2001). "Covariation between spatial language and cognition, and its implications for language learning". In Melissa Bowerman and Stephen Levinson. Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development. Cambridge University Press. pp. 566–588. ISBN 978-0-521-59659-6.
Jump up ^ Gilbert, Aubrey L.; Regier, Terry; Kay, Paul; Ivry, Richard B. (2006-01-10). "Whorf hypothesis is supported in the right visual field but not the left". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 103 (2): 489–494. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 1326182  . PMID 16387848. doi:10.1073/pnas.0509868103.
Jump up ^ Hickmann, Maya; Robert, Stéphane (16 May 2006). "The relativity of motion in first language acquisition". Space in Languages: Linguistic Systems and Cognitive Categories. John Benjamins Publishing. pp. 281–308. ISBN 90-272-9355-4.
Jump up ^ Perlovsky, Leonid (2009). "Language and emotions: Emotional Sapir–Whorf hypothesis". Neural Networks. 22 (5–6): 518–526. ISSN 0893-6080. doi:10.1016/j.neunet.2009.06.034.
Jump up ^ Mazuka, Reiko; Friedman, Ronald S. (2000). "Linguistic Relativity in Japanese and English: Is Language the Primary Determinant in Object Classification?". Journal of East Asian Linguistics. 9 (4): 353–377. ISSN 0925-8558. doi:10.1023/A:1008356620617.
Jump up ^ Pavlenko, A. (2003). "Eyewitness memory in late bilinguals: Evidence for discursive relativity". International Journal of Bilingualism. 7 (3): 257–281. ISSN 1367-0069. doi:10.1177/13670069030070030301.
Jump up ^ Pavlenko 1999 Cook & Bassetti 2010 Athanasopoulos 2009 Phillips & Boroditsky 2003
Jump up ^ Andrews 1994.
Jump up ^ Boroditsky, Ham & Ramscar 2002.
Jump up ^ Lucy 1997.
Jump up ^ Lucy 1992b.
Jump up ^ Lucy 1997, p. 301.
Jump up ^ Levinson 1996.
Jump up ^ Au, Terry K, "Counterfactuals: In Reply to Alfred Bloom", Cognition, 17 (3), 1984:
Jump up ^ Lucy 1997, p. 304.
Jump up ^ Everett, Daniel L. (2005), "Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã" (PDF), Current Anthropology, 46 (4): 621–646, doi:10.1086/431525, retrieved 1 October 2012
Jump up ^ Frank, Michael C.; Everett, Daniel L.; Fedorenko, Evelina; Gibson, Edward (2008), "Number as a cognitive technology: Evidence from Pirahã language and cognition" (PDF), Cognition, 108 (3), pp. 819–24, PMID 18547557, doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.007, archived from the original (PDF) on 15 February 2010, retrieved 14 May 2009
Jump up ^ Ira Nevins, Andrew; Pesetsky, David; Rodrigues, Cilene (2009). "Piraha Exceptionality: a Reassessment". Language. 85 (2): 355–404. doi:10.1353/lan.0.0107.
Jump up ^ Kou, J. Y.; Sera, M. D. (2007). "Classiﬁer effect on human categorization: the role of shape classiﬁers in Chinese Chinese. In". Journal of East Asian Linguistics. 18: 1–19. doi:10.1007/s10831-008-9036-6.
Jump up ^ Bross, Fabian; Pfaller, Philip (2012). "The decreasing Whorf-effect: a study in the classifier systems of Mandarin and Thai" (PDF). Journal of Unsolved Questions. 2 (2): S19–S24.
Jump up ^ http://www.rawstory.com/2017/05/your-perception-of-time-may-depend-on-the-language-you-speak/
Jump up ^ http://www.popsci.com/language-time-perception#page-3
Jump up ^ Lucy, J. A. (1997). The linguistics of "color". In C.L. Hardin & L. Maffi (Eds.), Color categories in thought and language (pp. 320–436). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jump up ^ Saunders, Barbara (2000). Revisiting Basic Color Terms. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute, 6, 81–99
Jump up ^ Levinson, Stephen C. (2000). "Yeli Dnye and the Theory of Basic Color Terms". Journal of Linguistic Anthropology. 10: 3–55. doi:10.1525/jlin.2000.10.1.3.
Jump up ^ MacLaury, Robert E.; Hewes, Gordon W.; Kinnear, Paul R.; Deregowski, J. B.; Merrifield, William R.; Saunders, B. a. C.; Stanlaw, James; Toren, Christina; Van Brakel, J. (1992-04-01). "From Brightness to Hue: An Explanatory Model of Color-Category Evolution [and Comments and Reply]". Current Anthropology. 33 (2): 137–186. ISSN 0011-3204. doi:10.1086/204049.
Jump up ^ MacLaury, Robert E. (1 January 1997). Color and Cognition in Mesoamerica: Constructing Categories as Vantages. University of Texas Press. ISBN 978-0-292-75193-4.
Jump up ^ Leavitt 2011.
Jump up ^ Korzybski, Alfred (1949). Time-binding: The General Theory : Two Papers 1924–1926. Institute of General Semantics. pp. (5), 54.
Jump up ^ Wake, Lisa (31 March 2008). Neurolinguistic Psychotherapy: A Postmodern Perspective. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-134-09482-0.
Jump up ^ Read, Allen Walker (1982). ""The Semiotic Aspect of Alfred Korzybski's General Semantics"" (PDF). Semiotics: 101–107. doi:10.5840/cpsem19828.
Jump up ^ Korzybski, Alfred (1958). Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics. Institute of GS. ISBN 978-0-937298-01-5.
Jump up ^ Okrent, Arika (2009), In the Land of Invented Languages: Esperanto Rock Stars, Klingon Poets, Loglan Lovers, and the Mad Dreamers Who Tried to Build A Perfect Language, Spiegel & Grau, pp. 208–257, ISBN 0-385-52788-8
Jump up ^ Foer, Joshua (December 24, 2012). "UTOPIAN FOR BEGINNERS: An amateur linguist loses control of the language he invented". New York Times.
Jump up ^ A Million Words and Counting: How Global English Is Rewriting the World, Paul J. J. Payack, (C) 2007, p. 194.
Jump up ^ Iverson, Kenneth E. (August 1980). "Notation as a tool of thought" (PDF). Communications of the ACM. 23 (8): 444–465. doi:10.1145/358896.358899. Archived from the original on 10 July 2011. CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown (link)
Jump up ^ Graham 2004.
Jump up ^ "The Power and Philosophy of Ruby (or how to create Babel-17".
Jump up ^ "The science behind the movie ‘Arrival’". Washington Post. Retrieved 2017-04-23.
References[edit]

Ahearn, Laura M. (21 March 2011). Living Language: An Introduction to Linguistic Anthropology. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 978-1-4443-4054-9.
Andrews, David (1994), "The Russian color categories sinij and goluboj: An experimental analysis of their interpretation in the standard and emigré languages", Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 2: 9–28
Athanasopoulos, Panos (2009), "Cognitive representation of colour in bilinguals: The case of Greek blues", Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12 (1): 83–95, doi:10.1017/S136672890800388X
Berlin, Brent; Kay, Paul (1969), Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution, Berkeley: University of California Press
Boroditsky, Lera; Ham, Wendy; Ramscar, Michael (2002), "What is universal in event perception? Comparing English & Indonesian speakers", in W. D. Gray & C. D. Schunn, Proceedings of the Twenty-Fourth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates CS1 maint: Uses editors parameter (link)
Brown, R.; Lenneberg, Eric (1954), "A study in language and cognition", Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 49 (3): 454–462, doi:10.1037/h0057814
Brown, R. (1976), "In Memorial Tribute to Eric Lenneberg", Cognition, 4 (2): 125–153, doi:10.1016/0010-0277(76)90001-9
Casasanto, Daniel (2008), "Who's Afraid of the Big Bad Whorf? Crosslinguistic Differences in Temporal Language and Thought", Language Learning, 58 (1): 79, doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00462.x
Cook, Vivian; Bassetti, Benedetta (2010), Language and Bilingual Cognition, Hove: Psychology Press
D'Andrade, Roy G. (27 January 1995). The Development of Cognitive Anthropology. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-45976-1.
Darnell, Regna (1990). Edward Sapir: Linguist, Anthropologist, Humanist. University of California Press. ISBN 978-0-520-06678-6.
Dinwoodie, David W. (2006), "Time and the Individual in Native North America", in Kan, Sergei; Strong, Pauline Turner; Fogelson, Raymond, New Perspectives on Native North America: Cultures, Histories, And Representations, U of Nebraska
Drivonikou, G. V., P. Kay, T. Regier, R. B. Ivry, A. L. Gilbert, A. Franklin & I. R. L. Davies (2007), "Further evidence that Whorfian effects are stronger in the right visual field than the left", Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 104 (3): 1097–1102, PMC 1783370  , PMID 17213312, doi:10.1073/pnas.0610132104 CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
Everett, Caleb (2013), Linguistic Relativity: Evidence Across Languages and Cognitive Domains, Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton
Fishman, Joshua A. (1978), "Positive bilingualism: Some overlooked rationales and forefathers", in J. E. Alatis (Ed.), International dimensions of bilingual education, Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press, pp. 42–52. CS1 maint: Extra text: editors list (link)
Fishman, Joshua A. (1982), "Whorfianism of the third kind: Ethnolinguistic diversity as a worldwide societal asset", Language in Society, 11: 1–14, doi:10.1017/S0047404500009015
Gilbert, Aubrey L., Terry Regier, Paul Kay & Richard B. Ivry (2008), "Support for lateralization of the Whorf effect beyond the realm of color discrimination" (PDF), Brain and Language, 105 (2): 91–98, PMID 17628656, doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2007.06.001 CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list (link)
Graham, Paul (2004). "Beating the Averages". Hackers & Painters: Big Ideas from the Computer Age. "O'Reilly Media, Inc.". ISBN 978-0-596-00662-4. Retrieved 2014-03-17.
Gumperz, John; Levinson, Stephen, eds. (1996), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Hill, Jane H; Mannheim, Bruce (1992), "Language and World view", Annual Review of Anthropology, 21: 381–406, doi:10.1146/annurev.an.21.100192.002121
Hoijer, Harry, ed. (1954), Language in culture: Conference on the interrelations of language and other aspects of culture, Chicago: University of Chicago Press
Lakoff, George (1987), Women, fire, and dangerous things, University Of Chicago Press
Leavitt, John (2011), Linguistic Relativities: Language Diversity and Modern Thought, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, ISBN 978-0-521-76782-8
Lee, Penny (1 January 1996). The Whorf Theory Complex: A Critical Reconstruction. John Benjamins Publishing. ISBN 90-272-4569-X.
Lenneberg, Eric; A. M. Brown (1956), "The Language of Experience: a Study in Methodology", Indiana University Publications in Anthropology and Linguistics, Baltimore: Waverly Press
Lenneberg, Eric (1953), "Cognition in Ethnolinguistics", Language, Linguistic Society of America, 29 (4): 463–471, JSTOR 409956, doi:10.2307/409956
Levinson, Stephen C. (1996), "Language and Space", Annual Review of Anthropology, 25: 353–82, doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.25.1.353
Levinson, Stephen C. (2000), "Yeli Dnye and the Theory of Basic Color Terms", Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 10 (1): 3–55, doi:10.1525/jlin.2000.10.1.3
Levinson, Stephen C. (2012), "Foreword", in Carroll, John B; Levinson, Stephen C; Lee, Penny, Language, Thought and Reality (2nd ed.), Cambridge, Mass/London, UK: MIT Press, pp. vii–xxiii, ISBN 978-0-262-51775-1
Lucy, John A. (1992a), Grammatical Categories and Cognition: A Case Study of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Lucy, John A. (1992b), Language Diversity and Thought: A Reformulation of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Lucy, John A. (1997), "Linguistic Relativity", Annual Review of Anthropology, 26: 291–312, doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.26.1.291
Lucy, John A. (1996), "The Scope of Linguistic Relativity:An analysis of Empirical Research", in Gumperz, John; Levinson, Stephen, Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 37–69
Lucy, J. A.; Wertsch, J. (1987), "Vygotsky and Whorf: A comparative analysis", in Hickmann, M., Social and functional approaches to language and thought, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press., pp. 67–86
Malotki, Ekkehart (1983), Werner Winter, ed., "Hopi Time: A Linguistic Analysis of the Temporal Concepts in the Hopi Language", Trends in Linguistics. Studies and Monographs, Berlin, New York, Amsterdam: Mouton Publishers, 20
Niemeier, Susanne & René Dirven (eds) (2000), Evidence for linguistic relativity, John Benjamins Publishing Company, ISBN 978-90-272-3705-7 CS1 maint: Extra text: authors list (link)
Pavlenko, Aneta (1999), "New approaches to concepts in bilingual memory", Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2 (3): 209–230, doi:10.1017/S1366728999000322
Phillips, Webb; Boroditsky, Lera (2003), "Can quirks of grammar affect the way you think? Grammatical gender and object concepts", in R. Alterman & D. Kirsh, Proceedings of the Twenty-fifth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Boston: Cognitive Science Society CS1 maint: Uses editors parameter (link)
Pinker, Steven (1994), The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language, Perennial
Pullum, Geoffrey (1991), The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax and other Irreverent Essays on the Study of Language (PDF), Chicaco University Press, retrieved 2014-03-17
Pula, R (1992), "The Nietzche-Korzybski-Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis?", ETC Review of General Semantics, 49 (1): 50–57
Pütz, Martin; Verspoor, Marjolyn, eds. (2000), Explorations in linguistic relativity, John Benjamins Publishing Company, ISBN 978-90-272-3706-4
Sapir, Edward (1921), Language: An Introduction to the Study of Speech, Harcourt, Brace
Sapir, Edward (1983), David G. Mandelbaum, ed., Selected Writings of Edward Sapir in Language, Culture, and Personality, University of California Press
Schultz, Emily Ann (1990), Dialogue at the Margins: Whorf, Bakhtin, and Linguistic Relativity, University of Wisconsin Press
Seidner, Stanley S. (1982), Ethnicity, Language, and Power from a Psycholinguistic Perspective, Bruxelles: Centre de recherche sur le pluralinguismePress
Seuren, Pieter A. M. (1998), Western linguistics: An historical introduction, Wiley-Blackwell, ISBN 0-631-20891-7
Trager, George L. (1959), "The Systematization of the Whorf Hypothesis", Anthropological Linguistics, Operational Models in Synchronic Linguistics: A Symposium Presented at the 1958 Meetings of the American Anthropological Association, 1 (1): 31–35
Whorf, Benjamin (1956), Carroll, John B., ed., Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf, MIT Press
Wolff, K. J.; Holmes (2011), "Linguistic relativity", Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science (PDF) (2), pp. 253–265
Further reading[edit]
The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (October 2017) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Alford, Dan Moonhawk, The Great Whorf Hypothesis Hoax
Boroditsky, Lera, "How Does Our Language Shape The Way We Think?", Edge
Boroditsky, Lera; Schmidt, Lauren; Phillips, Webb, "Sex, syntax, and semantics" (PDF), Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, pp. 61–79
Boroditsky, Lera; Segel, Edward (2011). "Grammar in Art". Frontiers in Psychology. 1. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00244.
Deutscher, Guy (26 August 2010), "Does Your Language Shape How You Think?", The New York Times Magazine
Deutscher, Guy (2011), Through the Language Glass: Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages, Arrow Books, ISBN 978-0-09-950557-0, retrieved 2014-03-17
Everett, Dan (2005), "Cultural Constraints on Grammar and Cognition in Pirahã: Another Look at the Design Features of Human Language" (PDF), Current Anthropology, 46 (4): 621, doi:10.1086/431525
Kay, Paul; Kempton, Willet (1984), "What is the Sapir–Whorf Hypothesis?", American Anthropologist, 86 (1): 65–79, doi:10.1525/aa.1984.86.1.02a00050
Kay, Paul; Chad K., McDaniel (1978), "The Linguistic Significance of Meanings of Basic Color Terms", Language, Linguistic Society of America, 54 (3): 610–646, JSTOR 412789, doi:10.2307/412789
O'Neill, Sean (2008), Cultural Contact and Linguistic Relativity Among the Indians of Northwestern California, University of Oklahoma Press, ISBN 0-8061-3922-6
Swoyer, Chris (2015), "The Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis", Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy Archive
"Which comes first, language or thought?", Harvard Gazette
[show]
v
t
e
Philosophy of language
Philosophers
Plato (Cratylus)
Gorgias
Confucius
Xunzi
Aristotle
Stoics
Pyrrhonists
Scholasticism
Ibn Rushd
Ibn Khaldun
Thomas Hobbes
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
Johann Herder
Ludwig Noiré
Wilhelm von Humboldt
Fritz Mauthner
Paul Ricœur
Ferdinand de Saussure
Gottlob Frege
Franz Boas
Paul Tillich
Edward Sapir
Leonard Bloomfield
Zhuangzi
Henri Bergson
Lev Vygotsky
Ludwig Wittgenstein
Philosophical Investigations
Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
Bertrand Russell
Rudolf Carnap
Jacques Derrida
Of Grammatology
Limited Inc
Benjamin Lee Whorf
Gustav Bergmann
J. L. Austin
Noam Chomsky
Hans-Georg Gadamer
Saul Kripke
A. J. Ayer
G. E. M. Anscombe
Jaakko Hintikka
Michael Dummett
Donald Davidson
Roger Gibson
Paul Grice
Gilbert Ryle
P. F. Strawson
Willard Van Orman Quine
Hilary Putnam
David Lewis
John Searle
Joxe Azurmendi
Scott Soames
Stephen Yablo
John Hawthorne
Stephen Neale
Paul Watzlawick
Theories
Causal theory of reference
Contrast theory of meaning
Contrastivism
Conventionalism
Cratylism
Deconstruction
Descriptivist theory of names
Direct reference theory
Dramatism
Expressivism
Linguistic determinism
Logical atomism
Logical positivism
Mediated reference theory
Nominalism
Non-cognitivism
Phallogocentrism
Quietism
Relevance theory
Semantic externalism
Semantic holism
Structuralism
Supposition theory
Symbiosism
Theological noncognitivism
Theory of descriptions
Verification theory
Concepts
Ambiguity
Linguistic relativity
Meaning
Language
Truth-bearer
Proposition
Use–mention distinction
Concept
Categories
Set
Class
Intension
Logical form
Metalanguage
Mental representation
Principle of compositionality
Property
Sign
Sense and reference
Speech act
Symbol
Entity
Sentence
Statement
more...
Related articles
Analytic philosophy
Philosophy of information
Philosophical logic
Linguistics
Pragmatics
Rhetoric
Semantics
Formal semantics
Semiotics
Category
Task Force
Discussion
Authority control
GND: 4128116-0
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Linguistic_relativity&oldid=804037415"
Categories:
Psycholinguistics
Relativism
Arguments in philosophy of mind
Hypotheses
Anthropological linguistics
Linguistic universals
Language comparison
Linguistic hypotheses
Cognition
Hidden categories:
Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL
CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown
Wikipedia articles needing clarification from May 2017
All articles with unsourced statements
Articles with unsourced statements from May 2017
Articles with unsourced statements from December 2016
CS1 maint: Uses editors parameter
CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list
CS1 maint: Extra text: editors list
CS1 maint: Extra text: authors list
NPOV disputes from October 2017
All NPOV disputes
Use dmy dates from November 2010
Wikipedia articles with GND identifiers
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
Languages
العربية
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Български
Brezhoneg
Català
Čeština
Cymraeg
Dansk
Deutsch
Eesti
Ελληνικά
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
한국어
Ido
Bahasa Indonesia
Interlingua
Íslenska
Italiano
עברית
ಕನ್ನಡ
ქართული
Қазақша
Latviešu
Magyar
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk
Norsk nynorsk
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Seeltersk
Simple English
Slovenčina
Slovenščina
Српски / srpski
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
Tiếng Việt
中文
Edit links
This page was last edited on 6 October 2017, at 09:13.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

attrs: id class style

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

value: p

value: sup

values:
/wiki/Color_perception
mw-redirect
Color perception

values:
/wiki/Gorgias_of_Leontini
mw-redirect
Gorgias of Leontini

values:
/wiki/St._Augustine
mw-redirect
St. Augustine

values: Edit section: German Romantic philosophers

values:
/wiki/Stephen_C._Levinson
mw-redirect
Stephen C. Levinson

values:
/wiki/Alfred_M._Tozzer
mw-redirect
Alfred M. Tozzer

attrs: alt src width height class data-file-width data-file-height

values:
/wiki/John_A_Lucy
mw-redirect
John A Lucy

values: Distinguishing blue from green in language

values: Universalism and relativism of color terminology

values:
/wiki/Universal_Grammar
mw-redirect
Universal Grammar

values:
/wiki/Strawman_fallacy
mw-redirect
Strawman fallacy

values: Edit section: Joshua Fishman's "Whorfianism of the third kind"

values:
/wiki/Joshua_Aaron_Fishman
mw-redirect
Joshua Aaron Fishman

values: Edit section: Rethinking Linguistic Relativity

values:
/wiki/Brain_lateralization
mw-redirect
Brain lateralization

values:
/wiki/Yucatec_Maya
mw-redirect
Yucatec Maya

values:
/wiki/Case_(linguistics)
mw-redirect
Case (linguistics)

values:
/wiki/Amazon_Basin
mw-redirect
Amazon Basin

values: Linguistic relativity and the color naming debate

values:
noprint Inline-Template
margin-left:0.1em; white-space:nowrap;

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (May 2017)

values:
noprint Inline-Template Template-Fact
white-space:nowrap;

values: what is the relevance of this in the local context? Is this a true dichotomy? (May 2017)

values: Edit section: Therapy and self-development

values:
/wiki/Neurolinguistic_Programming
mw-redirect
Neurolinguistic Programming

values:
/wiki/General_Semantics
mw-redirect
General Semantics

values:
/wiki/Neurolinguistic_programming
mw-redirect
Neurolinguistic programming

values:
/wiki/Constructed_languages
mw-redirect
Constructed languages

values:
/wiki/Experimental_languages
mw-redirect
Experimental languages

values:
/wiki/1984_(book)
mw-redirect
1984 (book)

values: This claim needs references to reliable sources. (December 2016)

values:
/wiki/Turing_award
mw-redirect
Turing award

values:
/wiki/Blub_paradox
mw-redirect
Blub paradox

values:
/wiki/Open_source
mw-redirect
Open source

values: Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/409588

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F409588

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.pnas.org/content/103/2/489

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/issn/0027-8424

values:
/wiki/PubMed_Identifier
mw-redirect
PubMed Identifier

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16387848

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.0509868103

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/issn/0893-6080

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/issn/0925-8558

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1023%2FA%3A1008356620617

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/issn/1367-0069

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1086%2F431525

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18547557

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1353%2Flan.0.0107

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1525%2Fjlin.2000.10.1.3

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/issn/0011-3204

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1086%2F204049

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.5840%2Fcpsem19828

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1145%2F358896.358899

values: Category:CS1 maint: BOT: original-url status unknown

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1017%2FS136672890800388X

values: Category:CS1 maint: Uses editors parameter

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1037%2Fh0057814

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17213312

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1073%2Fpnas.0610132104

values: Category:CS1 maint: Multiple names: authors list

values: Category:CS1 maint: Extra text: editors list

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17628656

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1016%2Fj.bandl.2007.06.001

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/409956

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F409956

values: Category:CS1 maint: Extra text: authors list

values:
/wiki/Geoffrey_Pullum
mw-redirect
Geoffrey Pullum

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-POV

values:
nofollow
external text
http://lera.ucsd.edu/papers/gender.pdf

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.3389%2Ffpsyg.2010.00244

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/412789

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2307%2F412789

values:
/wiki/G._E._M._Anscombe
mw-redirect
G. E. M. Anscombe

values:
/wiki/Contrast_theory_of_meaning
mw-redirect
Contrast theory of meaning

values:
/wiki/Verification_theory
mw-redirect
Verification theory

values: Index of philosophy of language articles

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible collapsed navbox-inner

values:
nofollow
external text
http://d-nb.info/gnd/4128116-0

values: Category:Arguments in philosophy of mind

values: Category:Pages using citations with accessdate and no URL

values: Category:Wikipedia articles needing clarification from May 2017

values: Category:All articles with unsourced statements

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from May 2017

values: Category:Articles with unsourced statements from December 2016

values: Category:NPOV disputes from October 2017

values: Category:Use dmy dates from November 2010

values: Category:Wikipedia articles with GND identifiers

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Linguistic_relativity
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: List of all English Wikipedia pages containing links to this page [ctrl-alt-j]

values: Recent changes in pages linked from this page [ctrl-alt-k]

values:
/wiki/Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard
Upload files [ctrl-alt-u]
u

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values:
uls-settings-trigger
Language settings
0
button
true

values: نسبية لغوية – Arabic

values: Гіпотэза Сэпіра-Ўорфа – Belarusian (Taraškievica orthography)

values: Хипотеза на Сапир — Уорф – Bulgarian

values: Γλωσσική σχετικότητα – Greek

values: فرضیه ساپیر-وورف – Persian

values: 사피어-워프 가설 – Korean

values: היפותזת ספיר-וורף – Hebrew

values: ಭಾಷಿಕ ಸಾಪೇಕ್ಷತೆ – Kannada

values: სეპირ-უორფის ჰიპოთეზა – Georgian

values: Сепир — Уорф болжамы – Kazakh

values: Lingvistiskās relativitātes teorija – Latvian

values: サピア＝ウォーフの仮説 – Japanese

values: Sapir-Whorf-hypotesen – Norwegian Nynorsk

values: Гипотеза лингвистической относительности – Russian

values: Sapir-Whorf Hypothese – Saterland Frisian

values: Сапир—Ворфова хипотеза – Serbian

values: Гіпотеза Сепіра — Ворфа – Ukrainian

values: 薩丕爾-沃夫假說 – Chinese

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Linguistic_relativity rootpage-Linguistic_relativity vector-nav-directionality skin-vector action-view


text:
Rolls-Royce Wraith (2013)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
This article is about the 2013 car model. For the 1938 model, see Rolls-Royce Wraith (1938). For models named "Silver Wraith", see Rolls-Royce Wraith.
Rolls-Royce Wraith
Overview
Manufacturer
Rolls-Royce Motor Cars
Production
2013–present
Model years
2014–present
Assembly
United Kingdom: Goodwood, England (Goodwood manufacturing)
Designer
Pavle Trpinac
Body and chassis
Class
Grand tourer (F)
Body style
2-door coupé
Layout
FR layout
Platform
BMW F01
Related
Rolls-Royce Dawn
Rolls-Royce Ghost
BMW 7 Series (F01)
Powertrain
Engine
6,592 cc (402.3 cu in) BMW N74 twin-turbo V12[1]
Transmission
ZF 8HP transmission 8-speed automatic[1]
Dimensions
Wheelbase
3,112 mm (122.5 in)
Length
5,268 mm (207.4 in)
Width
1,948 mm (76.7 in)
Kerb weight
2,440 kg (5,379.3 lb)
The Rolls-Royce Wraith is a British handmade 4 seat luxury grand tourer manufactured by Rolls-Royce Motor Cars and based on the chassis of the Rolls-Royce Ghost.
The name Wraith comes from an old Scottish word meaning image of a ghost or spirit, a name it shares with the 1938 model by the original Rolls Royce company.
Contents
[hide]
1 Initial release
1.1 Wraith (2013–)
1.2 Wraith Suhail Collection (2014–)
1.3 Wraith 'Inspired By Film' (2015)
1.4 Wraith 'Inspired By Fashion' (2015–)
1.5 Wraith 'Inspired By Music' (2015)
1.6 Wraith – History of Rugby (2015)
1.7 Rolls-Royce Enthusiasts' Club Wraith (2015)
1.8 Wraith Black Badge (2016–)
1.9 Wraith Porto Cervo (2016)
1.10 Engines
1.11 Transmissions
1.12 Marketing
2 See also
3 References
4 External links
Initial release[edit]
Wraith (2013–)[edit]
Interior
Rolls-Royce Wraith coupe
The vehicle was announced in January 2013[2] and unveiled at the 2013 Geneva Motor Show.[3][4][5][6] Deliveries began from the fourth quarter of 2013.
Wraith Suhail Collection (2014–)[edit]
It is a version of Wraith with moonstone pearl body colour, Suhail star emblem at Turchese Blue coachline, Crem é Light leather upholstery with Turchese accents, a Navy Blue instrument panel top and carpets, Suhail star emblems at the marquetry on the Ash Burr wood fascia, a Starlight Headliner, Bespoke clock colour-matched to the interior depicts the Suhail Ursa Minor and Major constellation on the clock face.[7]
Wraith 'Inspired By Film' (2015)[edit]
Wraith 'Inspired By Film' (魅影"鎏金岁月"特别版车型) is the 1st Wraith 'Inspired by ...' car with Silver and Jubilee Silver body colours, solid-silver hand-cast Spirit of Ecstasy ornament, Anthracite leather interior accented with Casden Tan.
The vehicle was unveiled in 2015 New York Auto Show,[8][9] followed by 2015 Shanghai motor Show,[10] 2015 Pebble Beach Concours d'Elegance.[11]
Wraith 'Inspired By Fashion' (2015–)[edit]
It is the second Wraith 'Inspired by ...' car with Andalusian White and Arctic White body colours, a choice of Jasmine, Tailored Purple or Mugello Red accent colours; Arctic White and Black interior color scheme, two-tone steering wheel, lining of the front and rear door pockets with fine silk upholstery and Spirit of Ecstasy, colourful welting on the door panel, lacquered wood dashboard.
The vehicle was unveiled in New York's PRATT Institute,[12] followed by 2015 Pebble Beach Concours d'Elegance.[11]
Wraith 'Inspired By Music' (2015)[edit]
It is the Third Wraith 'Inspired by ...' car with Lyrical Copper body colour, contemporary copper theme in the interior cabin, book-matched copper finish at fascia and the clock's radial lines on the outer bezel, 1300W 18-channel Bespoke Audio system. [13]
The vehicle was unveiled in 2015 Pebble Beach Concours d'Elegance,[11] followed by Auto China 2016.[14]
Wraith – History of Rugby (2015)[edit]
It is a version of Wraith with English White body colour, deep green coachline with an English rose motif in red, 21-inch five twin-spoke alloy wheels, headrest with an embroidered red rose, Hotspur Red dashboard accent panel, Hotspur Red seat and door piping, Piano Black veneer at dashboard and centre panel, centre panel with English rose inlay, Seashell interior colour contrasted with Navy Blue.[15]
Rolls-Royce Enthusiasts' Club Wraith (2015)[edit]
It is a version of Wraith with Midnight Sapphire and Silver body colours, Navy Blue interior colour, contrasting Arctic leather upholstery, Macassar Ebony veneer, a Starlight Headliner, an uplit Spirit of Ecstasy, night-vision, parking cameras, Satellite Aided Transmission.
The vehicle was unveiled in 2015 Lancaster Insurance Classic Motor Show.[16]
Wraith Black Badge (2016–)[edit]
It is a version of Wraith with Spirit of Ecstasy in high-gloss black vamp, Double R badges inverted to become silver on black and black starlight headliner, darkened chrome trims (front grille surround, boot lid finisher, lower air inlet finisher and exhaust pipes), 'Unlimited' infinity logo embroidered on the upholstery, 21-inch Carbon Alloy Composite Wheels, increased engine torque to 870 N·m (642 lb·ft)@1700–4500 rpm, tweaked air suspension and upgraded gearbox, Black Badge Black body colour, interior in Black and Mugello Red contrast leather, facia in aluminium-threaded carbon fibre composite surfacing.
The vehicle was unveiled in 2016 Goodwood Festival of Speed.[17]
Wraith Porto Cervo (2016)[edit]
It is a version of Wraith with two-tone silver exterior, Spirit of Ecstasy ornament with soft illumination, blue, purple, slate and black interior; ostrich leather upholstery.
The vehicle was unveiled in Rolls-Royce Summer Studio in Sardinia.[18]
Engines[edit]
Petrol engines[19][20]
[hide]Model
Years
Type/code
Power/rpm, Torque/rpm
Wraith 2013– 6,592 cc (402.3 cu in) V12 twin turbo (N74B66) 632 PS (465 kW; 623 hp)@5600, 800 N·m (590 lb·ft)@1500–5500
Wraith Black Badge 2016– 6,592 cc (402.3 cu in) V12 twin turbo (N74B66TÜ?) 632 PS (465 kW; 623 hp)@5600, 870 N·m (642 lb·ft)@1700–4500
Transmissions[edit]
Petrol engines
[hide]Model
Years
Type/code
Wraith 2013– 8-speed automatic (ZF 8HP90)
Wraith Black Badge 2016– 8-speed automatic (ZF 8HP95)
Marketing[edit]
Wraith Luggage Collection, conceived by Rolls-Royce Bespoke Designer Michael Bryden and designed in the Rolls-Royce Bespoke Design Studio led by Director of Design Giles Taylor, went on sale as of 2016 at Rolls-Royce Dealerships.[21][22][23]
See also[edit]
Rolls-Royce Ghost
BMW 7 Series (F01)
References[edit]
^ Jump up to: a b "Rolls Royce Wraith 2013". Auto evolution.
Jump up ^ "Rolls-Royce Wraith" (Press release). Rolls-Royce Motor Cars. 2013-01-18. Retrieved 2013-03-05.
Jump up ^ Lienert, Anita (2013-01-18). "2014 Rolls-Royce Wraith Set for 2013 Geneva Auto Show". Edmunds.com. Retrieved 2013-03-05.
Jump up ^ "Most Dynamic and Powerful Rolls-Royce in History Set for Debut at Geneva Motor Show" (Press release). Rolls‐Royce. 2013-01-18. Retrieved 2013-03-05.
Jump up ^ "2014 Rolls-Royce Wraith is everything you need, everything you don't", Auto blog, 6 March 2013
Jump up ^ Rolls-Royce Wraith Price, Rolls-Royce Motor Cars London, H.R. Owen, 2013-03-21, retrieved 2015-04-17
Jump up ^ ROLLS-ROYCE MOTOR CARS REVIEWS A YEAR OF BEAUTIFUL BESPOKE CARS AS IT UNVEILS THE SUHAIL COLLECTION
Jump up ^ Rolls-Royce Wraith ‘Inspired by Film’: a Rolls for the red carpet
Jump up ^ ROLLS-ROYCE WRAITH ‘INSPIRED BY FILM’ DEBUTS AS LAUNCH FILM IS ACCEPTED INTO BFI NATIONAL ARCHIVE
Jump up ^ 劳斯莱斯汽车全球及亚洲首发两款高级定制车型 惊艳亮相2015上海国际车展
^ Jump up to: a b c ROLLS-ROYCE MOTOR CARS HIGHLIGHTS BESPOKE COLOR AND INSPIRED WRAITH AT PEBBLE BEACH
Jump up ^ Rolls-Royce Wraith – Inspired by Fashion Is For Lovers Of Haute Couture
Jump up ^ ROLLS-ROYCE WRAITH ‘INSPIRED BY MUSIC’
Jump up ^ THREE DEBUTS FOR ROLLS-ROYCE MOTOR CARS AT AUTO CHINA 2016
Jump up ^ ROLLS-ROYCE MOTOR CARS UNVEILS BESPOKE ‘WRAITH' – HISTORY OF RUGBY’
Jump up ^ ROLLS-ROYCE WRAITH CELEBRATED AS A FUTURE CLASSIC AT THE NEC CLASSIC CAR SHOW
Jump up ^ ROLLS-ROYCE CELEBRATES 2016 GOODWOOD FESTIVAL OF SPEED WITH A DARK AND EDGY PRESENCE
Jump up ^ ROLLS-ROYCE UNVEILS EMERALD EMBELLISHED DAWN AND WRAITH INSPIRED BY PORTO CERVO
Jump up ^ Wraith Technical specification (PDF), Rolls Royce motor cars .
Jump up ^ Wraith Black Badge Technical specification (PDF), Rolls Royce motor cars .
Jump up ^ AN ELEGANT WRAITH LUGGAGE COLLECTION DEMONSTRATES THE ART OF TRUE LUXURY CONVEYANCE
Jump up ^ Wraith Luggage
Jump up ^ Rolls-Royce Wraith Luggage Collection costs more than a BMW 3 Series
External links[edit]
Wraith, Rolls-Royce .
Wraith (press kit), Rolls‐Royce .
[show]
v
t
e
Rolls-Royce Motor Cars timeline
Type 1900s 1910s 1920s 1930s 1940s 1950s 1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s 2010s
Ownership Independent Vickers plc VW Group BMW
Luxury car 10 hp
15 hp V-8
20 hp Twenty 20/25 25/30 Wraith WWII Silver Dawn Silver Cloud Silver Shadow Silver Spirit/Dawn Silver Seraph Ghost
Ultra-luxury car 30 hp 40/50 hp (Silver Ghost) Phantom I/II/III Silver Wraith Silver Wraith II Silver Spur Ghost Extended Wheelbase
Phantom IV Phantom V/VI Touring Limousine Park Ward Phantom
Convertible Corniche/II/III/IV Corniche V Phantom Drophead
Coupé Camargue Silver Spirit Hooper 2 Door Phantom Coupé
Wraith
[show]
v
t
e
Rolls-Royce Motors (1973–2003)
Rolls-Royce Motor Cars (2003–present)
A subsidiary of BMW AG
Current models
Cars
Dawn
Ghost
Ghost EWB
Phantom VIII
Wraith
Future
Cullinan
Historic models
Camargue
Corniche
Phantom VI
Phantom VII
Phantom Coupé
Phantom Drophead Coupé
Phantom EWB
Silver Seraph
Silver Shadow
Silver Spirit
Concepts/Prototypes
100EX
101EX
102EX
200EX
Ghost
Hyperion
Mini
Mulliner Silver Dawn Drophead Coupé
Category
Commons
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rolls-Royce_Wraith_(2013)&oldid=797272924"
Categories:
Rolls-Royce Motor Cars vehicles
Cars introduced in 2013
2010s automobiles
Luxury vehicles
Coupés
Hidden categories:
Use dmy dates from August 2017
Use British English from August 2017
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
العربية
Deutsch
فارسی
Français
Italiano
עברית
日本語
Русский
Slovenčina
Suomi
Svenska
Türkçe
Українська
Edit links
This page was last edited on 26 August 2017, at 00:29.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view

key: html

type: local

value: div

attrs: id class

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

value: a

attrs: id class lang

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

values: jump-to-nav mw-jump

attrs: href title

attrs: href class title

attrs: role class

values:
note
hatnote navigation-not-searchable

value: th

attrs: colspan class style

value: tr

value: img

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: 2014 Rolls-Royce Wraith (MY14) coupe (2015-07-25) 01.jpg

attrs: href class

value: td

attrs: colspan style

values:
/wiki/Automobile_platform
mw-redirect
Automobile platform

values:
/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Dawn
mw-redirect
Rolls-Royce Dawn

attrs: alt src width height class srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: Edit section: Wraith Suhail Collection (2014–)

values: Edit section: Wraith 'Inspired By Film' (2015)

values: Edit section: Wraith 'Inspired By Fashion' (2015–)

values: Edit section: Wraith 'Inspired By Music' (2015)

values: Edit section: Wraith – History of Rugby (2015)

values: Edit section: Rolls-Royce Enthusiasts' Club Wraith (2015)

values: Edit section: Wraith Black Badge (2016–)

values:
headerSort
0
columnheader button
Sort ascending

values: wikitable sortable collapsible jquery-tablesorter

values: -moz-column-width: 32em; -webkit-column-width: 32em; column-width: 32em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
plainlinks hlist navbar mini
float:left; text-align:left

values: display: none; background-color: rgb(240, 240, 240);

values: display: none; background-color: rgb(224, 224, 224);

values:
/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Silver_Wraith_II
mw-redirect
Rolls-Royce Silver Wraith II

values:
/wiki/Convertible_(car)
mw-redirect
Convertible (car)

values:
/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Phantom_(2017)
mw-redirect
Rolls-Royce Phantom (2017)

values:
/wiki/Rolls-Royce_101EX
mw-redirect
Rolls-Royce 101EX

values:
/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Hyperion
mw-redirect
Rolls-Royce Hyperion

values: Rolls-Royce Mulliner Silver Dawn Drophead Coupé (page does not exist)

attrs: alt src title width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible autocollapse navbox-inner

values: Category:Rolls-Royce Motor Cars vehicles

values: Category:Use British English from August 2017

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Rolls-Royce_Wraith_(2013)
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: p-views navigation vectorTabs p-views-label

values:
p-cactions
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-cactions-label

values:
mw-wiki-logo
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page

values:
/wiki/Main_Page
Visit the main page [ctrl-alt-z]
z

values: Featured content – the best of Wikipedia

values: Find background information on current events

values:
/wiki/Special:Random
Load a random article [ctrl-alt-x]
x

values: portal navigation p-navigation p-navigation-label

values: Guidance on how to use and edit Wikipedia

values: About the project, what you can do, where to find things

values: A list of recent changes in the wiki [ctrl-alt-r]

values: portal navigation p-interaction p-interaction-label

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values: رولزرويس رايث 2013 – Arabic

values: رولزرویس ریس – Persian

values: רולס-רויס ריית (2013) – Hebrew

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Rolls-Royce_Wraith_2013 rootpage-Rolls-Royce_Wraith_2013 skin-vector action-view