Linguistic relativity: The empirical evidence, the theoretical arguments, and the philosophical underpinnings

Abstract

There are few today who still adhere to the strong form of the hypothesis, for the very possibility of translation from one language to the next seems to refute it. Even if American A doesn't have a one word translation for Hopi word x, the fact that he can still articulate the ideas expressed by that Hopi word would seem to invalidate the strong claim. However, the second, weaker form of the argument is the real basis of this paper. This argument is still debated, and it is the intention of this paper to address four questions about this hypothesis - (1) How did it develop from Whorfs works? (2) What empirical evidence is there to support it and to refute it? (3) What theoretical arguments are there concerning it? (4) What are some of the necessary philosophical assumptions that must be in place to maintain this argument? (from Conclusion)