The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis is the combination of both linguistic determenism and linguistic relativism.

Linguistic determinism has to do with language constraining our thought, and it comes in two strengths:

• hard linguistic determinism – language determines our thought; if we don’t have a word for a concept we can’t imagine that concept [see Newspeak from George Orwell's classic novel Nineteen Eighty-Four]
• soft linguistic determinism – language merely influences our thought [see the American concept Political Correctness]

Linguistic relativism says “distinction encoded in one language are unique to that language alone”; that perfect translation of concepts between languages is impossible.

Personal observation: in my Metaphysics Philosophy class we were told propositions [sentences which are either true or false] are distinct entities from language. That they are called ‘abstracta’ by Alvin Plantinga. They exist in some netherland, and they are perfectly translatable. My hypothesis is linguistic relativism is incompatible with Plantinga’s position.

This entire post, except my observation on propositions, is a collection of notes from this website on The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.

Technorati Tags: linguistics, language, sapir-whorf, propositions, philosophy, abstracta, plantinga