The idea that different languages of certain sorts somehow represent, or reflect, or embody, different ways of experiencing, perceiving, or thinking about the world, or different ways of ‘ordering’ the ‘data’ of experience — let us say different ‘conceptual schemes’ — is an intriguing one. Benjamin Whorf is perhaps its most notable exponent;1 indeed it is sometimes referred to as the ‘Whorf hypothesis.’ But its roots go back at least to Kant, and it has been echoed in various forms by a diverse collection of psychologists, linguists, anthropologists, and philosophers.
KeywordsConceptual Scheme Simple Property Family Resemblance Natural Classis Secondary Characteristic
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Black, M., 1962, ’Linguistic Relativity: The Views of Benjamin Lee Whorf’, in Models and Metaphors, Ithaca, N. Y.Google Scholar
- Brown, R., 1958, Words and Things, The Free Press, Glencoe, Ill.Google Scholar
- Cohen, L. J., 1962, The Diversity of Meaning, London.Google Scholar
- Goodman, N., 1965, Fact, Fiction, and Forecast (2nd ed.), Indianapolis.Google Scholar
- Hoijer, H., 1954, ‘The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis’, in Language in Culture (ed. by H. Hoijer ), Chicago.Google Scholar
- Lenenberg, E. and Roberts, J., 1956 International Journal of American Linguistics, Memoir 13, pp. 25–30Google Scholar
- Quine, W. V. O., 1960, Word and Object, Cambridge.Google Scholar
- Whorf, B., 1956, Language, Thought and Reality (ed. by J. B. Carroll ), Cambridge.Google Scholar