---
# Tenseless Languages
Many languages lack obligatory tense-marking, e.g. Mandarin Chinese, Hopi, Hawaiian.
Among languages with tense-marking, there's some variation:
- "It will rain tomorrow" in English, French, etc.
- "It rains tomorrow" in German, Finnish, etc.
--
Chen (2013) reports a correlation: speakers of languages that grammatically mark future take fewer future-orieted behaviors (e.g. saving, exercising, non-smoking, condom use, retirement savings, long-run health).
---
# Chen's (2013): National Savings Rates
---
# Other Observations
After controlling for country, sex, age, income-level, education, marital status, religion, etc. the following effects for speakers of future-less languages:
- 30% more likely to save
- retire with 25% more in savings
- 20-24% less likely to smoke
- 13-17% less likely to be obese
- 21% more likely to use condoms
Mavisakalyan et al. (2018) find that speakers of future-marking languages are less likely to behave pro-environmentally.
---
# Correlation from Causation?
To explain these observations, Chen claims that the future feels more distant for speakers of future-marking languages.
--
But we should be careful about inferring causation from correlation.
- Why verbal marking? Perhaps all languages studied by Chen have adverbials that signal future, e.g. "tomorrow".
- What about past tense?
Also, detailed linguistic analyses are necessary, e.g. Japanese is classified as a future-less language, but it obligatorily marks the present with the progressive (as in English). So the present and future form of eventive verbs are distinguished.
---
---
# Spatial Metaphor for Time
Frames of reference for spatial configurations
: 'north', 'south', 'east', 'west', 'uphill', 'downhill'
Speakers of Tzeltal, Kuuk Thaayorre, etc. primarily use absolute expressions.
--
It is common to use spatial concepts to describe time
- In English, the future is front, the past is behind
- In Aymara, the future is behind, the past is front
- In Yupno, the future is uphill, the past is downhill
---
# Boroditsky & Gaby (2010)
American English and Kuuk Thayorre speakers were asked to arrange images of the same man taken at different times.
- English speakers always showed L-to-R progression
- Kuuk Thayorre speakers often used East-to-West order
---
# Other Results
- A task similar to Boroditsky & Gaby (2010) shows that speakers of Kawahib do not represent time linearly or cyclically (Sinha et al. 2011).
- In Miles, et al.'s (2010) experiment, Englsh speakers were blindfolded and asked to imagine the typical day 4 years ago, or 4 years later. When imagining past, participants swayed backward, when imagining future, they swayed forward (by about 2 mm).
---
Number
---
# Approximate vs. Exact Number Systems

Some animals (from chimps, dogs, horses, crows, to toads, guppies, spiders, bees, etc.) and pre-linguistic infants are known to be able to compare 'approximate quantities' (
Analog Magnitude Estimation).
But their ability to deal with exact numbers is limited to small quantities (1-4ish).
(Dehaene 1997, Gallistel & Gelman 1999, Xu & Spelke 2000, Feigenson et al. 2004, Carey 2009, Agrillo et al. 2012)
---
# Pirahã
Pirahã has no singular vs. plural and very few number words
(Everett 2005, Gordon 2004, Frank et al. 2008)
According to Gordon and Frank et al., it has three major quantity words, and none of them have exact meanings.
-
hói (roughly one)

-
hoí (roughly two)
-
baagiso/aibaagi (many)
Gordon suggests that Pirahã speakers represent approximate quantities, but not exact quantities.
---
# Frank et al. (2008): Experiment 1
Presented spools of threads and asked 'How much/many is this?' in Parahã for each quantity.

---
# Frank et al. (2008): Experiment 2
Non-verbal task: Presented spools of threads and asked to give the same number of balloons.

The near perfect performance demonstrates that Pirahã speakers can represent exact quantities.
---
# Frank et al. (2008): Experiment 2 (cont.)

When memory is involved, performance gets worse.
Frank et al. suggest that exact number words help speakers remember and compare exact quantities.
Frank et al. (2012) report similar results in English.
---
# Classifier Languages
Classifier languages, e.g. Mandarin Chinese, Vietnamese, Korean, Japanese, Yucatec Mayan:
- No (obligatory) number marking on nouns
- Obligatory use of classifiers with numerals
yì/sān | *(zhī) | māo |
one/three | *(CL) | cat |
(Mandarin Chinese)
|
Classifiers often encode shape and other information, e.g.
-rin in Japanese is used for flowers,
-mai for flat objects.
Some linguists claim that all nouns in classifier are mass nouns, cf. "two
sheets of paper", "two
pints of beer", "two
pieces of furniture".
---
# Linguistic Determinism and Mass/Count
Lucy (2004): Nouns in classifier languages are "semantically unspecified as to quantificational unit — almost as if they referred to un-formed substances."
Quine (1960): to learn how to classify objects into discrete entities and non-discrete substances, one needs to acquire the linguistic mass/count distinction.
--
But there's evidence that pre-linguitsic infants distinguish discrete vs. non-discrete entities
(Ballargeon et al. 1985, Soja et al. 1991, Wynn 1992, Spelke et al. 1995, Xu & Carey 1996, Feigenson et al. 2009).
Does language still have effects on perception of objects?
(Lucy 1992a,b, Imai & Gentner 1997, Lucy & Gaskins 2001, Lucy 2004, Imai & Mazuka 2007)
More on this in PLIN0001.
---
class: center, middle
Summary
---
# Concluding Remarks
Some effects of language on memory, perception, and cultural association.
But no strong effects of language on thought.
--
As a linguist, and as a consumer of media, a few things to keep an eye on when evaluating Linguistic Relativity.
-
Linguitsic analysis: Are the linguistic anlaysis and assumptions reasonable?
-
Causation: How do we know that language is causing thought, rather than reflecting thought/culture?
Suggested reading: Casasanto, Daniel (2015) Linguistic relativity. In Nick Riemer (ed.),
The Routledge Handbook of Semantics. pp. 158-174.
---

---
References
Baillargeon, Spelke & Wasserman (1985) Object permanence in five-month-old infants. Cognition, 20
Agrillo, Piffer, Biasazza & Butterworth (2012) Evidence for two numerical systems that are similar in humans and guppies. PLoS ONE, 7.
Berlin & Kay (1969) Basic Color Terms: Their Universality and Evolution.
Boroditsky & Gaby (2010) Remembrances of times East: absolute spatial representations of time in an Australian Aboriginal community. Psychological Science, 21.
Boroditsky, Schmidt & Phillips (2003) Sex, syntax, and semantics. In Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought.
Brown & Lennenberg (1954) A study in language and cognition". Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology. 49
Carey (2009) The Origin of Concepts. Oxford University Press.
Chen (2013) The effect of language on economic behavior: evidence from savings rates, health behaviors, and retirement assets. The American Economic Review, 103.
Davidoff, Davies & Roberson (1999) Is color categorisation universal? New evidence from a stone-age culture. Nature, 398.
Dehaene (1997) The Number Sense. Oxford University Press.
Everett (2005) Cultural constraints on grammar and cognition in Pirahã. Current Anthropology, 46.
Everett (2013) Linguistic Relativity: Evidence Across Languages and Cognitive Domains. de Gruyter.
Feigenson, Dehaene & Spelke (2004) Core systems of number. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8.
Frank, Everett, Fedorenko & Gibson (2008) Number as a cognitive technology: evidence from Pirahã language and cognition. Cognition, 108.
Frank, Everett, Fedorenko & Gibson (2012) Verbal interference suppresses exact numerical representation. Cognitive Psychology, 64.
Gallistel & Gelman (1999) Non-verbal counting in humans: the psychophysics of number representation. Psychological Science, 10.
Gordon (2004) Numerical cognition without words: Evidence from Amazonia. Science, 306.
Imai & Gentner (1997) A cross-linguistic study of early word meaning: universal ontology and linguistic influence. Cognition, 62.
---
References
Imai & Mazuka (2007) Language-relative construal of individuation constrained by universal ontology: Revisiting language universals and linguistic relativity. Cognitive Science, 31.
Kay & Regier (2006) Language, thought, and color: Recent developments. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10.
Lakoff & Johnson (2003) Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.
Levinson & Wilkins (2006) Patterns in the data: towards a semantic typology of spatial description. In Grammars of Space: Explorations in Cognitive Diversity.
Lucy (1992a) Grammatical Categories and Cognition: A Case Study of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis. Cambridge University Press.
Lucy (1992b) Language Diversity and Thought: A Reformulation of the Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis. Cambridge University Press.
Lucy (2004) Language, culture, and mind in comparative perspective. In Language, Culture, and Mind.
Lucy & Gaskins (2001) Grammatical categories and the development of classification pref- erences: a comparative approach. In Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development.
Mavisakalyan, Tarverdi & Weber (2018) Talking in the present, caring for the future: language and environment. Journal of Comparative Economics.
Malotki (1983) Hopi time: a linguistic analysis of the temporal concepts in the Hopi language. In Trends in Linguistics.
Miles, Nind & Macrae (2010) Moving through time. Psychological Science, 21.
Pullum (1991) The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax and Other Irreverent Essays on the Study of Language. Chicago University Press.
Quine (1960) Word and Object. MIT Press.
Reiger & Kay (2009) Language, thought, and color: Whorf was half right. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13.
Roberson, Davies & Davidoff (2000) Color categories are not universal. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 129.
Rosch Heider & Olivier (1972) The structure of the color space in naming and memory for two languages. Cognitive Psychology, 3.
---
References
Sinha, da Silva Sinha, Zinken & Sampaio (2011) When time is not space: the social and linguistic construction of time intervals and temporal event relations in an Amazonian culture. Language and Cognition, 3.
Soja, Carey & Spelke (1991) Ontological categories guide young children’s inductions of word meaning: Object terms and substance terms. Cognition, 38.
Spelke, Kestenbaum, Simons & Wein (1995) Spatiotemporal continuity,smoothness of motion and object identity in infancy. Developmental Psychology, 13.
Winawer, Witthoft, Frank, Wu, Wade & Boroditsky (2007) Russian blues reveal effects of language on color discrimination. PNAS, 104.
Wynn, Karen (1992) Children’s acquisition of the number words and the counting system. Cognitive Psychology, 24.
Xu & Spelke (2000) Large number discrimination in 6-month-old infants. Cognition, 74.