Reference no: EM133279405
Question: Author T. Jewis (1996) tells the story of how linguistic relativity "works." He was interested in why the Zulu language has that amount of words for "green," whereas English has only one. So he asked a Zulu chief. The Zulu chief explained that prior to national highways the Zulu had to make long treks across the savannah grasslands. Because there were no signposts or maps, the lengthy journeys had to be described by those who had traveled the road before. The language changed to accommodate the need for "finely wrought, beautiful logical descriptions of nature, causation, repetition, duration, and results" (p. 16). Lewis describes the conversation:
"But give me some examples of different green-words," I persisted.
My friend picked up a leaf. "What color is this?" he asked.
"Green," I replied.
The sun was shining. He waited until a cloud intervened. "What color is the leaf now?" he asked.
"Green," I answered, already sensing my inadequacy.
"It isn't the same green, is it?"
"No, it isn't."
"We have a different word in Zulu." He dipped the leaf in water and held it out again. "Has the color changed?"
"Yes."
"In Zulu we have a word for 'green shining wet.'"
The sun came out again and I needed another word (leaf-green-wet-but-with-sunshine-on-it!).
My friend retreated 20 meters and showed me the leaf. "Has the color changed again?"
"Yes," I screamed.
"We have another word," he said with a smile.
He went on to indicate how different Zulu greens would deal with tree leaves, bush leaves, leaves vibrating in the wind, river greens, pool greens, tree trunk greens, crocodile greens--he got to 39 without even raising a sweat, (p. 160)
Summarizes the Sapir Whorf Hypothesis.
Describe to the firmer and softer versions of the theory.
Relate this story to what the text says about Variation in Vocabulary.