The Problem of Sociocultural Determination of Thought: a Battleground Between Chomsky's Universal Grammar and Linguistic Relativism?

Annotation

The study of the problem of sociocultural determination of thinking aims to elucidate the mechanisms through which the surrounding material and spiritual environment influences the formation of cognitive processes. Establised theoretical approaches to researching sociocultural impact reveal an antinomy between the autonomous cognitive activity of the individual and their embeddedness in social structures, which is clearly conceptualized in the distinction between individual and collective mind. Language, as an institutionalized practice, acts as a key mediator of sociocultural interactions, influencing the functioning of thought. The article reinterprets the traditional opposition between linguistic relativism and Noam Chomsky's universal grammar, demonstrating their complementarity in studying the problem of sociocultural determination of thinking. It is established that universal grammar and linguistic relativism focus on different aspects of this issue: universal grammar, grounded in the principles of universalism and internalism, examines the impact of the environment on individual ontogenetic development, whereas linguistic relativism analyzes the emergence of culturally conditioned differences.The analysis revealed a divergence in the research foci of the two concepts: universal grammar concentrates on the sociocultural determination of individual cognitive processes, while linguistic relativism specializes in studying collective forms of thinking. Recognizing the complementarity of these concepts deepens the understanding of the relationship between language and thought but simultaneously poses a new methodological challenge: defining strict boundaries between individual and collective thinking within the context of linguistic influence.

Keywords

• the relationship between language and thought
• sociocultural determination of thought
• the linguistic relativity hypothesis
• universal grammar
• Noam Chomsky
• internalism
• linguistic relativism
• culturally conditioned differences
• individual mind
• collective mind
* click on a keyword to go to the search

References

1. Boroday, S. Yu. Yazyk i poznanie: vvedenie v postrelyativizm [Language and Cognition. An Introduction to the Postrelative Theory]. Moscow: YASK; 2020, 800 p.
2. Sepir, E. Bessoznatelnye stereotipy povedeniya v obshchestve [The Unconscious patterning of behavior in society]. Izbrannye trudy po yazykoznaniyu i kulturologii [Selected Works on Linguistics and Cultural Studies]. Moscow: Progress, Univers; 1993, pp. 270–284.
3. Sepir, E. Yazyk [Language]. Izbrannye trudy po yazykoznaniyu i kulturologii [Selected Works on Linguistics and Cultural Studies]. Moscow: Progress, Univers; 1993, pp. 223–247.
4. Whorf, B. L. Nauka i yazykoznanie [Science and linguistics]. Yazyki kak obraz mira. Antologiya [Languages as a worldview. Anthology]. Moscow: AST; 2003, pp. 202–220.
5. Whorf, B. Otnoshenie norm povedeniya i myshleniya k yazyku [The relation of habitual thought and behavior to language]. Yazyki kak obraz mira. Antologiya [Languages as a worldview. Anthology]. Moscow: AST; 2003, pp. 157–202.
6. Сhomsky, N., Bervik R. Chelovek govoryashchij. Evolyuciya i yazyk [Why Only Us. Language and Evolution]. Saint Petersburg: Piteri; 2019, 304 p.
7. Сhomsky, N. O prirode i yazyke. S ocherkom “Sekulyarnoe svyashchenstvo i opasnosti, kotorye tait demokratiya” [On nature and language. With an Essay on “The Secular Priesthood and the Perils of Democracy”]. Moscow: KomKniga; 2005, 288 p.
8. Shestakova, M. A. Individualnoe myshlenie v kontekste principa plyuralizma [Individual Thinking in the Context of Pluralism Principle]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 7 “Filosofiya” [Moscow University Bulletin. Series 7 “Philosophy”]. 2005, no. 4, pp. 3–18.
9. Everett, D. Kak nachinalsya yazyk. Istoriya velichayshego otkrytiya [How language began: the story of humanity's greatest invention]. Moscow: Alpina Didzhital; 2017, 205 p.
10. Everett, D. Ne spi – krugom zmei! Byt i yazyk indejcev amazonskih dzhungley [Don't Sleep, There Are Snakes: Life and Language in the Amazonian Jungle]. Moscow: YASK; 2016, 384 p.
11. Berwick, R. C. Pietroski P. Yankama B. Chomsky N. Poverty of the Stimulus Revisited. Cognitive Science. 2011, vol. 35, iss. 7, pp. 1207–1242, doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01189.x.
12. Chomsky, N. Language from an Internalist Perspective. The future of the cognitive revolution. Ed. by D. Johnson, Ch. Erneling. New York: Oxford University Press; 1997, pp. 118–135.
13. Chomsky, N., Hauser, M. D., Fitch, W. T. The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It, and How Did It Evolve? Science. 2002, vol. 298, iss. 5598, pp. 1569–1579, doi: 10.1126/science.298.5598.1569.
14. Chomsky, N. What kind of creatures are we? (Columbia Themes in Philosophy) Includes bibliographical references and index. Columbia: Columbia University Press E-book; 2016, 140 p.
15. Сhomsky, N. New Horizons in the Study of Language and Mind. New-York: Cambridge University Press; 2000, 230 p.
16. Сhomsky, N. Some simple evo devo theses: how true might they be for language? The evolution of Human Language. Biolinguistic Perspectives. Ed. by R. K. Larson, V. Déprez, H. Yamakido. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2010, pp. 45–62.
17. Everett, D. Language: the cultural tool. Great Britain: CPI Group; 2013, 351 p.
18. Fitch, W., Hauser, M., Chomsky, N. The evolution of the language faculty: Clarifications and implications. Cognition. 2005, vol. 97, iss. 2, pp. 179–210, doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.005.
19. Gallaher, Sh. The socially extended mind. Cognitive systems research. 2013, vol. 25–26, pp. 4–12, doi: 10.1016/j.cogsys.2013.03.008.
20. Gumperz, J. J., Levinson, S. C. Rethinking linguistic relativity. Current Anthropology. 1991, vol. 32 (5), pp. 613–623.
21. Huebner, B., Gallotti, M. Collective intentionality and socially extended minds. Philosophical Psychology. 2017, vol. 3, iss. 3, pp. 251–268, doi: 10.1080/09515089.2017.1295629.
22. Hutchins, E. The cultural ecosystem of human cognition. Philosophical Psychology. 2014, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 34–49, doi: 10.1080/09515089.2013.830548.
23. Langacker, R. Cognitive Grammar: A Basic Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2008, 562 p.
24. Levinson, S. C. From outer to inner space: Linguistic categories and non-linguistic thinking. Language and conceptualization. Ed. by J. Nuyts, E. Pederson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1997, pp. 13–45.
25. Levinson, S. C. Space in language and cognition: explorations in cognitive diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2003, 389 p.
26. Slors, M. A cognitive explanation of the perceived normativity of cultural conventions. Mind & Language. 2019, vol. 36 (1), pp. 62–80, doi: 10.1111/mila.12265.
27. Talmy, L. Toward a Cognitive Semantics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 2000, vol. 1, 495 p.
28. Tomasello, M. Becoming human: a theory of ontogeny. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press; 2019, 379 p.
29. Tomasello, M. Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain sciences. 2005, vol. 28 (5), pp. 675–691, doi: 10.1017/S0140525X05000129.
30. Watumull, J., Chomsky, N. Rethinking universality. Syntactic architecture and its consequences II: Between syntax and morphology. Ed. by T. Biberauer, S. Vikner, A. Barany, J. Douglas. Berlin: Language Science Press; 2020, pp. 3–24.
31. Whorf, B. L. Language, mind and reality. Language, thought, and reality. Selected writings of Beniamin lee Whorf. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The M. I. T. Press; 1956, pp. 246–270.

Popular articles