The Influence of Grammatical Gender on Perception in English and Spanish Speakers
By Julia Valgenti
Abstract
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has been an interesting cross-discipline topic since its proposal in the 1940s. It has many implications for various disciplines including but not limited to; anthropology, psychology, linguistics, sociology and cognitive neurology. Their hypothesis has generated a good deal of discussion due to its two possible interpretations: linguistic relativity (the weak version) and linguistic determinism (the strong version). In this study, I will focus on the weak version of the hypothesis and its implications in the context of the Spanish language. Using current germaine literature I will discuss current research which supports the weak hypothesis and shows the influence language can have on thought and a speaker's view of the world in the context of color and time perception, and the influence of grammatical gender. I have chosen to focus on the influence grammatical gender in Spanish can have on a speaker's perception of objects due to my interest in the topic as an English speaker learning Spanish. This study will attempt to answer the following research question: Does grammatical gender in Spanish influence the way speakers view the world, specifically objects or concepts with no natural gender? And if so, in what ways is the speaker’s perception of the world influenced by the language they speak? Through a series of focus group discussions with both English and Spanish speakers, qualitative data will be interpreted and analyzed. The results of this study suggest that grammatical gender in Spanish does ‘rub off’ on the concepts themselves and can even be seen in the way grammatical gender is manipulated in everyday use of the language.
Introduction
Did you know that the Russian word for fruit (frukty) excludes berries? Or that the Japanese word mame encompasses both beans and peas? With more than 7,000 languages in the world there are endless ways of expressing one’s self. But does the existence of more than 7,000 languages mean that there are thousands of ways of viewing the world?
Background - The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, named after its two contributors, Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf, is a linguistic theory which describes the influence of language on thought and perception. It proposes that the language one speaks influences the way one thinks about reality. Since its formulation in the 1940s, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has been the subject of debate and controversy across various disciplines due to its implications not only for linguistics but also for psychology, ethnology, anthropology, sociology, philosophy and the natural sciences (Al-Shaikh Hussein, 2012, p. 243).
Contributing Research
The creators of the hypothesis, Sapir and his student Whorf were not the first to think that language systems shape the thinking of their speakers. Sapir especially was greatly influenced by the two German philosophers J.G. Herder (1744-1803) and W.V. Humboldt (1767-1835), even discussing the influence of Herder on Humboldt in his masters thesis (Koerner, 1992, p. 176). The two philosophers believed that “if language forms ideas, it also plays a role in shaping the attitudes of individuals” (Al-Shaikh Hussein, 2012, p. 643). This would imply that individuals who speak different languages would have different world views. The following excerpt from a letter written by Humboldt illustrates his Weltansicht hypothesis has striking similarities with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis:
Language is, therefore, if not altogether, at least in terms of perception, the means by which [each] human being constructs at the same time himself and the world or, by which he, rather, becomes conscious of himself by discriminating between himself and the world (Koerner, 1992, p. 168).
He also noted in 1812, that “the world in which we live...is exactly that into which the language we speak transplants us” (Koerner, 1992. P. 179). As seen in these two texts from Humboldt, his Weltansicht hypothesis discusses the relationship between language and the mind, specifically “the linguistic structure and the particular manner in which a speaker of a given language conceptualizes his universe” (Koerner, 1992, p. 179).
Sapir. Drawing upon Humboldt's ideas, Sapir believed that humans are “at the mercy of the particular language” (Koerner, 1992, p. 180) that they speak. That is, “language does not reflect reality” (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012, p. 642) but plays a role in shaping it. Sapir’s hypothesis of linguistic relativity consists of two main statements: a) the language we speak and think in shapes the way we perceive the world and b) the existence of various language systems implies that the people who think in these different languages must perceive the world differently. (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012).
Unlike Humboldt, a philosopher, Sapir’s hypothesis is based on empirical evidence gathered from work with American Indian languages (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012). He also believed that language and culture are intrinsically connected and that one “cannot be understood and appreciated without knowledge of the other” (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012, p. 642).
Whorf. Benjamin Lee Whorf, a chemical engineer and fire-insurance investigator by profession, linguist by avocation, also performed extensive research with Native American languages, specifically the Hopi Indians in Arizona (Koerner, 1992). He is most well known for the formulation of linguistic relativity. Whorf built upon his teacher’s (Sapir) ideas and went on to say that the relationship between language and culture was deterministic (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012).
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis: Strong Version and Weak Version
The controversy surrounding the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis stems from its two possible interpretations. The ambiguity of the language used in Whorf’s papers leads the hypothesis to be interpreted in two ways: “language determines thought” or “language influences thought” (Bonilla, 2019). The strong version of the hypothesis (‘language determines thought’) can also be understood as linguistic determinism. While the weak version of the hypothesis (“language influences thought”) is known as linguistic relativity. Although Whorf’s ambiguity is not resolved in any of his subsequent papers, Sapir, Humboldt and Herder all support the strong version in some of their works (Bonilla, 2019). A review of the empirical evidence shows that only the weak version is supported due to the lack of a technique that could adequately test the strong version of the hypothesis (Bonilla, 2019).
Research Proposal
I first became interested in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis while reading about it in the context of intercultural communication. As an English speaker learning Spanish, I find the hypothesis an interesting way to view my everyday relationship with the two languages. In a world that is becoming increasingly globalized, exposure to other cultures and languages is increasingly common. Another effect of this increasing globalization is the dominance of English in politics, business and even everyday life around the globe. Could an increasingly anglophone society be missing out on other ways of viewing the world? The rise of interest in linguistic relativity is the result of wanting an answer to the weak hypothesis, does language really shape perception?
Topics of interest for studies looking at the weak version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis include the perception of color (Kay & Kempton, 1984; Robertson et. al., 2000) object similarity classification (Masuda et. al., 2017) and more abstract concepts such as time (Boroditsky, 2001; Casasanto et al., 2004). The majority of the studies focus on whether or not language has some effect on these cognitive abilities or perceptions of abstract concepts. Their approaches are largely social scientific, relying heavily on statistical analysis and empirical data.
After reading current literature on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, I became interested in another linguistic category that differs between languages. The majority of the above mentioned studies focus on differences in lexical or semantic linguistic categories between languages. Linguistic categories, however, may also be grammatical. English speakers learning Spanish often struggle with grammatical gender, a linguistic category not present in English.
Spanish is a language with two grammatical gender classes. They can be used to mark grammatical gender but also to mark natural gender such as in the case of niña ( “girl”, a- feminine grammatical gender) and niño (“boy”, o - masculine grammatical gender). But, many nouns carry a gender classification in Spanish even though they do not refer to animals or humans. This linguistic category seems to be arbitrary, varying between languages or not existing all together in the case of English. Many native English speakers find it confusing that objects, many of which inanimate, needed to be identified with an assigned grammatical gender.
I began to find current research that focused on the influence grammatical gender may have on one’s perception of the world. Various studies focussed on German (Bassetti, 2007; Imai, 2014; Konishi, 1993) French (Haertlé, 2017), Polish (Haertlé, 2017), Italian (Bassetti, 2007; Samuel et al., 2019) and Spanish (Boutonnet et al., 2012; Konishi, 1993; Samuel et al., 2019; Sera et al., 2004). The studies which focused on the influence of grammatical gender in Spanish limited their research to groups of children or adults. However, no research was done specifically on university students. In addition, I found the need for an interpretive approach to the topic. Along with the studies which focused on other linguistic categories in relation to the hypothesis, the studies that involved grammatical gender in Spanish and English took a social science approach that relied on statistical data. I will attempt to answer the following research question: Does grammatical gender in Spanish influence the way speakers view the world, specifically objects or concepts with no natural gender? And if so, in what ways is the speaker’s perception of the world influenced by the language they speak?
Literature Review
There are numerous studies that investigate the weak hypothesis, focusing specifically on the way language can influence perception of the world. The weak hypothesis “asserts that language influences psychological processes such as cognition and perception” (Masuda et al., 2017, p. 2). The studies investigate the influence of language on the following types of perception; the perception of color (e.g., Kay and Kempton, 1984; Roberson et al., 2000), the perception and estimation of time (Boroditsky 2001; Cassanto et al., 2005), perceived similarity between objects (Masuda et al., 2017) and the effects of grammatical gender on perception (Boutonnet et al., 2012; Konishi, 1993; Samuel et al., 2019; Sera et al., 2004).
Color
The existence of one word in a language but not in another can cause difficulties in understanding and translation. It is also possible that the speakers of the two languages may perceive the world in two different ways according to the guidelines set out by their native language. The existence of one word in a language but not in another not only creates ambiguity in translation, but can also change the way that people view the world.
The English language “makes a basic lexical distinction” (Kay and Kempton, 1984, p.68) between blue and green. In other languages, such as that of the Tarahumara (a Uto-aztecan population of northern Mexico), no distinction is made between the two colors. The word siyóname is used for both colors (Kay and Kempton, 1984, p.68). In this case, the one Tarahumara word has two possible English equivalents, posing a complication for translation, but also raising questions about whether the absence of two separate linguistic categories impedes the Tarahumara’s perception of the two colors.
To an English speaker, a distinction between blue and green is expected. “The color of the grass after all is notably different from that of the sky” (Kay & Kempton, p.72). Paul Kay and Willett Kempton set out in their study (Kay & Kempton, 1984) to discover if the Tarahumara linguistic categorization of blue and green under the same word alters their perception of color. They found that English speakers “exaggerate the subjective distances of colors¨ (Kay and Kempton, 1984, p.72) that are close to the blue-green lexical boundary. On the other hand, speakers of Tarahumara did not have a similar “distorting effect” (Kay and Kempton, 1984, p.72) to that seen in English speakers when observing colors close to the boundary. The results of the experiment supported the weak hypothesis by finding that the linguistic categorization in the different languages influenced the way the speakers thought about and ultimately perceived the world (Kay and Kempton, 1984,pp.72).
Another study (Roberson et al., 2000) looked at the Berinmo language which is native to Papua New Guinea and only has five basic color terms. The study observed similar results to that of Kay and Kempton, showing that color vocabulary influenced the speakers recognition of desaturated colors (Roberson et al., 2000). Speakers of different languages are anatomically capable of seeing color, but the absence of words to distinguish specific colors makes a need for distinguishing them unnecessary. In this case, the lexical categories of the language dictates the speaker's perception of the world.
Time
Beyond the realm of color, studies have focused on the way language can influence the perception not just of color but of broader and more abstract concepts such as time. One study (Boroditsky, 2001) found that native English and Mandarin speakers think differently about time. Both Mandarin and English speakers use horizontal terms to talk about time (“good times are ahead of us”, “hardships behind”). However, Mandarin speakers commonly use vertical metaphors when talking about time (shàgn “up” and xià “down”) to express the order of events, weeks or months. The results concluded that “language encouraged mappings” (Boroditsky, 2001, p.7) shape a speaker's idea of time.
This is not just true for spatial metaphors but also when thinking about ‘time as distance’ (“a long time ago”) or ‘time as quantity’ (“mucho tiempo” “much time”) metaphors in language. One study (Casasanto et al., 2004) observed the influence distance and quantity metaphors can have across English, Indonesian, Greek and Spanish. The study found that the effects of these metaphors when estimating time “corresponded strikingly” (Casasanto et al., 2004, p. 580) to the relative prevalence of the corresponding metaphors in the four languages observed. Therefore, when spatiotemporal metaphors differ between languages, this can influence a speaker's ideas of time. As such, language is an especially important tool when shaping abstract thought.
Linguistic Categories and Object Perception
One study (Masuda et. al., 2017) attempted to find out if and how linguistic categories in addition to influencing a speaker's perception of color and time can influence a speaker’s “similarity judgement” (Masuda et al., 2017 pp. 2) of everyday objects between English and Japanese speakers. Assuming that objects are categorized by speakers according to the “lines drawn between existing categories” (Masuda et al., 2017 pp. 2) by their native language, the study expected concepts within the same linguistic category to have a stronger perception of similarity than if the concepts pertained to two different linguistic categories. The words bean and pea in English belong to two linguistic categories. In Japanese, a single linguistic category is assigned to the two concepts. Mame can be used to mean both pea and bean. English speakers were expected to identify a larger degree of difference between the two concepts than Japanese speakers.
The study found that English speakers were more likely to note similarity between two concepts which belonged to the same linguistic category in English (and two linguistic categories in Japanese) than Japanese speakers. Conversely, Japanese speakers were more likely to note similarity between two concepts which belonged to the same linguistic category in Japanese (and two linguistic categories in English) than English speakers. The results supported the weak version of the hypothesis and led to the conclusion that linguistic categories have an effect on perception of objects.
Grammatical Gender and Object Perception
Linguistic categories do not just include lexis and semantics but can also encompass grammar. Some languages attribute grammatical gender to nouns. An interesting question is whether this linguistic characterization can have an influence on the speaker’s perception of objects and the way they classify them. (Sera et al., 1994) found that grammatical gender can influence an adult Spanish speaker’s attribution of gender to objects that lack a natural gender. They concluded that the relationship between grammatical and conceptual gender is not nonsensical but rather the result of a link between language and thought. A similar study which looked at Spanish and German (Konishi, 1993) found that grammatical gender may affect the implied meaning of words for speakers of each language.
The studies of the 1990s have served as a basis for more recent research. A more recent study (Boutonnet et al., 2012) which also looked at Spanish and English speakers built upon the previous studies’ findings to show that grammatical gender is unconsciously retrieved during semantic processing of pictures and therefore lexical-semantic processing was not required, showing that grammatical gender is not only processed when provided with language but the language has a lasting effect on the speakers non-language related thought process.
In this study, I would like to build upon previous research (which firmly establishes that a connection between language and thought does exist), yet approach the weak version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis from an interpretive point of view. Instead of looking for statistical data, I would like to find qualitative data in the hopes of answering my two research questions: How much does grammatical gender in Spanish influence the way speakers view the world, specifically objects or concepts with no natural gender? And in what ways is the speaker’s perception of the world influenced by the language they speak?
Procedures Participant Data
5 native Spanish speakers and 4 native English speakers participated in this study. All participants were graduate or undergraduate students at various universities in Madrid, Spain and between the ages of 20 and 24. All of the participating Spanish speakers had an intermediate to advanced understanding of English and all English speakers had an intermediate to advanced understanding of Spanish.
Data Collection
The participants were interviewed in focus groups of 4-5 participants. Native Spanish speakers were placed in a focus group, and native English speakers participated in a separate focus group discussion. As the researcher, I guided the focus group discussion with a series of questions. Participants were asked to reflect on the effect that grammatical gender in Spanish may have on their perception of objects and of the world in general. Because all participants had an understanding of both English and Spanish, they were also asked to reflect on whether they saw a difference in their perception of objects when thinking about them in English (due to the absence of grammatical gender in the language). Some questions focused on specific words in Spanish and their English translations and asked participants to explore their perception of the object in relation to its grammatical gender or lack thereof. English speakers who have an advanced understanding of Spanish were also interviewed to see if the influence of grammatical gender in Spanish could be learned. Their results were compared to those of the Spanish speakers to observe possible differences.
Data Analysis
The findings of the focus group interviews were analyzed thematically, identifying common themes expressed by the participants in each group, and noting differences. English speakers who have learned Spanish as a second language were interviewed in addition to native speakers to see whether Spanish grammatical gender not only shapes native speakers' perception of the world but also learners of Spanish. The same set of questions were used for both focus groups, allowing for comparison of results between the two groups regarding their discussion of the same words and concepts. Specific themes that were highlighted in the analysis of results include; the association of words with specific characteristics, differences in meanings between synonyms due to differences in grammatical gender and most notably the use of grammatical gender to express superlative or diminutive meaning.
Results and Discussion
Grammatical gender was found to influence the way participants perceive the world both consciously and unconsciously. It must be noted that the grammatical gender of an object or concept did not automatically and universally cause speakers to perceive the concept as more feminine or masculine. Nor did they believe that the grammatical gender caused them to think about innately neutral objects and concepts as such. In the case of specific concepts, such as those associated with femininity, a clear association with feminine characteristics was described.
At the start of the focus group discussion, the participants belonging to the group of native Spanish speakers agreed that they did not think that grammatical gender influenced their perception of objects or concepts. They affirmed that the object itself, not the grammatical gender of the word, had more effect on how they viewed the object. According to the participants, grammatical gender is “a matter of custom” or “rules” which they have been taught since they were young. The majority of the participants agreed that the grammatical gender of a word is arbitrary but assigned and therefore valid. For example, la botella cannot be el botella simply because “that is the name and that's it."
Throughout discussion, the characterization of objects showed that grammatical gender can have an unconscious effect on how Spanish speakers describe and talk about concepts. Participants were seen to describe concepts with feminine grammatical gender using words that are commonly associated with femininity. La casa (the house) was unanimously described as “warm”, “intimate” and “cozy”. When asked to elaborate on the type of ‘warmth’ they associate with la casa they described it as “clothed”, and a warmth that “envelopes everything”. Participants compared this sensation to that of a “mother’s hug”, the warmth of “freshly made cocido'' (a type of stew) and even in one case to the security of the womb. In contrast to the soft, and cozy warmth associated with la casa, when talking about masculine words such as el árbol, participants used words such as “imposing” and “rough”. Participants used similar contrasting descriptions when asked to describe the difference between the wood of a tree and the wood from which a house is constructed.
Participants continued their discussion to compare el desván to la buhardilla. Desván and buhardilla are synonyms used to describe the part of a house immediately underneath the roof, or the attic. Participants described la buhardilla as “a cozy place to hang out” whereas el desván was described as a “useful”, “dusty” and a place dedicated to “storage”. Participants agreed that while they would like to sleep in a buhardilla, they would not willingly sleep in a desván. Considering that la buhardilla and desván are defined formally as being synonyms that describe the same part of a house, the distinction that the participants noted between the two words can be attributed to the differing grammatical gender of the two words.
At the beginning of the discussion, the majority of the native Spanish speakers in the focus group agreed that la llave for them is “just an object”, with an assigned grammatical gender which does not influence their perception of the object. One participant noted that although she views keys as a neutral object, when later asked to reflect on el tenedor (the fork), she considers the metal of a key to be different from the metal of a fork. For her, the metal of a key is “similar to metals used in jewelry” and is more “delicate”. The other participants in the group did not agree with this observation, saying that if anything the metal of a fork is more “neat” and “tidy” than the metal of a key, due to the function of a fork in transporting food to the mouth. However, it must be noted that when discussing the grammatical gender of la llave, two participants jokingly said that “el llave does not sound right”. In saying el llave, they lowered the tone of their voice to a deep tenor and used a gruff tone. When later discussing la llave, they returned their voice to a lighter falsetto. The earlier observations about the nature of the metals of la llave compared to the nature of the metal of el tenedor could be interpreted as the function of the object influencing the participants perception. However, their change in tone of voice when saying la llave compared to el llave shows that the grammatical gender of the word does play a role in how they perceive the object.
In discussing la cuchara (the spoon), the participants noted that their association of the spoon with more feminine traits is most likely due to the object's function. A spoon is commonly used for warm and “soothing” foods such as soup or broth. One participant described la cuchara as something that “envelops” and “holds things” whereas the fork is more “violent” and “impales”. Although, she also agreed with the other participants' observations that the traits of a spoon are in part due to its function.
The grammatical gender was found to greatly influence the participants perception of objects and concepts when related with diminutive and superlative descriptions. Native Spanish speaking participants noted that in the case of la hamburguesa, they at first did not consider the grammatical gender to influence their perception of the object. They noted that they considered there to be a great difference between una hamburguesita (f.) and un hamburguesón (m.). These colloquial uses of the superlative and diminutive form of la hamburguesa are used to denote differences between the two concepts of the same object. Participants would employ the use of la hamburguesita when describing a small hamburger that left them hungry or was not very good. Or perhaps a hamburger that “cost more than it was worth”. In contrast, they would use el hamburguesón to describe a “delicious” and “filling” hamburger that was a “work of art”. Participants were surprised to realize that although la hamburguesa is grammatically feminine, it changes to be grammatically masculine in the superlative and consequently transmits a different meaning or sensation.
Similarly, participants noted that la sopa is grammatically feminine but in the superlative form it changes to be grammatically masculine. They observed that la sopita transmits the concept of a soup that your mother of grandmother may cook, or the food you eat when sick. Whereas a sopón is a stew or “hearty” and “satiating” soup. This shows that grammatical gender does influence the way speakers perceive objects, because deliberate uses of grammatical gender are used to transmit meaning to objects or ideas, especially through the use of superlatives and diminutives.
In contrast to the results found in the focus group of native Spanish speakers, English speakers noted that when speaking Spanish, they consider grammatical gender as a nonsensical grammatical aspect of the language. Rather than associating objects with more feminine or masculine traits due to the grammatical gender, English speakers tended to characterize objects based on their function or shape. For example, although they identified la llave as having feminine grammatical gender, the majority of the native English speakers agreed that a key is an object they would associate as more masculine, due to its function, composition and form. They explained that keys are “hard”, “rough or serrated”, “industrial” and even “phallic in form”. They considered their characterization of la llave as being independent of the word’s grammatical gender. Suggesting the absence of grammatical gender in their native language has more of an influence than the grammatical gender of a language they learned later in life.
In the case of the word la casa English speakers described the word similarly to the native Spanish speakers. They agreed that the word “la casa” invokes a feeling of “warmth”, “coziness” and “protection”. However, in their opinion, this association of la casa with feminine characteristics is due to cultural associations such as the concept of “housewives” or the old saying that “a woman’s place is in the home”. The native English speakers focus not on the ‘sense’ or ‘feeling’ that the grammatical gender attributes to words but on the function or form of the object and its cultural associations. Implying that although they are aware of grammatical gender in Spanish, their non-grammatically gendered native language has a stronger influence on their world view. In this case, cultural associations influence an English speakers gendered association of objects more than the grammatical gender of their second language.
The results of this study found that in the case of Spanish speakers, grammatical gender does influence their perception of the world. In instances where speakers wish to express qualities of an object (specifically if they are superlative or diminutive) they employ grammatical gender. It can be said that grammatical gender has an influence on a speaker's perception of an object because it changes from its correct gender to another to transmit different meanings. This study saw this in the examples of sopita/sopón and hamburguesita/hamburguesón. In addition, words such as buhardilla and desván although formally synonyms which transmit the same meaning, the grammatical gender of the two words can be said to ‘rub off’ on the implied meaning of each which results in a difference in interpretation. And finally, although Spanish speakers do not consciously consider grammatical gender to influence their view of the world, it influences the way they think about objects and concepts often without them consciously realizing its effects as was observed in the participants' tendency to pronounce el llave or el cuchara with a lower tone of voice. Although they were not aware, their subconscious associated the masculine form of the word with a traditionally masculine tone of voice. Taken together, these findings can show how much and the ways in which grammatical gender in Spanish influences thought.
Unlike previous studies, this one looks at qualitative data through an interpretive approach. Instead of focusing on the question of does language influence thought or through what underlying neurological mechanisms it does so, the study focuses on in what ways a speaker's view of the world is influenced by the linguistic categories (in this case grammatical gender) of the language they speak. Previous studies established the influence of language on thought, therefore it was unnecessary to empirically establish a connection. The extent and manner of the influence of language on thought specifically in the case of Spanish among university students had not been investigated previously.
Some limitations are present in this study. First, the size of the focus groups was limited to two groups of 4-5 participants. A larger pool of participants could give more accurate results. Second, the length of the focus group discussions could be extended. In the case of this study, focus group discussions were limited to about an hour, however a longer period of time could allow for more discussion among participants.
The findings of this study have interesting implications for the study of the weak version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. It is apparent that even though speakers are not conscious of the effects the language they speak has on the way they view the world, the influence of grammatical gender on language can be seen in many ways even in our everyday use of language.
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has been an interesting cross-discipline topic since its proposal in the 1940s. It has many implications for various disciplines including but not limited to; anthropology, psychology, linguistics, sociology and cognitive neurology. Their hypothesis has generated a good deal of discussion due to its two possible interpretations: linguistic relativity (the weak version) and linguistic determinism (the strong version). In this study, I will focus on the weak version of the hypothesis and its implications in the context of the Spanish language. Using current germaine literature I will discuss current research which supports the weak hypothesis and shows the influence language can have on thought and a speaker's view of the world in the context of color and time perception, and the influence of grammatical gender. I have chosen to focus on the influence grammatical gender in Spanish can have on a speaker's perception of objects due to my interest in the topic as an English speaker learning Spanish. This study will attempt to answer the following research question: Does grammatical gender in Spanish influence the way speakers view the world, specifically objects or concepts with no natural gender? And if so, in what ways is the speaker’s perception of the world influenced by the language they speak? Through a series of focus group discussions with both English and Spanish speakers, qualitative data will be interpreted and analyzed. The results of this study suggest that grammatical gender in Spanish does ‘rub off’ on the concepts themselves and can even be seen in the way grammatical gender is manipulated in everyday use of the language.
Introduction
Did you know that the Russian word for fruit (frukty) excludes berries? Or that the Japanese word mame encompasses both beans and peas? With more than 7,000 languages in the world there are endless ways of expressing one’s self. But does the existence of more than 7,000 languages mean that there are thousands of ways of viewing the world?
Background - The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, named after its two contributors, Edward Sapir and Benjamin Lee Whorf, is a linguistic theory which describes the influence of language on thought and perception. It proposes that the language one speaks influences the way one thinks about reality. Since its formulation in the 1940s, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis has been the subject of debate and controversy across various disciplines due to its implications not only for linguistics but also for psychology, ethnology, anthropology, sociology, philosophy and the natural sciences (Al-Shaikh Hussein, 2012, p. 243).
Contributing Research
The creators of the hypothesis, Sapir and his student Whorf were not the first to think that language systems shape the thinking of their speakers. Sapir especially was greatly influenced by the two German philosophers J.G. Herder (1744-1803) and W.V. Humboldt (1767-1835), even discussing the influence of Herder on Humboldt in his masters thesis (Koerner, 1992, p. 176). The two philosophers believed that “if language forms ideas, it also plays a role in shaping the attitudes of individuals” (Al-Shaikh Hussein, 2012, p. 643). This would imply that individuals who speak different languages would have different world views. The following excerpt from a letter written by Humboldt illustrates his Weltansicht hypothesis has striking similarities with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis:
Language is, therefore, if not altogether, at least in terms of perception, the means by which [each] human being constructs at the same time himself and the world or, by which he, rather, becomes conscious of himself by discriminating between himself and the world (Koerner, 1992, p. 168).
He also noted in 1812, that “the world in which we live...is exactly that into which the language we speak transplants us” (Koerner, 1992. P. 179). As seen in these two texts from Humboldt, his Weltansicht hypothesis discusses the relationship between language and the mind, specifically “the linguistic structure and the particular manner in which a speaker of a given language conceptualizes his universe” (Koerner, 1992, p. 179).
Sapir. Drawing upon Humboldt's ideas, Sapir believed that humans are “at the mercy of the particular language” (Koerner, 1992, p. 180) that they speak. That is, “language does not reflect reality” (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012, p. 642) but plays a role in shaping it. Sapir’s hypothesis of linguistic relativity consists of two main statements: a) the language we speak and think in shapes the way we perceive the world and b) the existence of various language systems implies that the people who think in these different languages must perceive the world differently. (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012).
Unlike Humboldt, a philosopher, Sapir’s hypothesis is based on empirical evidence gathered from work with American Indian languages (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012). He also believed that language and culture are intrinsically connected and that one “cannot be understood and appreciated without knowledge of the other” (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012, p. 642).
Whorf. Benjamin Lee Whorf, a chemical engineer and fire-insurance investigator by profession, linguist by avocation, also performed extensive research with Native American languages, specifically the Hopi Indians in Arizona (Koerner, 1992). He is most well known for the formulation of linguistic relativity. Whorf built upon his teacher’s (Sapir) ideas and went on to say that the relationship between language and culture was deterministic (Al-Sheikh Hussein, 2012).
The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis: Strong Version and Weak Version
The controversy surrounding the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis stems from its two possible interpretations. The ambiguity of the language used in Whorf’s papers leads the hypothesis to be interpreted in two ways: “language determines thought” or “language influences thought” (Bonilla, 2019). The strong version of the hypothesis (‘language determines thought’) can also be understood as linguistic determinism. While the weak version of the hypothesis (“language influences thought”) is known as linguistic relativity. Although Whorf’s ambiguity is not resolved in any of his subsequent papers, Sapir, Humboldt and Herder all support the strong version in some of their works (Bonilla, 2019). A review of the empirical evidence shows that only the weak version is supported due to the lack of a technique that could adequately test the strong version of the hypothesis (Bonilla, 2019).
Research Proposal
I first became interested in the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis while reading about it in the context of intercultural communication. As an English speaker learning Spanish, I find the hypothesis an interesting way to view my everyday relationship with the two languages. In a world that is becoming increasingly globalized, exposure to other cultures and languages is increasingly common. Another effect of this increasing globalization is the dominance of English in politics, business and even everyday life around the globe. Could an increasingly anglophone society be missing out on other ways of viewing the world? The rise of interest in linguistic relativity is the result of wanting an answer to the weak hypothesis, does language really shape perception?
Topics of interest for studies looking at the weak version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis include the perception of color (Kay & Kempton, 1984; Robertson et. al., 2000) object similarity classification (Masuda et. al., 2017) and more abstract concepts such as time (Boroditsky, 2001; Casasanto et al., 2004). The majority of the studies focus on whether or not language has some effect on these cognitive abilities or perceptions of abstract concepts. Their approaches are largely social scientific, relying heavily on statistical analysis and empirical data.
After reading current literature on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, I became interested in another linguistic category that differs between languages. The majority of the above mentioned studies focus on differences in lexical or semantic linguistic categories between languages. Linguistic categories, however, may also be grammatical. English speakers learning Spanish often struggle with grammatical gender, a linguistic category not present in English.
Spanish is a language with two grammatical gender classes. They can be used to mark grammatical gender but also to mark natural gender such as in the case of niña ( “girl”, a- feminine grammatical gender) and niño (“boy”, o - masculine grammatical gender). But, many nouns carry a gender classification in Spanish even though they do not refer to animals or humans. This linguistic category seems to be arbitrary, varying between languages or not existing all together in the case of English. Many native English speakers find it confusing that objects, many of which inanimate, needed to be identified with an assigned grammatical gender.
I began to find current research that focused on the influence grammatical gender may have on one’s perception of the world. Various studies focussed on German (Bassetti, 2007; Imai, 2014; Konishi, 1993) French (Haertlé, 2017), Polish (Haertlé, 2017), Italian (Bassetti, 2007; Samuel et al., 2019) and Spanish (Boutonnet et al., 2012; Konishi, 1993; Samuel et al., 2019; Sera et al., 2004). The studies which focused on the influence of grammatical gender in Spanish limited their research to groups of children or adults. However, no research was done specifically on university students. In addition, I found the need for an interpretive approach to the topic. Along with the studies which focused on other linguistic categories in relation to the hypothesis, the studies that involved grammatical gender in Spanish and English took a social science approach that relied on statistical data. I will attempt to answer the following research question: Does grammatical gender in Spanish influence the way speakers view the world, specifically objects or concepts with no natural gender? And if so, in what ways is the speaker’s perception of the world influenced by the language they speak?
Literature Review
There are numerous studies that investigate the weak hypothesis, focusing specifically on the way language can influence perception of the world. The weak hypothesis “asserts that language influences psychological processes such as cognition and perception” (Masuda et al., 2017, p. 2). The studies investigate the influence of language on the following types of perception; the perception of color (e.g., Kay and Kempton, 1984; Roberson et al., 2000), the perception and estimation of time (Boroditsky 2001; Cassanto et al., 2005), perceived similarity between objects (Masuda et al., 2017) and the effects of grammatical gender on perception (Boutonnet et al., 2012; Konishi, 1993; Samuel et al., 2019; Sera et al., 2004).
Color
The existence of one word in a language but not in another can cause difficulties in understanding and translation. It is also possible that the speakers of the two languages may perceive the world in two different ways according to the guidelines set out by their native language. The existence of one word in a language but not in another not only creates ambiguity in translation, but can also change the way that people view the world.
The English language “makes a basic lexical distinction” (Kay and Kempton, 1984, p.68) between blue and green. In other languages, such as that of the Tarahumara (a Uto-aztecan population of northern Mexico), no distinction is made between the two colors. The word siyóname is used for both colors (Kay and Kempton, 1984, p.68). In this case, the one Tarahumara word has two possible English equivalents, posing a complication for translation, but also raising questions about whether the absence of two separate linguistic categories impedes the Tarahumara’s perception of the two colors.
To an English speaker, a distinction between blue and green is expected. “The color of the grass after all is notably different from that of the sky” (Kay & Kempton, p.72). Paul Kay and Willett Kempton set out in their study (Kay & Kempton, 1984) to discover if the Tarahumara linguistic categorization of blue and green under the same word alters their perception of color. They found that English speakers “exaggerate the subjective distances of colors¨ (Kay and Kempton, 1984, p.72) that are close to the blue-green lexical boundary. On the other hand, speakers of Tarahumara did not have a similar “distorting effect” (Kay and Kempton, 1984, p.72) to that seen in English speakers when observing colors close to the boundary. The results of the experiment supported the weak hypothesis by finding that the linguistic categorization in the different languages influenced the way the speakers thought about and ultimately perceived the world (Kay and Kempton, 1984,pp.72).
Another study (Roberson et al., 2000) looked at the Berinmo language which is native to Papua New Guinea and only has five basic color terms. The study observed similar results to that of Kay and Kempton, showing that color vocabulary influenced the speakers recognition of desaturated colors (Roberson et al., 2000). Speakers of different languages are anatomically capable of seeing color, but the absence of words to distinguish specific colors makes a need for distinguishing them unnecessary. In this case, the lexical categories of the language dictates the speaker's perception of the world.
Time
Beyond the realm of color, studies have focused on the way language can influence the perception not just of color but of broader and more abstract concepts such as time. One study (Boroditsky, 2001) found that native English and Mandarin speakers think differently about time. Both Mandarin and English speakers use horizontal terms to talk about time (“good times are ahead of us”, “hardships behind”). However, Mandarin speakers commonly use vertical metaphors when talking about time (shàgn “up” and xià “down”) to express the order of events, weeks or months. The results concluded that “language encouraged mappings” (Boroditsky, 2001, p.7) shape a speaker's idea of time.
This is not just true for spatial metaphors but also when thinking about ‘time as distance’ (“a long time ago”) or ‘time as quantity’ (“mucho tiempo” “much time”) metaphors in language. One study (Casasanto et al., 2004) observed the influence distance and quantity metaphors can have across English, Indonesian, Greek and Spanish. The study found that the effects of these metaphors when estimating time “corresponded strikingly” (Casasanto et al., 2004, p. 580) to the relative prevalence of the corresponding metaphors in the four languages observed. Therefore, when spatiotemporal metaphors differ between languages, this can influence a speaker's ideas of time. As such, language is an especially important tool when shaping abstract thought.
Linguistic Categories and Object Perception
One study (Masuda et. al., 2017) attempted to find out if and how linguistic categories in addition to influencing a speaker's perception of color and time can influence a speaker’s “similarity judgement” (Masuda et al., 2017 pp. 2) of everyday objects between English and Japanese speakers. Assuming that objects are categorized by speakers according to the “lines drawn between existing categories” (Masuda et al., 2017 pp. 2) by their native language, the study expected concepts within the same linguistic category to have a stronger perception of similarity than if the concepts pertained to two different linguistic categories. The words bean and pea in English belong to two linguistic categories. In Japanese, a single linguistic category is assigned to the two concepts. Mame can be used to mean both pea and bean. English speakers were expected to identify a larger degree of difference between the two concepts than Japanese speakers.
The study found that English speakers were more likely to note similarity between two concepts which belonged to the same linguistic category in English (and two linguistic categories in Japanese) than Japanese speakers. Conversely, Japanese speakers were more likely to note similarity between two concepts which belonged to the same linguistic category in Japanese (and two linguistic categories in English) than English speakers. The results supported the weak version of the hypothesis and led to the conclusion that linguistic categories have an effect on perception of objects.
Grammatical Gender and Object Perception
Linguistic categories do not just include lexis and semantics but can also encompass grammar. Some languages attribute grammatical gender to nouns. An interesting question is whether this linguistic characterization can have an influence on the speaker’s perception of objects and the way they classify them. (Sera et al., 1994) found that grammatical gender can influence an adult Spanish speaker’s attribution of gender to objects that lack a natural gender. They concluded that the relationship between grammatical and conceptual gender is not nonsensical but rather the result of a link between language and thought. A similar study which looked at Spanish and German (Konishi, 1993) found that grammatical gender may affect the implied meaning of words for speakers of each language.
The studies of the 1990s have served as a basis for more recent research. A more recent study (Boutonnet et al., 2012) which also looked at Spanish and English speakers built upon the previous studies’ findings to show that grammatical gender is unconsciously retrieved during semantic processing of pictures and therefore lexical-semantic processing was not required, showing that grammatical gender is not only processed when provided with language but the language has a lasting effect on the speakers non-language related thought process.
In this study, I would like to build upon previous research (which firmly establishes that a connection between language and thought does exist), yet approach the weak version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis from an interpretive point of view. Instead of looking for statistical data, I would like to find qualitative data in the hopes of answering my two research questions: How much does grammatical gender in Spanish influence the way speakers view the world, specifically objects or concepts with no natural gender? And in what ways is the speaker’s perception of the world influenced by the language they speak?
Procedures Participant Data
5 native Spanish speakers and 4 native English speakers participated in this study. All participants were graduate or undergraduate students at various universities in Madrid, Spain and between the ages of 20 and 24. All of the participating Spanish speakers had an intermediate to advanced understanding of English and all English speakers had an intermediate to advanced understanding of Spanish.
Data Collection
The participants were interviewed in focus groups of 4-5 participants. Native Spanish speakers were placed in a focus group, and native English speakers participated in a separate focus group discussion. As the researcher, I guided the focus group discussion with a series of questions. Participants were asked to reflect on the effect that grammatical gender in Spanish may have on their perception of objects and of the world in general. Because all participants had an understanding of both English and Spanish, they were also asked to reflect on whether they saw a difference in their perception of objects when thinking about them in English (due to the absence of grammatical gender in the language). Some questions focused on specific words in Spanish and their English translations and asked participants to explore their perception of the object in relation to its grammatical gender or lack thereof. English speakers who have an advanced understanding of Spanish were also interviewed to see if the influence of grammatical gender in Spanish could be learned. Their results were compared to those of the Spanish speakers to observe possible differences.
Data Analysis
The findings of the focus group interviews were analyzed thematically, identifying common themes expressed by the participants in each group, and noting differences. English speakers who have learned Spanish as a second language were interviewed in addition to native speakers to see whether Spanish grammatical gender not only shapes native speakers' perception of the world but also learners of Spanish. The same set of questions were used for both focus groups, allowing for comparison of results between the two groups regarding their discussion of the same words and concepts. Specific themes that were highlighted in the analysis of results include; the association of words with specific characteristics, differences in meanings between synonyms due to differences in grammatical gender and most notably the use of grammatical gender to express superlative or diminutive meaning.
Results and Discussion
Grammatical gender was found to influence the way participants perceive the world both consciously and unconsciously. It must be noted that the grammatical gender of an object or concept did not automatically and universally cause speakers to perceive the concept as more feminine or masculine. Nor did they believe that the grammatical gender caused them to think about innately neutral objects and concepts as such. In the case of specific concepts, such as those associated with femininity, a clear association with feminine characteristics was described.
At the start of the focus group discussion, the participants belonging to the group of native Spanish speakers agreed that they did not think that grammatical gender influenced their perception of objects or concepts. They affirmed that the object itself, not the grammatical gender of the word, had more effect on how they viewed the object. According to the participants, grammatical gender is “a matter of custom” or “rules” which they have been taught since they were young. The majority of the participants agreed that the grammatical gender of a word is arbitrary but assigned and therefore valid. For example, la botella cannot be el botella simply because “that is the name and that's it."
Throughout discussion, the characterization of objects showed that grammatical gender can have an unconscious effect on how Spanish speakers describe and talk about concepts. Participants were seen to describe concepts with feminine grammatical gender using words that are commonly associated with femininity. La casa (the house) was unanimously described as “warm”, “intimate” and “cozy”. When asked to elaborate on the type of ‘warmth’ they associate with la casa they described it as “clothed”, and a warmth that “envelopes everything”. Participants compared this sensation to that of a “mother’s hug”, the warmth of “freshly made cocido'' (a type of stew) and even in one case to the security of the womb. In contrast to the soft, and cozy warmth associated with la casa, when talking about masculine words such as el árbol, participants used words such as “imposing” and “rough”. Participants used similar contrasting descriptions when asked to describe the difference between the wood of a tree and the wood from which a house is constructed.
Participants continued their discussion to compare el desván to la buhardilla. Desván and buhardilla are synonyms used to describe the part of a house immediately underneath the roof, or the attic. Participants described la buhardilla as “a cozy place to hang out” whereas el desván was described as a “useful”, “dusty” and a place dedicated to “storage”. Participants agreed that while they would like to sleep in a buhardilla, they would not willingly sleep in a desván. Considering that la buhardilla and desván are defined formally as being synonyms that describe the same part of a house, the distinction that the participants noted between the two words can be attributed to the differing grammatical gender of the two words.
At the beginning of the discussion, the majority of the native Spanish speakers in the focus group agreed that la llave for them is “just an object”, with an assigned grammatical gender which does not influence their perception of the object. One participant noted that although she views keys as a neutral object, when later asked to reflect on el tenedor (the fork), she considers the metal of a key to be different from the metal of a fork. For her, the metal of a key is “similar to metals used in jewelry” and is more “delicate”. The other participants in the group did not agree with this observation, saying that if anything the metal of a fork is more “neat” and “tidy” than the metal of a key, due to the function of a fork in transporting food to the mouth. However, it must be noted that when discussing the grammatical gender of la llave, two participants jokingly said that “el llave does not sound right”. In saying el llave, they lowered the tone of their voice to a deep tenor and used a gruff tone. When later discussing la llave, they returned their voice to a lighter falsetto. The earlier observations about the nature of the metals of la llave compared to the nature of the metal of el tenedor could be interpreted as the function of the object influencing the participants perception. However, their change in tone of voice when saying la llave compared to el llave shows that the grammatical gender of the word does play a role in how they perceive the object.
In discussing la cuchara (the spoon), the participants noted that their association of the spoon with more feminine traits is most likely due to the object's function. A spoon is commonly used for warm and “soothing” foods such as soup or broth. One participant described la cuchara as something that “envelops” and “holds things” whereas the fork is more “violent” and “impales”. Although, she also agreed with the other participants' observations that the traits of a spoon are in part due to its function.
The grammatical gender was found to greatly influence the participants perception of objects and concepts when related with diminutive and superlative descriptions. Native Spanish speaking participants noted that in the case of la hamburguesa, they at first did not consider the grammatical gender to influence their perception of the object. They noted that they considered there to be a great difference between una hamburguesita (f.) and un hamburguesón (m.). These colloquial uses of the superlative and diminutive form of la hamburguesa are used to denote differences between the two concepts of the same object. Participants would employ the use of la hamburguesita when describing a small hamburger that left them hungry or was not very good. Or perhaps a hamburger that “cost more than it was worth”. In contrast, they would use el hamburguesón to describe a “delicious” and “filling” hamburger that was a “work of art”. Participants were surprised to realize that although la hamburguesa is grammatically feminine, it changes to be grammatically masculine in the superlative and consequently transmits a different meaning or sensation.
Similarly, participants noted that la sopa is grammatically feminine but in the superlative form it changes to be grammatically masculine. They observed that la sopita transmits the concept of a soup that your mother of grandmother may cook, or the food you eat when sick. Whereas a sopón is a stew or “hearty” and “satiating” soup. This shows that grammatical gender does influence the way speakers perceive objects, because deliberate uses of grammatical gender are used to transmit meaning to objects or ideas, especially through the use of superlatives and diminutives.
In contrast to the results found in the focus group of native Spanish speakers, English speakers noted that when speaking Spanish, they consider grammatical gender as a nonsensical grammatical aspect of the language. Rather than associating objects with more feminine or masculine traits due to the grammatical gender, English speakers tended to characterize objects based on their function or shape. For example, although they identified la llave as having feminine grammatical gender, the majority of the native English speakers agreed that a key is an object they would associate as more masculine, due to its function, composition and form. They explained that keys are “hard”, “rough or serrated”, “industrial” and even “phallic in form”. They considered their characterization of la llave as being independent of the word’s grammatical gender. Suggesting the absence of grammatical gender in their native language has more of an influence than the grammatical gender of a language they learned later in life.
In the case of the word la casa English speakers described the word similarly to the native Spanish speakers. They agreed that the word “la casa” invokes a feeling of “warmth”, “coziness” and “protection”. However, in their opinion, this association of la casa with feminine characteristics is due to cultural associations such as the concept of “housewives” or the old saying that “a woman’s place is in the home”. The native English speakers focus not on the ‘sense’ or ‘feeling’ that the grammatical gender attributes to words but on the function or form of the object and its cultural associations. Implying that although they are aware of grammatical gender in Spanish, their non-grammatically gendered native language has a stronger influence on their world view. In this case, cultural associations influence an English speakers gendered association of objects more than the grammatical gender of their second language.
The results of this study found that in the case of Spanish speakers, grammatical gender does influence their perception of the world. In instances where speakers wish to express qualities of an object (specifically if they are superlative or diminutive) they employ grammatical gender. It can be said that grammatical gender has an influence on a speaker's perception of an object because it changes from its correct gender to another to transmit different meanings. This study saw this in the examples of sopita/sopón and hamburguesita/hamburguesón. In addition, words such as buhardilla and desván although formally synonyms which transmit the same meaning, the grammatical gender of the two words can be said to ‘rub off’ on the implied meaning of each which results in a difference in interpretation. And finally, although Spanish speakers do not consciously consider grammatical gender to influence their view of the world, it influences the way they think about objects and concepts often without them consciously realizing its effects as was observed in the participants' tendency to pronounce el llave or el cuchara with a lower tone of voice. Although they were not aware, their subconscious associated the masculine form of the word with a traditionally masculine tone of voice. Taken together, these findings can show how much and the ways in which grammatical gender in Spanish influences thought.
Unlike previous studies, this one looks at qualitative data through an interpretive approach. Instead of focusing on the question of does language influence thought or through what underlying neurological mechanisms it does so, the study focuses on in what ways a speaker's view of the world is influenced by the linguistic categories (in this case grammatical gender) of the language they speak. Previous studies established the influence of language on thought, therefore it was unnecessary to empirically establish a connection. The extent and manner of the influence of language on thought specifically in the case of Spanish among university students had not been investigated previously.
Some limitations are present in this study. First, the size of the focus groups was limited to two groups of 4-5 participants. A larger pool of participants could give more accurate results. Second, the length of the focus group discussions could be extended. In the case of this study, focus group discussions were limited to about an hour, however a longer period of time could allow for more discussion among participants.
The findings of this study have interesting implications for the study of the weak version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. It is apparent that even though speakers are not conscious of the effects the language they speak has on the way they view the world, the influence of grammatical gender on language can be seen in many ways even in our everyday use of language.
References
Al-Sheikh Hussein, B. (2012). The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2 (3), 642-646.
Bonilla, N. (2019). Perception of the World Through Language: Do Spanish and English do speakers perceive the world differently? A review of the Literature on the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. ICESI University. 1-56.
Boroditsky, L. (2001). Does Language Shape Thought?: Mandarin and English Speakers’ Conceptions of Time. Cognitive Psychology, 43(1),1–22. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2001.0748
Boutonnet, B., Athanasopoulos, P., & Thierry, G. (2012). Unconscious effects of grammatical gender during object categorisation. Brain Research, 1479, 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2012.08.044
Casasanto, D., Boroditsky, L., Phillips, W., Greene, J., Goswami, S., Bocanegra-Thiel, S., … Gil, D. (2005). How deep are the effects of language on thought? Time estimation in speakers of English, Indonesian, Greek, and Spanish. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 186–191.
Haertlé, I. (2017). Does Grammatical Gender Influence Perception? A Study of Polish and French Speakers, Psychology of Language and Communication, 21(1), 386-407. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2017-0019
Koerner, E. (1992). The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis: A Preliminary History and a Bibliographical Essay. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 2(2), 173-198. Retrieved December 10, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/43102168
Kay, P., & Kempton, W. (1984). What is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis? American Anthropologist, 86, 65–79.
Konishi, T. The semantics of grammatical gender: A cross-cultural study. J Psycholinguist Res 22, 519–534 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068252 Masuda, T., Ishii, K., Miwa, K., Rashid, M., Lee, H., & Mahdi, R. (2017). One label or two? Linguistic influences on the similarity judgment of objects between English and Japanese speakers. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(SEP), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01637
Roberson D, Davies I, Davidoff J. Color categories are not universal: Replications and new evidence from a stone-age culture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2000;129:369–398.
Samuel, S., Cole, G. & Eacott, M.J. Grammatical gender and linguistic relativity: A systematic review. Psychon Bull Rev, 26, 1767–1786 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01652-3
Sera, M. D., Berge, C. A. H., & Pintado, J. del C. (1994). Grammatical and conceptual forces in the attribution of gender by English and Spanish speakers. Cognitive Development, 9(3), 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-2014(94)90007-8
Bonilla, N. (2019). Perception of the World Through Language: Do Spanish and English do speakers perceive the world differently? A review of the Literature on the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis. ICESI University. 1-56.
Boroditsky, L. (2001). Does Language Shape Thought?: Mandarin and English Speakers’ Conceptions of Time. Cognitive Psychology, 43(1),1–22. https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.2001.0748
Boutonnet, B., Athanasopoulos, P., & Thierry, G. (2012). Unconscious effects of grammatical gender during object categorisation. Brain Research, 1479, 72–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2012.08.044
Casasanto, D., Boroditsky, L., Phillips, W., Greene, J., Goswami, S., Bocanegra-Thiel, S., … Gil, D. (2005). How deep are the effects of language on thought? Time estimation in speakers of English, Indonesian, Greek, and Spanish. Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 186–191.
Haertlé, I. (2017). Does Grammatical Gender Influence Perception? A Study of Polish and French Speakers, Psychology of Language and Communication, 21(1), 386-407. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/plc-2017-0019
Koerner, E. (1992). The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis: A Preliminary History and a Bibliographical Essay. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 2(2), 173-198. Retrieved December 10, 2020, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/43102168
Kay, P., & Kempton, W. (1984). What is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis? American Anthropologist, 86, 65–79.
Konishi, T. The semantics of grammatical gender: A cross-cultural study. J Psycholinguist Res 22, 519–534 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01068252 Masuda, T., Ishii, K., Miwa, K., Rashid, M., Lee, H., & Mahdi, R. (2017). One label or two? Linguistic influences on the similarity judgment of objects between English and Japanese speakers. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(SEP), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01637
Roberson D, Davies I, Davidoff J. Color categories are not universal: Replications and new evidence from a stone-age culture. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 2000;129:369–398.
Samuel, S., Cole, G. & Eacott, M.J. Grammatical gender and linguistic relativity: A systematic review. Psychon Bull Rev, 26, 1767–1786 (2019). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01652-3
Sera, M. D., Berge, C. A. H., & Pintado, J. del C. (1994). Grammatical and conceptual forces in the attribution of gender by English and Spanish speakers. Cognitive Development, 9(3), 261–292. https://doi.org/10.1016/0885-2014(94)90007-8