The relationship between language and culture is known to be confusing with no clear distinction on how to separate the two. Language must be learned in order to communicate with the people who speak it as their native tongue, and culture must be understood in order to act in accordance with the social norms of society. But if multiple languages are learned without any cultural knowledge on the country where that language is spoken, is that language fully learned? And if multiple countries are visited and explored from a local perspective, is that culture fully comprehended without knowing the language? Are language and culture inseparable from one another? This paper will examine how language and culture are connected to the environment
…show more content…
In Claire Kramsch’s The Relationship Between Language and Culture, she analyzes how language and culture are linked, and also the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Kramsch highlights the romantic aspect of the complex relationship, ultimately deciding that the relationship is arbitrary, and one cannot exist without the other. One critical point that is made states, “different people speak differently because they think differently, and that they think differently because their language offers them different ways of expressing the world around them” (Kramsch 11). Kramsch confirms the idea that language has the ability to shape and alter worldviews and how they are expressed and communicated between people who speak different language, even if they come from the same culture. Kramsch fully refutes the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, stating that, “the strong version that posits that language determines the way we think, cannot be taken seriously, but a weak version, supported by the findings that there are cultural differences in the semantic associations evoked by seemingly common concepts, is generally accepted nowadays … The way a given language encodes experience semantically makes aspects of that experience not exclusively accessible, but just more salient for the users of that language” (Kramsch 13). Her questioning of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is interesting, because …show more content…
One line says, “It’s because of the vowels that as we all know only native Danes master. The vowels reveal the foreigners” (Nordbrandt). He distinctly believes that the Danish language is so difficult to comprehend and master that you are automatically a foreigner if you do not master the vowels. How is one expected to understand and feel welcomed in a culture if they are judged based on their mastery of a language? It’s simply not possible. Nordbrandt further criticizes the Danish language on its exclusivity, asking, “Shouldn’t we welcome foreigners in a language they can pronounce? Just as long as it isn’t English because that is too banal” (Nordbrandt). He wants the Danish language to be easier to learn and understand, because that way foreigners will be more welcomed into their culture. Nordbrandt alludes to the idea that part of the Danish language’s identity to be hard to understand, only adding to the Danish culture. It’s humorous that he prefers the universal language not to be English, even though almost everyone in Denmark speaks English. Learning a language can act as a cultural barrier for anyone entering a new culture, thus only further emphasizing that the limitations created by language prove culture cannot exist without
In Claire Kramsch’s The Relationship Between Language and Culture, she analyzes how language and culture are linked, and also the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Kramsch highlights the romantic aspect of the complex relationship, ultimately deciding that the relationship is arbitrary, and one cannot exist without the other. One critical point that is made states, “different people speak differently because they think differently, and that they think differently because their language offers them different ways of expressing the world around them” (Kramsch 11). Kramsch confirms the idea that language has the ability to shape and alter worldviews and how they are expressed and communicated between people who speak different language, even if they come from the same culture. Kramsch fully refutes the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, stating that, “the strong version that posits that language determines the way we think, cannot be taken seriously, but a weak version, supported by the findings that there are cultural differences in the semantic associations evoked by seemingly common concepts, is generally accepted nowadays … The way a given language encodes experience semantically makes aspects of that experience not exclusively accessible, but just more salient for the users of that language” (Kramsch 13). Her questioning of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is interesting, because …show more content…
One line says, “It’s because of the vowels that as we all know only native Danes master. The vowels reveal the foreigners” (Nordbrandt). He distinctly believes that the Danish language is so difficult to comprehend and master that you are automatically a foreigner if you do not master the vowels. How is one expected to understand and feel welcomed in a culture if they are judged based on their mastery of a language? It’s simply not possible. Nordbrandt further criticizes the Danish language on its exclusivity, asking, “Shouldn’t we welcome foreigners in a language they can pronounce? Just as long as it isn’t English because that is too banal” (Nordbrandt). He wants the Danish language to be easier to learn and understand, because that way foreigners will be more welcomed into their culture. Nordbrandt alludes to the idea that part of the Danish language’s identity to be hard to understand, only adding to the Danish culture. It’s humorous that he prefers the universal language not to be English, even though almost everyone in Denmark speaks English. Learning a language can act as a cultural barrier for anyone entering a new culture, thus only further emphasizing that the limitations created by language prove culture cannot exist without