LANGUAGE IN CULTURE

1 he record of a conference, including seven papers and an additional 150 pages of discussion, does not often appear in book form, even as a memoir of American Anthropologist.1 Even more surprising, present work is a part of a series devoted primarily to specific cultures (e.g., Arthur Wright's Studies in Chinese Thought). This volume, however, is con cerned with implications and provability of Whorf hy pothesis, or Saphir-Whorf hypothesis, as it is more accurately labeled. We may well inquire why such treatment should be given to any hypothesis. The late Benjamin L. Whorf proposed linguistic system (in other words, grammar) of each language is not merely a reproducing instrument for voicing ideas but rather is itself shaper of ideas, program and guide for individual's mental activity, for his analysis of impressions, for his synthesis of his mental stock in trade (quoted by Hoijer, 94). Whorf went further, maintaining that each language conceals a hidden meta physics, and that this metaphysics has a profound influence on normal behavior patterns. Whorf was a disciple of late Edward Sapir, who earlier but more reservedly suggested thesis of linguistic influence on thought and action. Whorf, in his enthu siasm, tended toward extreme view that thought worlds rest on language to such an extent that they defy ultimate translation from one language to another. Even an individual equally versed in two languages could only sense presence of basic linguistic difference, but could never verbalize it completely in either language. Such a thesis is called the linguistic relativity principle by Franklin Fearing2 (47-49). Joseph Greenberg,8 on