This is also known as the strong Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

One particular assumption having received much attention in fiction is popularly known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

In science fiction, much work has been done on the assumption popularly known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

Versions of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis were embraced by a number of scholars.

The book also explores the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis, that language shapes thinking, and thus, culture.

The major themes explored by this tale are determinism, language, and an interesting take on the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis postulates that a person's language influences their perceptions and cognitive patterns.

Some linguists believe that lexicon influences people's perception of things, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is the basis for ideologically motivated linguistic prescriptivism.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is a linguistic idea.

(For linguistic theories about how language may direct thought, see the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.)

This leads to another debate (see the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis or Eskimo words for snow).

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis states that language use significantly shapes perceptions of the world and forms ideological preconceptions.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis argues that individuals experience the world based on the grammatical structures they habitually use.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis was contrary to prevailing academic wisdom, and was effectively ignored.

As a note of interest, it was Hoijer who coined the term "Sapir-Whorf hypothesis".

Her work has provided new insights on the controversial question of whether the languages we speak shape the way we think (see Sapir-Whorf hypothesis).

In addition, the site has critically addressed opinions and theories related to the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis concerning the relationship between culture, thought and language.

This is the Japanese version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, according to which grammar determines world-view.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis claims that there is a relationship between the language a person speaks and how that person understands the world.

See the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.

The famous but disputed Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is sometimes cited; this claims that the language one speaks influences the way one thinks.

This corresponds to the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis.

The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in linguistics states that the grammatical structure of a mother language influences the way adherents to it perceive the world.

Among the most popular and controversial theories in this area of scholarly work is the theory of linguistic relativity (also known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis).

It has led to a renewed interest in the study of linguistic relativity.

Such belief is related to the theory of Linguistic relativity.

"Grammar and social practice: on the role of 'culture' in linguistic relativity."

John Lucy has identified three main strands of research into linguistic relativity.

One parameter is the degree and depth of linguistic relativity.

Whorf considered allophones to be another example of linguistic relativity.

A main point of debate in the discussion of linguistic relativity is the correlation between language and thought.

Some effects of linguistic relativity have been shown in several semantic domains, although they are generally weak.

This theory combines elements of linguistic relativity and affective neuroscience.

The scope of linguistic relativity: An analysis and review of empirical research.

It was in the writings of his last two years that he laid out the research program of Linguistic relativity.

This, Lucy argues, made them blind to the instances in which color terms provided other information that might be considered examples of linguistic relativity.

He identified four parameters on which researchers differed in their opinions about what constitutes linguistic relativity.

The hypothesis of linguistic relativity has inspired many to think about how it might be possible to influence thought by consciously manipulating language.

Many took Malotki's work as the final nail in the coffin of the linguistic relativity hypothesis.

In doing so they began a line of empirical studies that investigated the principle of linguistic relativity.

He concluded that the debate on linguistic relativity had been confused and resultingly fruitless.

A fourth parameter is whether to view the locus of linguistic relativity as being in the language or in the mind.

Currently, researchers prefer to use Whorf's own terminology, by referring to the principle of linguistic relativity.

In this volume, cognitive and social scientists laid out a new paradigm for investigations in linguistic relativity.

Called the linguistic relativity hypothesis, it argues that humans see the world less with their eyes than with their language.

That's not what researchers in the 1970's found with another remote tribe, in a study that sent linguistic relativity into something of a tailspin.

Today many followers of the universalist school of thought still oppose the idea of linguistic relativity.

The concept of Linguistic relativity concerns the relationship between language and thought, about whether and how language influences thought.

Bowerman showed that certain cognitive processes did not use language to any significant extent and therefore could not be subject to effects of linguistic relativity.