Abstract
Whorf and Wittgenstein are perhaps the most famous names in linguistics and philosophy associated with the assumption that language plays a decisive role in shaping our view of reality. After a critical discussion of Whorf's linguistic relativity principle I conclude that it is not language as a system, but the use of language according to the rules of language games which connects language thought and world view, especially if some particular usage becomes the commonly accepted norm. This traditional norm also enters argumentative discourse in the form of background assumptions occuring in the premises of arguments. Thus, traditional points of view and prevailing ideologies in a society, even if challenged in discussions, can become reinforced and stabilized. This is illustrated with a critical analysis of the role and function of tautological utterances in argumentative discourse, which only apparently are compelling means of argumentation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
Chatterjee, R.: 1985, ‘Reading Whorf Through Wittgenstein. A Solution to the Linguistic Relativity Problem’, Lingua 67, 37–63.
Chomsky, N.: 1988, Language and Problems of Knowledge. The Managua Lectures, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Colwell, G.: 1994, ‘Freedom, Determinism and Circular Reasoning’, Argumentation 8(3), 251–263.
Coseriu, E.: 1964, ‘Pour une sémantique diachronique structurale’, Travaux de linguistique et littérature II(1), Strasbourg, 139–186.
Coseriu, E. and H. Geckeler: 1981, Trends in Structural Semantics, Narr, Tübingen.
Dijk, T. A. van: 1993, Elite Discourse and Racism, Sage, Newbury Park.
Dressler, W. U.: 1991, ‘Vielfalt in Sprache und Gesellschaft’, in P. Gstettner/ V. Wakounig (Hg.), Mut zur Vielfalt. Strategien gegen das Verschwinden ethnischer Minderheiten, Drava, Klagenfurt and Celovec, pp. 23–31.
Eemeren, F. H. Van and R. Grootendorst: 1984, Speech Acts in Argumentative Discussions, Foris, Dordrecht.
Eemeren, F. H. Van and R. Grootendorst: 1992, Argumentation, Communication, and Fallacies, Erlbaum, Hillsdale, N.J.
Farghal, M.: 1992, ‘Colloquial Jordanian Arabic Tautologies’, Journal of Pragmatics 17(3), 223–240.
Fraser, B.: 1988, ‘Motor-oil is Motor-oil. An Account of British Nominal Tautologies’, Journal of Pragmatics 12(2), 215–220.
Gipper, H.: 1972, Gibt es ein sprachliches Relativitätsprinzip? Überlegungen zur Sapir-Whorf-Hypothese, Fischer, Stuttgart.
Grewendorf, G.: 1995, Sprache als Organ. Sprache als Lebensform, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt M.
Grice, H. P.: 1975, ‘The Logic of Conversation’, in P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds.), Speech Acts, Academic Press, New York, pp. 41–58.
Häberlin, S., R. Schmid and E. L. Wyss: 1992, Übung macht die Meisterin, Verlag Frauenoffensive, München.
Helbig, G.: 1975, Geschichte der neueren Sprachwissenschaft, Rowohlt, Reinbek.
Hoijer, H.: 1954, ‘The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis’, in H. Hoijer (ed.), Language in Culture, Chicago Univ. Press, Chicago, pp. 92–105.
Humboldt, W. v.: 1963, Über die Verschiedenheit des menschlichen Sprachbaus und ihren Einfluß auf die geistige Entwicklung des Menschengeschlechts, in Werke. Bd 3. Schriften zur Sprachphilosophie, Wiss. Buchgesellschaft, Darmstadt, pp. 368–756.
Katz, J. J.: 1972, Semantic Theory, Harper and Row, New York.
Katz, J. J.: 1988, ‘The Refutation of Indeterminacy’, The Journal of Philosophy 85(5), 227–252.
Keller, R.: 1977, ‘Kollokutionäre Akte’, Germanistische Linguistik 1, 3–50.
Khosroshahi, F.: 1989, ‘Penguin's Don't Care, but Women Do: A Social Identity Analysis of a Whorfian Problem’, Language in Society 18(4), 505–525.
Kienpointner, M.: 1983, Argumentationsanalyse, Verlag des Institus für Sprachwissenschaft, Innsbruck.
Kienpointner, M.: 1992, Allagslogik, Frommann und Holzboog, Stuttgart.
Kienpointner, M.: 1996, Vernünftig argumentieren, Rowohlt, Reinbek.
Lakoff, G.: 1987, Women, Fire and Dangerous Things, Univ. Press, Chicago.
Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson: 1980, Metaphors we Live by, Univ. Press, Chicago.
Lakoff, R.: 1975, Language and Woman's Place, Herper & Row, New York.
Levinson, S.: 1983, Pragmatics, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
Lucy, J. A.: 1992, Language Diversity and Thought, Univ. Press, Cambridge.
Malotki, E.: 1979, Hopi-Raum, Narr, Tübingen.
Malotki, E.: 1983, Hopi Time, Mouton, Berlin.
Mackenzie, J.: 1994, ‘Contexts of Begging the Question’, Argumentation 8(3), 227–240.
Okamoto, S.: 1993, ‘Nominal Repetitive Constructions in Japanese: The ‘Tautology’ Controversy Revisited’, Journal of Pragmatics 20(5), 433–466.
Perelman, Ch. and L. Olbrechts-Tyteca: 1983, Traité de l'argumentation. La nouvelle rhétorique, Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles, Bruxelles.
Piaget, J. and B. Inhelder: 1979, Die Psychologie des Kindes, Fischer, Frankfurt, M.
Pusch, L.: 1984, Das Deutsche als Männersprache, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, M.
Pusch, L.: 1990, Alle Menschen werden Schwestern, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, M.
Quine, W. V. O.: 1960, Word and Object, M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Samel, I.: 1995, Einführung in die feministische Sprachwissenschaft, Schmidt, Berlin.
Sapir, E.: 1968, Selected Writings. Ed. by D. G. Mandelbaum, Univ. of California Press, Berkeley.
Schaff, A.: 1964, Sprache und Erkenntnis, Europa Verlag, Wien.
Slobin, D.: 1991, ‘Learning to Think for Speaking: Native Language, Cognition, and Rhetorical Style’, Pragmatics 1(1), 7–25.
Stahlschmidt, A.: 1983, Das Verbalsystem des Hopi, Seminar für Allgemeine und Indogermanische Sprachwissenschaft, Kiel.
Touratier, Chr.: 1993a, Que penser de l' hypothèse Sapir-Whorf? In: Langues et cultures. Cercle Linguistique d' Aix-en-Provence, Travaux 11. Publications de l'Univ. de Provence, Aix-en-Provence, pp. 65–74.
Touratier, Chr.: 1993b, Langue, culture et pensée. In: Langues et cultures. Cercle Linguistique d' Aix-en-Provence, Travaux 11. Publications de l'Univ. de Provence, Aix-en-Provence, pp. 9–15.
Walton, D.: 1994, ‘Begging the Question as a Pragmatic Fallacy’, Synthese 100, 95–131.
Walton, D.: 1996, Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning, Erlbaum, Mahwah, N.J.
Ward, G. L. and J. Hirschberg: 1991, ‘A Pragmatic Analysis of Tautological Utterances’, Journal of Pragmatics 15(6), 507–520.
Webster's Third New International Dictionary of the English Language. Merriam, Springfield, Mass, 1971.
Wierzbicka, A.: 1987, ‘Boy will be Boys: ‘Radical Semantics’ vs ‘Radical Pragmatics’, Language 63, 95–114.
Wierzbicka, A.: 1988, ‘Boys will be Boys. A Rejoinder to Bruce Fraser’, Journal of Pragmatics 12(2), 221–224.
Wodak, R. et al.: 1987, Sprachliche Gleichbehandlung von Frau und Mann. Linguistische Empfehlungen zur sprachlichen Gleichbehandlung von Frau und Mann im öffentlichen Bereich. Bundesministerium für Arbeit und Soziales, Wien.
Wodak, R. et al.: 1990, ‘Wir sind alle unschuldige Täter!’: diskurshistorische Studien zum Nachkriegsantisemitismus, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, M.
Whorf, B. L.: 1946, ‘The Hopi Language, Toreva Dialect’, in H. Hoijer et al. (ed.), Linguistics Structures of Native America, Viking Fund, New York, pp. 158–183.
Whorf, B. L.: 1956, Language, Thought, and Reality. Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Ed. by J.B. Carroll, MIT-Press, Cambridge, Mass.
Wittgenstein, L.: 1975, Philosophische Untersuchungen, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, M.
Wittgenstein, L.: 1978, Tractatus logico-philosophicus, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt, M.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Kienpointner, M. Whorf and Wittgenstein. Language, world view and argumentation. Argumentation 10, 475–494 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142980
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00142980