Philippine Normal University

The National Center for Teacher Education

Mindanao
Prosperidad, Agusan del Sur

Presented to:
DR. UNI GRACE P. PORRAS
Professor

Presented by:
ANNE SHANYNE B. DE LOS SANTOS
Student

November 8, 2014

LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

The relationship between language and culture is one of many topics or issues discussed in
Sociolinguistics. According to Trudgill (1974) in Sumarsono (2009) Sociolinguistics is defined as the study of a
language as a part of culture and society. From the definition above, it is emphasized that language is a part of
culture and cannot be separated from each other. Criper and Widowson (1975) in Sumarsono (2009) stated that
Sociolinguistics is the study of language in operation. Its purpose is to show how the convention of language use
relates to other aspect s of culture. In other words, in Sociolinguistics, we study language, culture and the relationship
between them.
There are a lot of theories concerned with language and culture. Some theories stated that language is a
part of culture. Others said that language and culture are two different things that have a much closed relation. In one
hand, it is claimed that language is much more influenced by culture. As a result, all things included in culture can be
manifested in language. In the other hand, it is also stated that language much influenced the culture and the way of
thought of the society in which the language is used. (Khair and Agustina, 2010, p. 162 )
Traditionally, language has been viewed as a vehicle of thought, a system of expression that a person
mediates the transfer of thought from one person to another. (Finegan, Besiner, Blair, and Collins, 1992. p.3)
Linguistically, language is defined as an arbitrary vocal system used by human beings to communicate with one
another.( 1992. p. 9) Awhile, culture, in this context, is defined in the sense of whatever a person must know in order
to function in a particular society, not in the sense of `high culture` like the appreciation of music, literature, the arts,
etc. Goodenough ( 1957, p. 167) gives the definition of culture as ` a society`s culture consists of whatever it is one
has to know or believe in order to operate in a manner acceptable to its member, and to do so in any role that they
accept for any one of themselves.` In other words, culture is the `knowhow` that a person must possess to get
through the task of daily living. (Wardhaugh, 1998, p. 215)
THE WHORFIAN HYPOTHESIS
One of the existed theories concerning the relationship between language and culture was founded by
Edward Sapir and his student Benjamin Lee Whorf. This theory is known as Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. Some
sociolinguists tend to use the term `Whorfian hypothesis` because the claim seems to be much more concerned with
Whorf than it does to Sapir. Based on this hypothesis, the structure of a native language determines the way in which
speakers of that language view the world. The way of thought of society is really determined by the language
used.(Wardhaugh, 216) Sapir in his book `Language` (1929, p. 207) as quoted by Wardhaugh stated that human
beings do not live in the objective world alone, nor alone in the world of social activity as ordinarily understood, but
are very much at the mercy of the particular language which has become the medium of expression for their society.
(p. 216) This idea was extended and strengthened by his student Benjamin Lee Whorf. Whorf stated that the
background linguistics system called `grammar` of each language is not merely a reproducing instrument for voicing
ideas but rather is itself the shaper of ideas, the program and guide for the individual`s mental activity, for his analysis
of impression, for his synthesis for his mental stock in trade. Formulation of ideas is not an independent process,
strictly rational in the old sense, but is part of a particular grammar, and differs from slightly to greatly, between
different grammars. (Carroll, 1956, pp. 212)
According to Whorf, different speakers will experience the world differently insofar as the language they
speak differ structurally, and most of us are not aware of all the subtleties of structural differences among language
can avoid seeing the world as it is rather than as it is presented through the screen of the language.(Wardhaugh, p.
217) This case can be exemplified by Javanese words `jaran` for `horse` and `belo` for `the kid of horse` known by
Javanese children. These two words will influence their view when they learn Indonesian language. They will ask in
his mind the word for `belo` in Indonesian. Awhile Indonesian has no word for it. (Sumarsono, p.59) Other example is
that the linguistic structure of Hopi is different from that of English, German, and French called as Standard Average
European (SAE). Hopi grammatical categories provide a `process` orientation toward the world, whereas the

categories in SAE are a fixed orientation toward time and space so that they not only `objectify` reality in certain ways
but even distinguish between things that must be counted, e.g., trees, hills, waves, and sparks, and those that need
not to be counted, e.g., water, fire, and courage. In SAE events occur, have occurred, or will occur, in a definite time,
i.e., present, past, or future; to speaker of Hopi, an event can be warranted to have occurred, or to be occurring, or to
be expected to occur. From these linguistic structure phenomena, Whorf concluded that these differences lead
speakers of Hopi and SAE to view the world differently. (Wardhaugh, p. 219)
Concerning with the claims made in Whorf hypothesis, Fishman (1972) claims that `if speakers of one
language have certain words to describe things and speakers of another language lack of similar words, the
speakers of the first language will find it easier to talk about those things` We can see this case on using the
vocabularies of certain occasion like in profession; for example, physicians talk easily about medical phenomena,
more easily than other profession like technical engineers, because physicians have the vocabulary to do so.
Moreover, it is claimed that if one language makes distinctions that another language does not make, then those who
use the first language will more readily perceive the differences in their environment which such linguistics
distinctions draw attention to. .(Wardhaugh, p. 217)
There is another opinion that language and culture are two different things and they have close relationship.
Silzer (1990) stated language and culture are like twins. What is in culture will be seen in language and vice versa.
For example, In English and other European languages that are not familiar with eating rice, rice is the only one word
for all kinds of rice. But in Indonesian, there are various kinds of words referring to rice, that is, padi, gabah, beras,
and nasi. English societies know the difference of the four different words, but they don`t need to differ them. On the
contrary, English societies are familiar with horse racing. They have `horse`, `colt`, `stallion`, `pony`, and `mare` for
the word`horse`. But in Indonesian, there is only one word for `horse` because they feel they don`t need to
differentiate it although they know the difference. (Chaer and Agustina, p. 168)
In contrast to Whorfian hypothesis, an anthropologist, Koentharaningrat, (1990) said that culture influences
language. In this case, the relation can be as main system and subsystem. Culture is considered as the main system
and language as the subsystem. For example, if we praise someone with `Bajumu bagus sekali`, `Wah, rumah
saudara besar sekali`, someone whom we praise seems to be shy and directly says``Ah, itu Cuma baju murahan,
kok`, `beginilah namanya rumah di kampung`. In English, in contrast, someone will say `thank you` if s/he gets a kind
of praise. (Chaer and Agustina, p. 170) This condition shows that the culture of English and Indonesian is different.
So, the difference will be seen in the use of the language itself.
KINSHIP SYSTEM
One thing that can show the way in which people use language in daily living and show the relation between
language and culture is in the case of kinship system. Kinship system is a universal feature of language because it is
so important in social organization. Some systems are much richer than others, but all systems make use of such
factors as sex, age, generation, blood, and marriage. Different kinship system will carry idea on how such people
ought to call and behave towards others in the society that uses that system. This can be shown through the
vocabularies used in different language. For example, the word ` family` in English has the same meaning as
`keluarga` in Indonesian. For English, the word` family` includes husband, wife, and children. In contrast, in
Indonesian the word `keluarga` includes more than husband, wife, and children. It rather includes grandparents,
uncle, aunt, cousin, niece, nephew and so on.(Sumarsono, 2009, p. 62)
It is important to remember that when a term like father, brother, or older brother is used in a kinship system
that it carries with it ideas about how such people ought to behave towards others in the society that uses that
system. Fathers, brothers, and older brothers are assumed to have certain rights and duties. In practice, of course,
they may behave otherwise. It is the kinship system which determines who is called what; it is not the behavior of
individuals which leads them to be called this or that.(Wardhaugh, p. 226)

According to Sumarsono, there are two important terms that can be differentiated in this context. The first
term is called `term of reference` This term refers to the words of kinship system, i.e. brother, sister, father, uncle,
cousin etc in English. In Sasak, there are `inak`, `amak`, `papuk`, `balok`, `anak`. The second term called `term of
address` refers to how we call or address the member of the family like `bi` for Indonesian for `aunt`, `pakl$$ek` for
`older uncle from father or mother in Javanese, `amak kake`, `inak kake`, `saik` in Sasak. (p.63)
TABOO AND EUPHEMISM
In one sense, language is used to express cultural meaning. But in other sense, it is used to avoid saying
certain things and express them in other expression. Certain things are not said, not because they cannot be, but
because people don`t talk about those things, or if those things are talked about, they are talked about in very
roundabout ways. In the first case we have instances of linguistic taboo; in the second we have the employment of
euphemism so as to avoid mentioning certain matters directly. (Wardhaugh, p.234)
A taboo is a strong social prohibition (or ban) relating to any area of human activity or social custom that is
sacred and forbidden based on moral judgement and sometimes even religious beliefs. Breaking the taboo is usually
considered objectionable or abhorrent by society. The term comes from the Tongan language, and appears in many
Polynesian cultures. In those cultures, a tabu (or tapu or kapu) often has specific religious associations. When an
activity or custom is a taboo, it is forbidden and interdictions are implemented concerning it, such as the ground set
apart as a sanctuary for criminals. Some taboo activities or customs are prohibited under law and transgressions may
lead to severe penalties. Other taboos result in embarrassment, shame, and rudeness. Although critics and/or
dissenters may oppose taboos, they are put into place to avoid disrespect to any given authority, be it legal, moral
and/or religious.
Common etymology traces taboo to the Tongan word tapu or the Fijian word tabu] meaning "under
prohibition", "not allowed", or "forbidden". In its current use in Tonga, the word tapu also means "sacred" or "holy",
often in the sense of being restricted or protected by custom or law. In the main island of the Kingdom of Tonga,
where the greater portion of the population reside within the capital Nuku'alofa, the word is often appended to the end
of "Tonga", making the word "Tongatapu", where local use it as "Sacred South" rather than "forbidden south".
Taboos can include dietary restrictions (halal and kosher diets, religious vegetarianism, and the prohibition
of cannibalism), restrictions on sexual activities and relationships (sex outside of marriage, adultery, intermarriage,
miscegenation, homosexuality, incest, animal-human sex, adult-child sex, sex with the dead), restrictions of bodily
functions (burping, flatulence, restrictions on the use of psychoactive drugs, restrictions on state of genitalia such as
circumcision or sex reassignment), exposure of body parts (ankles in the Victorian British Empire, women's hair in
parts of the Middle East, nudity in the US), and restrictions on the use of offensive language.
No taboo is known to be universal, but some (such as the cannibalism, exposing of intimate parts,
intentional homicide, and incest taboos) occur in the majority of societies. Taboos may serve many functions, and
often remain in effect after the original reason behind them has expired. Some have argued that taboos therefore
reveal the history of societies when other records are lacking.
In regard to linguistic taboo, there has been a considerable change since the late twentieth century. The
decline may have been more increasing in the use of euphemistic language. Euphemistic words and expressions
allow us to talk about unpleasant things and disguise or neutralize the unpleasentness, e.g. the subject os sickness,
death, unemployment, and criminality. They also allow us to give labels to unpleasant tasks and jobs in an attempt to
make them sound almost attractive. Euphemism is endemic in our society: the glorification of the commonplace and
the elevation of the trivial.(Wardhaugh, 235)
In conclusion, taboo and euphemism affect us all. We may not be deeply conscious of the effects, but affect
us they do.We all probably have a few things we refuse to talk about and still others we do not talk about directly. We

may have some words we know but never-or hardly ever- use because they are too emotional for either us or others.
Awhile we may find some thought too deep for words, others we definitely take care not to express at all even though
we know the words, or else we express ourselves on them very indirectly. (Wardhaugh, 236)
In Sasak the relation between language and culture can also be shown by taboo. Some taboos are based
on the religious concept, some are based on custom and traditional belief, and some are based on moral judgment.
There are some kinds of taboo in Sasak language based on religion concept, for example, dietary restrictions. For
Sasak people, especially Muslim Sasak, it is forbidden to eat certain animals like dog, pig, and etc. Also, it is taboo to
take the oath like Bani Haram, Bani Pekek, Bani Bedok, and etc.
Based on traditional belief, it is taboo for Sasak People to say Antih aku when the people pass through
forest or big river because it is believed that if someone say antih aku in the forest, there will be a wild animal that
waits for him, or if someone say antih aku in the river there will be crocodile that waits for him.
Meanwhile, based on moral judgment or moral value of Sasak, it is taboo to mention directly the name of
genitalia. For example Lesek for man and Pepek for woman. But these two words can be replaced by Perabot
dengan mame and Perabot dengan nine. So in this case, we use euphemism to replace the word taboo as
mentioned about.
FOLK TAXONOMY
According to Berlin (1992) in Wardhaugh, folk taxonomy is a way of classifying a certain part of reality so
that it makes some kinds of sense to those who have to deal with it. Typically, such taxonomies involve matters like
naturally occurring flora and fauna in the environment, but they may also others matters too. One the best-known
studies of a folk taxonomy is Frakes account (1961) of the terms that the Subanun of Mindanao in the southern
Philippines use to explain disease of the skin. Effective treatment of any disease depends on proper diagnosis, but
that depends on recognizing the symptoms for what they are. (Wardhaugh, 1998, 227)
Diagnosis is the process of finding the appropriate name for a set of symptoms. Once that name is found,
treatment can follow. However, we can see that the success of that treatment depends critically not only on its
therapeutic value but on the validity of the system of classification for diseases. That system is rather a folk one, not
a scientific one.
According to Berlin (1992) in Mifflin Folk taxonomies have hierarchical levels similar to formal biological
classifications of kingdom, phylum, class, order, family, genus and species (Berlin, 1992). In folk taxonomy, the
common levels are life from, generic, specific and varietal.
Life form

A high level category of plants or animals that share some general shape or characteristic of their
morphology. Examples: tree, vine, bush, fish, snake, bird, wug, or mammal.
Generic

The most common, basic level. Examples are dog, oak, grass, rice, ant. Folk generally often do not
correspond to scientific genera but may correspond to Linnaean species or families. For instance, dog is a folk
genus, but grass is a Linnaean species folk genus, and a Linnaean family (actually a little less, since people
generally do not recognize maize, etc. as grasses); rice is a folk genus, but two Linnaean; species and ant is a folk
genus, but a Linnaean family, formicidae.

Specific

In some languages such as Spanish, Bahasa (spoken in Indonesia and Malaysia), the generic name comes
first, as in a Linnaean name. In other languages such as English, it is the other way around. The specific name tends
to be a pneumonic device, e.g., color, shape, utility, etc. that makes the name easy to remember.
Varietal

Common in crops such as the potato. Examples are papa imilla, papa imilla negra, and papa imilla blanca.

Carolus Linnaeus, an 18th-century Swedish botanist, devised the system of binomial nomenclature used for
naming species. In this system, each species is given a two-part Latin name, formed by appending a specific epithet
to the genus name. By convention, the genus name is capitalized, and both the genus name and specific epithet are
italicized, for Canis familiaris or simply C. familiaris. Modern taxonomy is currently in flux, and certain aspects of
classification are being refined. This table shows one traditional classification of five species of life out of the
estimated five million species of the world. This table shows one traditional classification of five species of life out of
the estimated five million species of the world.
In Sasak language is also found the folk taxonomy. For example the kinds of House, there are Bale
Balaq, Bale Pager, Bale Batu, Bale Betingkat. Then, the kind of disease of Sasak language. Based on where the
the diseases is felt. For example, Sakit kaki, sakit jejengku, sakit tian, sakit angen, sakit dade, sakit belong, and
sakit otak.
COLOR TERMINOLOGY
Color terminology has also been used to explore the relationship between different language and culture.
Sometimes we cannot directly translate color words from one language to another without introducing subtle changes
in meaning, e.g., English `brown` and French `brun`.
All languages make use of basic color term. A basic color term must be a single word, e.g., blue or yellow,
not some combination of words, e.g.,light blue or pole yellow.
According to Berlin and Kay (1969) in Wardaugh, an analysis of the basic color terms found in a wide variety
of languages reveals certain very interesting patterns. If a language has only two terms, they are for equivalents to
black and white (or dark and light). If a third is added, it is red. The fourth and fifth terms will be yellow and green, but
the other may be reserved. The sixth and seventh terms are blue and brown. Finally, as in English, come terms like
grey, pink, orange, and purple, but not in any particular order. In this view there are only eleven basic color terms. All
other terms for colors are combinations like greyish-brown, variation like scarlet, modifications like fire-engine red,
and finally the kinds of designations favored by paint and cosmetic manufacturers. Wardaugh, 1998. Pp. 230)
Two points about color terminology seem particularly interesting. The color spectrum is an objective fact: it
is out there, waiting to be dealt with cognitively. Apparently, human cognition is so alike everywhere that every one
approaches the spectrum in the same way. Moreover, as cultural and technological change occur, it becomes more
and more necessary for people to differentiate within the color spectrum. Instead of picking bits and pieces of
spectrum at random as it were and naming them, people, no matter what languages they speak, progressively subdevide the whole spectrum in a systematic way. The second points are that, if speakers of any language are asked to
identify the parts of the spectrum, they find one system of such identification much easier to manipulate than another.
They find it difficult to draw a line to separate that part of the spectrum they would call yellow from that part they
would call orange, or similarly to separate blue from green. That is, assigning precise easy task for individuals nor
one on which groups of individuals achieve a remarkable consensus. However, they do find it easy and they do reach
a better consensus, if they are required to indicate some parts of the spectrum they would call typically orange,
typically blue, or typically green. That is, they have consistent and uniform ideas about typical colors. Speakers of

different languages exhibit such a behaviour always provided that the appropriate color terms are in their
languages.(Wardaugh, 231)
Color terminology also found in sasak terminology, for example the term red is means abang (in ngenongene dialect) and beaq (in other four dialects). This color of abang can be abang odak , abang toak, abang
daraq, and lempok lomak.

CONCLUSION
There are some theories related to the relationship between language and culture. One theory stated that
language influenced culture and the way of thought of the society in which the language is used. This theory is called
Whorfian Hypothesis. Other said that language is much influenced by culture and as a part of culture. The other one
stated that language and culture are two different things that have a very close relation. In addition, there are various
ways in which language and culture have been claimed to be closely related. They are kinship system, color
terminology, taxonomies, and taboo and euphemism.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Chaer, Abdul and Agustina, Leonie. 2010. Sociolinguistics : Perkenalan Awal. Rineka Cipta. Jakarta
Finegan, Edward, Besiner, Niko, Blair, David and Collins, Peter. 1992. Language `It`s Structure and Use` .Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich Group Ltd. Australia.
Mifflin,H.2000 `Taxonomy Life` taken from http://www. Answers.com/topic/Taxonomy.xzz lackyqih B/;Monday,
October 3th, 09.00 PM.
Sumarsono, M.Ed, Dr, Prof. 2009. Sosiolinguistik. Pustaka Fajar, Sabda. Cileban Timur, Yogyakarta.
Wardhaugh, Ronald. 1998. An Introduction to Sociolinguistics. Third edition. Blackwell Publishers Ltd. UK