1

Could someone systematically, methodologically, organisedly research Sociology, Civilisation, Culture through Language?

I.e The state of Language would be the observation and one would give a Cultural explanation(scientific theory) to why the language is the way it is. Like one sees an apple falling down and so as to explain the fall comes up with the Theory of Gravity.

In Greek we have not lost T-V distinction even thought we most frequently use the plural to address someone and there have been about 2 centuries since its introduction.

In Greek we call Mister Κύριος. Κύριος is the owner of something. If someone is Κύριος of his house he is the Master of his house. And it has not been weakened Κύριος stayed κύριος not like Master turned into Mister. Maybe the individuality(Master of oneself) is stressed more. Portuguese and other Romance languages use Senhor which is more alike Sir both rising from Senex. Noone calls someone Dono X.

In Japan they most often ask for Pardon even if most of us would thank a person instead.

In Brasil we ask for permission "Com licença" so we can interupt someone or pass by instead of asking for pardon Excuse me, Συγνώμη.

And many more examples to explain.

The whole point is that by explaining the Language(s) this way we gain insights on the culture and civilisation.

  • start with "The Geography of Thought" by Richard Nisbett. – Swami Vishwananda Sep 26 at 17:03
  • @SwamiVishwananda But my question is not about West and East. My question is not limited to Geography or such γρεατ distances. Italy (senex signore and not dominus donno) is very close geographically to Greece(even historically) which uses Κύριος. – George Ntoulos Sep 26 at 21:29
  • 1
    I've put in my reopen vote. But you could help make this more accessible by putting in a link to technical terms like T-V – Rusi-packing-up Oct 13 at 6:20
2

Linguists are not always that fond of methods using sciences other than linguistics itself. But certainly there are ways to explain why the word hound is related to hunt; Canis is related to tooth and kalba is related to saliva (drewling). The languages that use these different words are spoken in countries where the dog had different cultural significances. In one it was a companion used for hunting. In the other its use was biting and thus to protect and ward off strangers. While in another the hound had no significant meaning and was more or less described as drewling. The use of the dog dominated its name in different language groups. That means culture has influence on what you say and why you use that word and not another. Because a dog can hunt, bite and drewl in Germany, Italy and Saudi Arabia. But each language related to these countries has a name related to the cultural view of dogs. Not just that. It also tells something about the attitude towards dogs by these different people.

  • 1
    It could be done by Sociologists or Socio-linguists. Somehow we need to infer the culture and civilisation. If our observations were limited to the Language(s) we need to do what needs to be done. Why is X true? How is X? X must be true to explain Y. X must be like that to explain Y. But I am asking if that job is really done systematically. Regardless of if it is done by linguists or sociologists. – George Ntoulos Sep 26 at 21:37
  • Not aware of such research. I think that may be because generally researchers do not believe these connections exist and therefor research may not even be considered. It would also be a huge investment to do which would be risky business. Do you wish to start such research then I am willing to help. Not financially but time investments can be done. – Ajagar Sep 28 at 8:00

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.