Abstract
Participants read aloud swear words, euphemisms of the swear words, and neutral stimuli while their autonomic activity was measured by electrodermal activity. The key finding was that autonomic responses to swear words were larger than to euphemisms and neutral stimuli. It is argued that the heightened response to swear words reflects a form of verbal conditioning in which the phonological form of the word is directly associated with an affective response. Euphemisms are effective because they replace the trigger (the offending word form) by another word form that expresses a similar idea. That is, word forms exert some control on affect and cognition in turn. We relate these findings to the linguistic relativity hypothesis, and suggest a simple mechanistic account of how language may influence thinking in this context.
Highlights
Linguistic relativity is concerned with a profound but subtle question: Does the language you speak affect the way you think? the messages expressed in language do influence thought
We argue that euphemisms are often useful because they allow the speaker to replace the trigger by another word form that expresses the same idea but that is not itself associated with a conditioned response
Each mean amplitude was itself baselined with respect to a 1 s period prior to stimulus onset
Summary
Linguistic relativity is concerned with a profound but subtle question: Does the language you speak affect the way you think? The messages expressed in language do influence thought. That is what language is for – to implant thoughts and feelings into the minds of others. What is not so obvious, is whether the form of a language can influence thought. The answer to this question is highly contentious. As Bloom and Keil put it: ‘‘The debate, as we see it, is not whether language shapes thought—it is whether language shapes thoughts in some way other than through the semantic information that it conveys. The interesting debate is over whether the structure of language [italics theirs]—syntactic, morphological, lexical, phonological, etc.—has an effect on thought’’ [1]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
