Hopi time controversy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Hopi time controversy is the academic debate about how the Hopi
language grammaticalizes the concept of time, and about whether the
differences between the ways the English and Hopi languages describe time is
an example of linguistic relativity or not !n popular discourse the debate is
often framed as a "uestion about whether the Hopi #have a concept of time#,
which it is now well established that they do
The debate originated in the $%&'s when (merican linguist )en*amin +ee
Whorf argued that the Hopi conceptualized time differently from the average
English speaker, and that this difference correlated with grammatical
differences between the languages
,$-
Whorf argued that Hopi has #no words,
grammatical forms, construction or expressions that refer directly to what we
call .time.#, and concluded that the Hopi had #no general notion or intuition of
time as a smooth flowing continuum in which everything in the universe
proceeds at e"ual rate, out of a future, through the present, into a past#
,/-

Whorf used the Hopi concept of time as a primary example of his concept of
linguistic relativity, which posits that the way in which individual languages
encode information about the world, influences and correlates with the
cultural world view of the speakers Whorf.s relativist views fell out of favor
in linguistics and anthropology in the $%0's, but Whorf.s statement lived on in
the popular literature often in the form of an urban myth that #The Hopi have
no concept of time# !n $%12 linguist Ekkehart 3alotki published a 0''4page
study of the grammar of time in the Hopi language, concluding that he had
finally refuted Whorf.s claims about the language
,2-
3alotki.s treatise gave
hundreds of examples of Hopi words and grammatical forms referring to
temporal relations 3alotki.s central claim was that the Hopi do indeed
conceptualize time as structured in terms of an ego4centered spatial
progression from past, through present into the future He also demonstrated
that the Hopi language grammaticalizes tense using a distinction between
future and non4future tenses, as opposed to the English tense system, which is
usually analyzed as being based on a past5non4past distinction 3any took
3alotki.s work as the final nail in the coffin of the linguistic relativity
hypothesis
,&-
+inguist and specialist in the linguistic typology of tense
)ernard 6omrie concluded that #3alotki.s presentation and argumentation are
devastating#
,7-
8sychologist 9teven 8inker, a well4known critic of Whorf and
the concept of linguistic relativity, accepted 3alotki.s claims as having
demonstrated Whorf.s complete ineptitude as a linguist
,0-
9ubse"uently the study of linguistic relativity was revived using new
approaches in the $%%'s,
,:-,1-
and 3alotki.s study came under criticism from
relativist linguists and anthropologists, who did not consider that the study
invalidated Whorf.s claims
,&-,%-,$'-,$$-
The main issue of contention is the
interpretation of Whorf.s original claims about Hopi, and what exactly it was
that he was claiming made Hopi different from what Whorf called #9tandard
(verage European# languages
,:-
9ome consider that the Hopi language may
be best described as a tenseless language, and that the distinction between
non4future and future posited by 3alotki may be better understood as a
distinction between realis and irrealis moods
,$/-
;egardless of exactly how
the Hopi concept of time is best analyzed, most specialists agree with 3alotki
that all humans conceptualize time by an analogy with space, although some
recent studies have also "uestioned this
,$2-,$&-
Contents
$ The Hopi language
/ )en*amin +ee Whorf
o /$ Whorf on Hopi time
/$$ Hopi as a tenseless language
o // Whorf.s inspiration from Einsteinian physics
2 The myth of the timeless Hopi
& 3ax )lack and Helmut <ipper
7 Ekkehart 3alotki
o 7$ Hopi Time =$%12>
7$$ 3alotki on tense in Hopi
0 Further debates
o 0$ +anguage, time and cognition
: ?otes
1 ;eferences
The Hopi language
The Hopi language is a ?ative (merican language of the @to4(ztecan
language family, which is spoken by some 7,''' Hopi people in the Hopi
;eservation in ?ortheastern (rizona, @9
!n the large Hopi dictionary there is no word exactly corresponding to the
English noun #time# Hopi employs different words to refer to #a duration of
time# =pasa' #for that long#>, to a point in time =pasat #at that time#>, and
time as measured by a clock =pahntawa>, as an occasion to do something
=hisat or qeni>, a turn or the appropriate time for doing something =qeniptsi
=noun>>, and to have time for something =aw nnaptsiwta =verb>>
,$7-
Time reference can be marked on verbs using the suffix -ni
Momoyam piktota #The women are5were making piki#
Women piki4make
Momoyam piktotani #The women will be making piki#
,$0-
Women piki4make4?!
The 4ni suffix is also used in the word naatoniqa which means #that which
will happen yet# in reference to the future This word is formed from the
adverb naato #yet#, the -ni suffix and the clitic 4"a that forms a relative clause
with the meaning #that which#
,$:-
The 4ni suffix is also obligatory on the main verb in conditional clausesA
,$1-
Nu' put tuwe' nu' waayani #if ! see him !.ll run away#
,$1-
! him see ! run4?!
The suffix is also used in conditional
,$%-
clauses referring to a past context then
often combined with the particle as that carries past tense or counterfactual
meaning, or describes unachieved intentA
,/'-
Pam nuy tuwq nu' so'on as wayaani #!f he had seen me ! wouldn.t
have run#
,$%-
he me see ! ?eg 8ast56ounterfact run4?!
Nu' saytini #! will smile#
,/'-
! smile4?!
Nu' as saytini #! tried to smile5! should smile5! wanted to smile5!
was going to smile#
,/'-
! 8ast56ounterfact smile
The suffix -nwu describes actions taking place habitually or as a general rule
T!m!' taawa tatkyaqw ymangwu #!n the winter the sun rises in
the southeast#
,$0-
Benjamin Lee Whorf
)en*amin +ee Whorf =$1%:B$%&$>, a fire prevention engineer by profession,
studied ?ative (merican linguistics from an early age He corresponded with
many of the greatest scholars of his time, such as (lfred Tozzer at Harvard
and Herbert 9pinden of the (merican 3useum of ?atural History They were
impressed with his work on the linguistics of the ?ahuatl language and
encouraged him to participate professionally and to undertake field research in
3exico !n $%2$ Edward 9apir, the foremost expert on ?ative (merican
languages, started teaching at Cale, close to where Whorf lived, and Whorf
signed up for graduate4level classes with 9apir, becoming one of his most
respected students
,/$-
Whorf took a special interest in the Hopi language and
started working with Ernest ?a"uayouma, a speaker of Hopi from Toreva
village on the 9econd 3esa of the Hopi ;eservation in (rizona, who was
living in the 3anhattan borough of ?ew Cork 6ity (t this time it was
common for linguists to base their descriptions of a language on data from a
single speaker Whorf credited ?a"uayouma as the source of most of his
information on the Hopi language, although in $%21 he took a short field trip
to the village of 3ishongnovi on the 9econd 3esa, collecting some additional
data
,//-
Whorf published several articles on Hopi grammar, focusing particularly on
the ways in which the grammatical categories of Hopi encoded information
about events and processes, and how this correlated with aspects of Hopi
culture and behavior (fter his death his full sketch of Hopi grammar was
published by his friend the linguist Harry Hoi*er, and some essays on ?ative
(merican linguistics, many of which had been previously published in
academic *ournals, were published in $%70 in the anthology "anuae#
Thouht# and $eality by his friend psychologist Dohn )issell 6arroll
,$-
Whorf on Hopi time
Whorf.s most fre"uently cited statement regarding Hopi time is the strongly
worded introduction of his $%20 paper #(n (merican !ndian model of the
@niverse#, which was first published posthumously in 6arroll.s edited volume
Here he writes that
! find it gratuitous to assume that a Hopi who knows only the Hopi language
and the cultural ideas of his own society has the same notions, often supposed
to be intuitions, of time and space as we have, and that are generally assumed
to be universal !n particular he has no notion or intuition of T!3E as a smooth
flowing continuum in which everything in the universe proceeds at an e"ual
rate, out of a future into a present and into a past (fter a long and careful
analysis the Hopi language is seen to contain no words, grammatical forms,
construction or expressions that refer directly to what we call .time., or to past,
present or future #%&horf '()*+,-*./
Whorf argues that in Hopi units of time are not represented by nouns, but by
adverbs or verbs Whorf argues that all Hopi nouns include the notion of a
boundary or outline, and that conse"uently the Hopi language does not refer to
abstract concepts with nouns This, Whorf argues, is encoded in Hopi
grammar, which does not allow durations of time to be counted in the same
way ob*ects are 9o instead of saying, for example, #three days#, Hopi would
say the e"uivalent of #on the third day#, using ordinal numbers Whorf argues
that the Hopi do not consider the process of time passing to produce another
new day, but merely as bringing back the daylight aspect of the world
,/2-
Hopi as a tenseless language
Whorf gives slightly different analyses of the grammatical encoding of time in
Hopi in his different writings His first published writing on Hopi grammar
was the paper #The punctual and segmentative aspects of verbs in Hopi#,
published in $%20 in "anuae, the *ournal of the +inguistic 9ociety of
(merica
,/&-
Here Whorf analyzed Hopi as having a tense system with a
distinction between three tensesA one used for past or present events =which
Whorf calls the 0actual tense or present-past>E one for future eventsE and one
for events that are generally or universally true =here called usitative> This
analysis was repeated in a $%2: letter to D ) 6arroll, who later published it as
part of his selected writings under the title #Fiscussion of Hopi +inguistics#
,/7-
!n the $%21 paper #9ome verbal categories of Hopi#, also published in
"anuae, Whorf abandoned the word #tense# in the description of Hopi and
described the distinction previously called #tense# with the label #assertions#
Whorf described assertions as a system of categories that describe the
speaker.s claim of epistemic validity of his own statement The three
#assertions# of Hopi described by Whorf are the $eportive, 12pective and
Nomic forms of the Hopi verb Whorf acknowledges that these #translate more
or less ,as- the English tenses#, but maintains that these forms do not refer to
time or duration, but rather to the speaker.s claim of the validity of the
statement
,/0-
The reportive form is unmarked, whereas the expective form is
marked with the verbal suffix -ni, and the nomic form with the suffix -3i !n
Whorf.s analysis, by using the reportive form the speaker claims that the event
has in fact occurred or is still occurring, whereas by using the expective form
the speaker describes an expectation of a future event Whorf says that the
expective can be used to describe events in the past, giving the meaning of
#was going to# or #would#
,/:-
!n the $%&' article #9cience and +inguistics#, Whorf gave the same three4way
classification based on the speaker.s assertion of the validity of his statementA
#The timeless Hopi verb does not distinguish between the present, past and
future of the event itself but must always indicate what type of validity the
98E(GE; intends the statement to haveA a report of an event b expectation
of an event E generalization or law about events#
,/1-
!n his full sketch of Hopi grammar published posthumously in $%&0, Whorf
also described how adverbial particles contributed to the linguistic description
of time in Hopi
,/%-
He posited two subclasses of adverbs called temporals and
tensors, which were used in sentences to located events in time ( central
claim in Whorf.s work on linguistic relativity was that for the Hopi units of
time were not considered ob*ects that can be counted like most of the
comparable English words that are described by nouns =a day, an hour etc>
He argued that only the Hopi word for #year# was a noun, the words for days
and nights were ambivalent between noun and verbs, but that all other cyclic
events and periods were described by adverbial particles used as modifiers for
the sentence
,2'-
Whorf's inspiration from Einsteinian physics
!n his interpretation of Hopi time Whorf was influenced by Einstein.s theory
of relativity, which was developed in the first decades of the century and
impacted the general Heitgeist
,2$-
Whorf, an engineer by profession, in fact
made occasion reference to physical relativity, and he adopted the term
#linguistic relativity,# reflecting the general concept of the different but
e"ually valid interpretations of some aspects of physical reality by different
observers due to differences in their =for Einstein> physical circumstances or
=for Whorf> their psychological4linguistic circumstances
The most salient points involve the concepts of simultaneity and spacetime !n
his $%'7 9pecial ;elativity paper, Einstein maintained that two given events
can legitimately be called simultaneous if and only if they take place at the
same point in time and in the same point in space ?o two events which take
place at a spatial distance from one another can legitimately be declared to be
simultaneous in any absolute sense, for the *udgement of simultaneity or non4
simultaneity will depend on the physical circumstances =to be exactA the
relative motion> of the observers This difference is no artifactE each of the
observers is correct =and is wrong only to the extent he or she insists that
another observer is incorrect>
Hermann 3inkowski, in his seminal $%'1 address to the 6ongress of <erman
8hysicists, translated Einstein.s $%'7 mathematical e"uations into geometric
terms 3inkowski famously declaredA
#Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into
mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an
independent reality#
,2/-
9patial distance and temporal distance between any two events was now
replaced by a single absolute distance in spacetime
Heynick points to several passages in Whorf.s wrtings on the Hopis which
parallel Einsteinian concepts such asA
#time varies with each observer and does not permit of simultaneity# =$%&'>
,22-
#The Hopi metaphysics does not raise the "uestion whether the things at a
distant village exist at the same moment as those in one.s own village, for it
says that any .events. in the distant village can be compared to any events in
one.s own village only by an interval of magnitude that has both time and
space forms in it# =c$%20>
,2&-
The concept of a #simultaneous now# throughout the cosmos was formulated
by (ristotle, ?ewton, and most succinctly in Dohn +ocke.s 1ssay 4oncernin
Human 5nderstandin =$0%'>A
#For this moment is common to all things that are now in being they all
exist in the same moment of time#
Whorf saw this notion as derived from the 9tandard (verage European
languages in which these thinkers thoughtA #?ewtonian space, time, and
matter are no intuitions They are recepts from culture and language That is
where ?ewton got them#
,27-
Heynick, who claimed no personal knowledge of the Hopi language, posits
alternative weaker and stronger interpretations of the influence of Einsteinian
relativity on Whorf.s analysis of the Hopi language and the Hopi concept of
time !n the weaker version, the =then> new "uestioning of the nature of time
and space brought about by the Einsteinian revolution in physics enabled
Whorf to approach the Hopis and their language unburdened by traditional
Western concepts and presumptions The stronger version is that Whorf under
the influence of Einstein tended inadverently to #read into# his linguistic and
cultural data relativistic concepts where they perhaps were not
,20-
The myth of the timeless Hopi
Whorf died in $%&$, but his ideas took on their own life in academia and in the
popular discourse on ?ative (mericans !n $%71 9tuart 6hase, an economist
and engineer at 3!T who had followed Whorf.s ideas with great interest, but
whom Whorf himself considered utterly incompetent and incapable of
understanding the nuances of his ideas,
,2:-
published #9ome things worth
knowingA a generalist.s guide to useful knowledge# Here he repeated Whorf.s
claim about Hopi time, but arguing that because of the Hopi view of time as a
process, they were better able to understand the concept of time as a fourth
dimension
,21-
9imilarly, even scientists were intrigued by the thought that the
idea of spatio4temporal unity that had taken (lbert Einstein seven years to
ponder, was readily available to the Hopi, simply because of the grammar of
their language
,2%-
!n $%0& Dohn <reenway published a humorous portrait of (merican culture,
The 6nevita,le 7mericans, in which he wroteA #Cou have a watch, because
(mericans are obsessed with time !f you were a Hopi !ndian, you would have
none, the Hopi have no concept of time#
,&'-
(nd even the $%:$ ethnography of
the Hopi by Euler and Fobyns claimed that #The English concept of time is
nearly incomprehensible to the Hopi#
,&$-
The myth "uickly became a staple
element of ?ew (ge conceptualizations of the Hopi
,&/-
Max Blac and Helmut !ipper
!n $%7% philosopher 3ax )lack published a criti"ue of Whorf.s arguments in
which he argued that the principle of linguistic relativity was obviously wrong
because translation between languages is always possible, even when there are
no exact correspondences between the single words or concepts in the two
languages
,&2-
<erman linguist and philosopher Helmut <ipper had studied with the neo4
Humboldtian linguist +eo Weisgerber and had a basically Gantian
understanding of the relation between language and thought Gant considered
the categories of time and space to be universals underlying all human
thinking
,&&-
Whorf.s argument that the Hopi do not conceive of time and space
as speakers of !ndo4European languages do clashed with this basic
understanding of cognition <ipper went to the Hopi reservation to collect
data for a general criti"ue of Whorf.s principle of linguistic relativity
published in $%:/ His criti"ue included a refutation of Whorf.s Hopi
arguments <ipper showed that the Hopi could refer to time, by *uxtaposing
Hopi phrases with their <erman e"uivalents that used words referring to units
of time and to distinctions between past and present <ipper also argued that
several time intervals were described by nouns, and that these nouns could
take the role of syntactic sub*ect or ob*ect, in contradiction of Whorf.s explicit
statement He argues that Whorf.s assertion that intervals of time are not
counted in the same way as ob*ects is #"uestionable#
,&7-
Eehart Maloti
Ekkehart 3alotki studied with <ipper at the WestfIlische Wilhelms4
@niversitIt at 3Jnster and his work was a continuation of his mentor.s,
spurred on by the fre"uent claims in the popular literature that #the Hopi have
no concept of time# 3alotki conducted four years of research on the Third
3esa, studying Hopi spatial and temporal reference He published two large
volumes, one in <erman, Hopi-$aum
,&0-
,Hopi space- and one in English,
Hopi Time
,2-
For 3alotki it was imperative to demonstrate two facts in
contradiction of Whorf.s claimsA $ that the Hopi language has an abundance
of terms, words and constructions that refer to time / that the Hopi do
cognitively conceptualize time in analogy with physical space, using spatial
metaphors to describe durations and units of time He also wanted to
demonstrate that Whorf misanalyzed several particularities regarding specific
Hopi words and expressions 3alotki states that a main goal is to present
#actual Hopi language data#, since when he was writing very little textual data
in Hopi had been published, and Whorf.s publications were largely without
text examples
,&:-
Hopi Time "#$%&'
3ost of Hopi Time is dedicated to the detailed description of the Hopi usage
of words and constructions related to time 3alotki describes in detail the
usage of a large amount of linguistic materialA temporal adverbs, time units,
time counting practices such as the Hopi calendar, the way that days are
counted and time is measured
The first part of the book describes #spatio4temporal metaphors#E in it he
shows several deictic adverbs that are used both to reference distance in space
and in time, such as the word ep that means both #there# and #then# !n the
second chapter he describes the way in which the Hopi talk about units of
time He argues that in some contexts, specifically those of the ceremonial
cycle, the Hopi do count days, using compound words such as payistala #the
third day =of a ceremony># composed of the morphemes payi #three#, s
#times# and taala' #day5light#, meaning literally #three4times4day#
,&1-
He also
shows that the Hopi reckon time through the movement of the sun, having
distinct words for the different degrees of light during the dawn and dusk
periods He also notes that the feeling of time passing can be described by
saying #the sun moves slowly5"uickly# 8arts 2, &, 7, and 0 describe Hopi
time4keeping practices using the sun relative to the horizon, using the stars,
the ceremonial calendar and the use of time4keeping devices such as knotted
strings or notched sticks with a mark or knot for every day, sun4hole
alignment and shadow observation The eighth chapter describes the temporal
particles that Whorf defined as temporals and tensors He argues that Whorf.s
descriptions are vague and alienating
,&%-
Maloti on tense in Hopi
The concept of Hopi tense is covered in the last part of chapter %, titled
#miscellaneous#, and in the conclusion 3alotki follows <ipper in arguing that
time is a natural category and that it is naturally experienced in terms of past,
present and future, even though many languages do not necessarily
grammaticalize all of these distinctions
,7'-
He analyzes the Hopi -ni suffix as
marking the future tense He argues that since there is no grammatical
distinction between past and present, Hopi has a future4nonfuture tense
system 3alotki distinguishes between primary and secondary functions of the
4ni suffix, arguing that its primary function is temporal reference and that its
many modal functions such as imperative, hortative and desiderative are of
secondary importance
(s it turns out from among the numerous suffixes that the Hopi verb can
select to mark the grammatical categories of aspect, mode and tense, one is
specifically reserved to refer to time, or rather the se"uential ordering of
events or states This temporal marker is -ni whose referential force is futurity
!ts temporal function is primaryE however, in many contexts i4ni also takes on
a number of secondary, atemporal functions which essentially belong to the
modal category =imperative, hortative, desiderative, etc> 9ince no markers
exist to point out present or past time, Hopi, like many other languages, can be
said to be endowed with a future4nonfuture tense system
,7$-
3alotki does admit that the English and Hopi systems of tense are different
since the English system distinguishes past from non4past, whereas Hopi
distinguishes future from non4future
,7/-
(urther de)ates
9ubse"uent descriptions of Hopi grammar have maintained 3alotki.s
distinction between an unmarked non4future tense and a future tense marked
with the 4ni suffix, and an habitual aspect marked by the suffix 4nwu
,$0-
The
review by )ernard 6omrie, a well4known authority on the linguistic typology
of tense and aspect, accepts that 3alotki.s work demonstrates that the Hopi do
have a concept of time and that it is devastating for Whorf.s strong claims )ut
6omrie also notes that 3alotki.s #6laim that Hopi has a tense system based on
the opposition of future and non4future strikes me as "uestionableA given the
wide range of modal uses of the so4called future, it is at least plausible that
this is a modal rather than temporal distinction, with the result that Hopi
would have no tense distinction#
,7-
+inguists and psychologists who work in the universalist tradition such as
9teven 8inker and Dohn 3cWhorter, have seen 3alotki.s study as being the
final proof that Whorf was an inept linguist and had no significant knowledge
or understanding of the Hopi language
,72-,7&-,77-,70-
This interpretation has been
criticized by relativist scholars as unfounded and based on a lack of
knowledge of Whorf.s work
,:-,%-
!n spite of 3alotki.s refutation, the myth that #the Hopi have no concept of
time# lived on in the popular literature For example, in her $%1% novel 8e2in
the 4herry, Deanette Winterson wrote of the HopiA #their language has no
grammar in the way we recognize it (nd most bizarre of all, they have no
tenses for past, present and future They do not sense time in that way For
them time is one#
,7:-
(nd the myth continues to be an integral part of ?ew
(ge thinking that draws on stereotypical depictions of #timeless Hopi
culture#
,&/-,71-
9ome linguists working on @niversals of semantics, such as (nna Wierzbicka
and 6liff <oddard, argue that there is a ?atural 9emantic 3etalanguage that
has a basic vocabulary of semantic primes including concepts such as T!3E,
WHE?, )EFK;E, (FTE; They have argued that 3alotki.s data show that the
Hopi share these primes with English and all other languages, even though it
is also clear that the precise way in which these concepts fit into the larger
pattern of culture and language practices is different in each language, as
illustrated by the differences between Hopi and English
,7%-
3alotki.s work has been criticized by relativist scholars for failing to engage
with Whorf.s actual argument Dohn ( +ucy argues that 3alotki.s criti"ue
misses the fact that Whorf.s point was exactly that the way in which the Hopi
language grammatically structurates the representation of time leads to a
different conception of time than the English one, not that they do not have
one
,0'-
+ucy notes that when Whorf makes his strong claim about what it is
that Hopi lacks, he consistently puts the word #time# in scare "uotes, and uses
the "ualifier #what we call#
,0$-
+ucy and others take this as evidence that
Whorf was implying specifically that what the Hopi lacked was a concept that
corresponds entirely to that denoted by the English word, ie he was making a
point of showing that the concepts of time were different 3alotki himself
acknowledges that the conceptualizations are different, but because he ignores
Whorf.s use of scare "uotes, takes Whorf to be arguing that the Hopi have no
concept of time at all
,0/-,02-
!n $%%$ 8enny +ee published a comparison of 3alotki and Whorf.s analyses
of the adverbial word class that Whorf had called #tensors# 9he argues that
Whorf.s analysis captured aspects of Hopi grammar that were not captured by
simply describing tensors as falling within the class of temporal adverbs
,$'-
!n /''0 anthropologist Favid Finwoodie published a severe criti"ue of
3alotki.s work, "uestioning his methods and his presentation of data as well
as his analysis Finwoodie argues that 3alotki fails to ade"uately support his
claim of having demonstrated that the Hopi have a concept of time #as we
know it#
,0&-
He provides ethnographic examples of how some Hopi speakers
explain the way they experience the difference between a traditional Hopi way
of experiencing time as tied closely to cycles of ritual and natural events, and
the (nglo4(merican concept of clock4time or school4time
,&-
Language* time and cognition
9parked by the Hopi debate about time a number of studies about how
different languages grammaticalize tense and conceptualize time have been
carried out 9ome of these studies in psycholinguistics and cognitive
linguistics have found some evidence that there may be significant differences
in how speakers of different languages conceptualize time, although not
necessarily in the way Whorf claimed for the Hopi 9pecifically, it has been
shown that some cultural groups conceptualize the flow of time in a direction
opposite to what is usual for speakers of English and other !ndo4European
languages, ie that the future is in front of the speaker and the past behind
,07-
,00-
!t has also been found that not all languages have a grammatical category
of tenseA some instead use combinations of adverbs and grammatical aspect to
locate events in time
,0:-,01-,0%-
+otes
$ 6arroll $%70
/ Whorf $%70b, p 7:
2 3alotki $%12
& Finwoodie /''0
7 6omrie $%1&, p $2/
0 8inker $%%&, p 02
: +eavitt /'$$
1 ;eines L 8rinze /''%
% +ee $%%0
$' +ee $%%$
$$ +eavitt /'$$, p $1'411
$/ 6omrie $%1&
$2 Evans /''&
$& 9inha et al /'$$
$7 Hopi Fictionary 8ro*ect $%%1, p 17&
$0 Hopi Fictionary 8ro*ect $%%1, p 1:1
$: Hopi Fictionary 8ro*ect $%%1, p /1$
$1 Galectaca $%:1, p $77
$% Galectaca $%:1, p $7:
/' Galectaca $%:1, p $&2
/$ 6arroll $%70, p passim
// Finwoodie =/''0A2&0>
/2 Whorf $%70e, pp $&147/
/& Whorf $%70a
/7 Whorf $%70c, p $'2
/0 Whorf $%21, p /:0
/: Whorf $%21, pp /:04/:1
/1 Whorf $%70f, p /$:
/% Whorf $%&0
2' Whorf $%&0, p $07
2$ Frank Heynick $%12 #From Einstein to WhorfA space, time,
matter and reference frames in physical and linguisitc relativity# 9emiotica,
&7 =$4/>
2/ Muoted in Heynick $%12, p&2
22 Muoted in Heynick $%12, p&/
2& Muoted in Heynick $%12, p&/ Heynick is careful to point out
that he has selectively cited such passages and that in the broader context
Whorf.s wiriting it would be inaccurate to assume that Whorf simply
presents the Hopis as pre4Einstein Einsteins in their conception of time
27 Muoted in Heynick $%12, p&0
20 Heynick also analyzes Whorf.s concepts of #eventing# and the
nature of matter in the language of the Hopis =and the ?ooktas>, and their
parallels in modern physics These relate only peripherally to the Hopi time
controversy
2: +ee $%%0, p $0
21 Feutscher /'$', p $&$4&2
2% +ivingstone $%02, p $0
&' <reenway $%0&, p %
&$ Euler L Fobyns $%:$, p /$
&/ <eertz $%%&
&2 )lack $%7%
&& +eavitt /'$$, pp $:%4$1', $1041:
&7 <ipper $%:/
&0 3alotki $%:%
&: 3alotki $%12, p 0/%
&1 3alotki $%12, p /&0
&% 3alotki $%12, p 72$
7' 3alotki $%12, p 0/7
7$ 3alotki $%12, p 0/&
7/ 3alotki $%12, p 000
72 8inker $%%&
7& 8inker /'':
77 3cWhorter /''%
70 3cWhorter /'$'
7: Winterson $%1%, p $&'
71 9ee for example )raden =/''%>E <riscom =$%11>E 8inchbeck
=/'':>
7% <oddard L Wierzbicka /''/, pp $14$%
0' +ucy $%%0
0$ +ucy$%%/b, p /10
0/ +eavitt /'$$, p $1'
02 +evinson /'$/, p xii
0& Finwoodie /''0, p 2&$
07 ?NOez L 9weetser /''0
00 Fahl $%%7
0: )ittner /''7
01 9mith /''1
0% Tonhauser /'$$
,eferences
)ittner, 3aria =/''7> #Future discourse in a tenseless language# 9ournal of
8emantics #- =&>A 22%B211 doiA$'$'%25*os5ffh'/%
)oroditsky, + =/'''> #3etaphoric structuringA @nderstanding time through
spatial metaphors# 4onition ./A $B/1 doiA$'$'$05s''$'4
'/::=%%>''':240
)lack, 3ax =$%7%> #+inguistic ;elativityA The Piews of )en*amin +ee
Whorf# The Philosophical $eview 0% =/>A //1B/21
doiA$'/2':5/$1/$01
)raden, <regg =/''%> 0ractal Time- The 8ecret of :;(: and a New &orld 7e
Hay House
)ybee, D +E 8erkins, ;E 8agliuca, W =$%%&> The evolution of rammar-
Tense# aspect and modality in the lanuaes of the world 6hicagoA
@niversity of 6hicago 8ress
6asasanto, Faniel =/''1> #Who.s (fraid of the )ig )ad WhorfQ
6rosslinguistic Fifferences in Temporal +anguage and Thought#
"anuae "earnin /% =$>A :% doiA$'$$$$5*$&0:4
%%///''1''&0/x
6arroll, Dohn ) =ed> =$%70> #!ntroduction# "anuae# Thouht# and $eality-
8elected &ritins of <en=amin "ee &horf 6ambridge, 3assA
Technology 8ress of 3assachusetts !nstitute of Technology pp $B
2& !9)? %:14'4/0/4:2''041
6omrie, )ernard =$%1&> #;eview of Ekkehart 3alotki, Hopi Time#
7ustralian 9ournal of "inuistics 1A $2$B2
6omrie, )ernard =$%17> Tense 6ambridge @niversity 8ress !9)? '47/$4
/1$2147
Fahl, R =$%%7> #When the future comes from behindA 3alagasy and other
time concepts and some conse"uences for communication#
6nternational 9ournal of 6ntercultural $elations #$A $%:B/'%
doiA$'$'$05'$&:4$:0:=%7>''''&4u
Feutscher, <uy =/'$'> Throuh the "anuae >lass- &hy the &orld "ooks
?ifferent in @ther "anuaes 3acmillan
Finwoodie, Favid W =/''0> #Time and the !ndividual in ?ative ?orth
(merica# !n 9ergei GanE 8auline Turner 9trongE ;aymond
Fogelson New Perspectives on Native North 7merica- 4ultures#
Histories# 7nd $epresentations @ of ?ebraska
Euler, ;obert 6E Fobyns, Henry F =$%:$> The Hopi People 8hoenixA !ndian
Tribal 9eries
Evans, Pyvyan =/''&> The 8tructure of Time- "anuae# meanin and
temporal conition =Human 6ognitive 8rocessing series> Dohn
)en*amins
<eertz, (rmin =$%%&> The 6nvention of Prophecy- 4ontinuity and Meanin in
Hopi 6ndian $eliion @niversity of 6alifornia 8ress
<entner, F =/''$> #9patial metaphors in temporal reasoning# !n 3 <attis
8patial schemas and a,stract thouht 6ambridge, 3(A 3!T
8ress pp /'2B///
<entner, FE 3utsumi, !E )oroditsky, + =/''/> #(s time goes byA Evidence
for two systems in processing space S time metaphors# "anuae
and 4onitive Processes #.A 72:B707
doiA$'$'1'5'$0%'%0'$&2'''2$:
<ipper, Helmut =$%:/> >i,t es ein sprachliches $elativitAtsprinBipC
5ntersuchunen Bur 8apir-&horf-Hypothese Frankfurt am 3ainA
9 Fischer Perlag "!erman'
<oddard, 6liffE Wierzbicka, (nna =/''/> Meanin and 5niversal >rammar-
Theory and 1mpirical 0indins# Dolume : Dohn )en*amins
8ublishing
<reenway, Dohn =$%0&> The 6nevita,le 7mericans new CorkA (lfred E Gnopf
<riscom, 6hris =$%11> Time is an 6llusion 9imon L 9chuster
Heynick, Frank =$%12> #From Einstein to WhorfA 9pace, time, matter, and
reference frames in physical and linguistic relativity# 8emiotica
1/A 27B0& doiA$'$7$75semi$%12&7$4/27
Hopi Fictionary 8ro*ect, =@niversity of (rizona )ureau of (pplied ;esearch in
(nthropology> =$%%1> Hopi dictionary- HopEikwa "avytutuveni-
7 Hopi-1nlish dictionary of the Third Mesa dialect with an
1nlish-Hopi finder list and a sketch of Hopi rammar Tucson,
(rizonaA @niversity of (rizona 8ress !9)? '41$074$:1%4&
Deanne, +aPerne 3asayesva =$%:1> hdlhandlenet5$:/$$5$02/7 7spects of
Hopi rammar 3!TA Foctoral dissertation
Galectaca, 3ilo =$%:1> "essons in Hopi Tucson, (rizonaA @niversity of
(rizona 8ress
+eavitt, Dohn =/'$$> "inuistic $elativities- "anuae ?iversity and Modern
Thouht 6ambridge, @GA 6ambridge @niversity 8ress !9)? %:14
'47/$4:0:1/41
+ee, 8enny =$%%$> #Whorf.s Hopi tensorsA 9ubtle articulators in the
language5thought nexusQ# 4onitive "inuistics - =/>A $/2B$&1
doiA$'$7$75cogl$%%$//$/2
+ee, 8enny =$%%0> The &horf Theory 4omple2 F 7 4ritical $econstruction
Dohn )en*amins
+evinson, 9tephen 6 =/'$/> #Foreword# !n 6arroll, Dohn )E +evinson,
9tephen 6E +ee, 8enny "anuae# Thouht and $eality =/nd ed>
6ambridge, 3ass5+ondon, @GA 3!T 8ress pp viiBxxiii
!9)? %:14'4/0/47$::74$
+ivingstone, ;obert =$%02> #8erception and 6ommitment# <ulletin of the
7tomic 8cientists =Educational Foundation for ?uclear 9cience,
!nc> #$ =/> !99? ''%042&'/
+ucy, Dohn ( =$%%:> #+inguistic ;elativity# 7nnual $eview of 7nthropoloy
-0A /%$B2$/ doiA$'$$&05annurevanthro/0$/%$
+ucy, Dohn ( =$%%/a> >rammatical 4ateories and 4onition- 7 4ase 8tudy
of the "inuistic $elativity Hypothesis 6ambridgeA 6ambridge
@niversity 8ress
+ucy, Dohn ( =$%%/b> "anuae ?iversity and Thouht- 7 $eformulation of
the "inuistic $elativity Hypothesis 6ambridgeA 6ambridge
@niversity 8ress
+ucy, Dohn ( =$%%0> #The 9cope of +inguistic ;elativityA(n analysis of
Empirical ;esearch# !n <umperz, DohnE +evinson, 9tephen
$ethinkin "inuistic $elativity 6ambridgeA 6ambridge
@niversity 8ress pp 2:B0%
3alotki, Ekkehart =$%:%> Hopi-$aum- 1ine sprachwissenschaftliche 7nalyse
der $aumvorstellunen in der Hopi-8prache TJbingenA <unter
?arr Perlag"!erman'
3alotki, Ekkehart =$%12> Hopi Time- 7 "inuistic 7nalysis of the Temporal
4oncepts in the Hopi "anuae Trends in +inguistics 9tudies and
3onographs -2 )erlin, ?ew Cork, (msterdamA 3outon
8ublishers
3cWhorter, Dohn =/''%> @ur Manificent <astard Tonue- The 5ntold
History of 1nlish 8enguin
3cWhorter, Dohn =Dune /$, /'$'> #!s English 9pecial )ecause !t.s
#<lobish#Q# The ?ew ;epublic
?NOez, ;afael EE 9weetser, Eve =/''0> #With the Future )ehind ThemA
6onvergent Evidence From (ymara +anguage and <esture in the
6rosslinguistic 6omparison of 9patial 6onstruals of Time#
4onitive 8cience &2A $B&%
8inchbeck, Favid =/'':> :;(:- The $eturn of GuetBalcoatl 8enguin
8inker, 9teven =$%%&> The "anuae 6nstinct- How the Mind 4reates
"anuae 8erennial
8inker, 9teven =/'':> The 8tuff of Thouht- "anuae as a window into
human nature 8enguin )ooks
8Jtz, 3artinE Perspoor, 3ar*olyn, eds =/'''> 12plorations in linuistic
relativity Dohn )en*amins 8ublishing 6ompany !9)? %:14%'4
/:/42:'04&
;eines, 3aria FranciscaE 8rinze, Desse =/''%> #;eviving WhorfA The ;eturn of
+inguistic ;elativity# Philosophy 4ompass 1 =0>A $'//B$'2/
doiA$'$$$$5*$:&:4%%%$/''%''/0'x
9inha, 6hrisE 9inha, Pera FE Hinken, DTrgE 9ampaio, Wany =/'$$> #When
time is not spaceA The social and linguistic construction of time
intervals and temporal event relations in an (mazonian culture#
"anuae and 4onition & =$>A $2:B$0%
doiA$'$7$75langcog/'$$''0
9mith, 6arlota 9 =/''1> #Time With and Without Tense# 8tudies in Natural
"anuae and "inuistic Theory ./A //:B/&% doiA$'$'':5%:14$4
&'/'4127&4%U$'
Tonhauser, Dudith =/'$$> #Temporal reference in 8araguayan <uaranV, a
tenseless language# "inuistics H Philosophy &1 =2>A /7:B2'2
doiA$'$'':5s$'%114'$$4%'%:4/
Poegelin, Deanne +aPerneE Poegelin, 83E 3asayesva =$%:%> #Hopi
9emantics# !n (lfonso Krtiz Hand,ook of North 7merican
6ndians# vol% )- 8outhwest pp 71$B1:
Whorf, )en*amin +ee =$%&0> #The Hopi language, Toreva dialect# !n Hoi*er,
Harry "inuistic 8tructures of Native 7merica Piking Fund
8ublications in (nthropology 0 ?ew CorkA Piking Fund pp $71B
$12
Whorf, )en*amin +ee =$%21> #9ome verbal categories of Hopi# "anuae #1
=&>A /:7B/10 doiA$'/2':5&'%$1$ D9TK; &'%$1$
Whorf, )en*amin +ee =$%70a> ,$%27- #The punctual and segmentative aspects
of verbs in Hopi# !n 6arroll, D ) "anuae# Thouht# and
$eality- 8elected &ritins of <en=amin "ee &horf 6ambridge,
3assA Technology 8ress of 3assachusetts !nstitute of Technology
pp 7$B77 !9)? %:14'4/0/4:2''041
Whorf, )en*amin +ee =$%70b> ,$%20Q- #(n (merican !ndian model of the
universe# !n 6arroll, D ) "anuae# Thouht# and $eality-
8elected &ritins of <en=amin "ee &horf 6ambridge, 3assA
Technology 8ress of 3assachusetts !nstitute of Technology
pp 7:B0& !9)? %:14'4/0/4:2''041
Whorf, )en*amin +ee =$%70c> ,$%2:- #Fiscussion of Hopi linguistics# !n
6arroll, D ) "anuae# Thouht# and $eality- 8elected &ritins of
<en=amin "ee &horf 6ambridge, 3assA Technology 8ress of
3assachusetts !nstitute of Technology pp $'/B$$$ !9)? %:14'4
/0/4:2''041
Whorf, )en*amin +ee =$%70d> ,$%20- #( linguistic consideration of thinking
in primitive communities# !n 6arroll, D ) "anuae# Thouht#
and $eality- 8elected &ritins of <en=amin "ee &horf 6ambridge,
3assA Technology 8ress of 3assachusetts !nstitute of Technology
pp 07B10 !9)? %:14'4/0/4:2''041
Whorf, )en*amin +ee =$%70e> ,$%2%- #The relation of habitual thought and
behavior to language# !n 6arroll, D ) "anuae# Thouht# and
$eality- 8elected &ritins of <en=amin "ee &horf 6ambridge,
3assA Technology 8ress of 3assachusetts !nstitute of Technology
pp $2&B$7% !9)? %:14'4/0/4:2''041
Whorf, )en*amin +ee =$%70f> ,$%&'a- #9cience and linguistics# !n 6arroll, D
) "anuae# Thouht# and $eality- 8elected &ritins of <en=amin
"ee &horf 6ambridge, 3assA Technology 8ress of 3assachusetts
!nstitute of Technology pp /':B/$% !9)? %:14'4/0/4:2''041
Whorf, )en*amin +ee =$%70g> ,$%&'b- #+inguistics as an exact science# !n
6arroll, D ) "anuae# Thouht# and $eality- 8elected &ritins of
<en=amin "ee &horf 6ambridge, 3assA Technology 8ress of
3assachusetts !nstitute of Technology pp //'B/2/ !9)? %:14'4
/0/4:2''041
Winterson, Deanette =$%1%> 8e2in the 4herry ?ew CorkA Pintage
;etrieved from #httpA55enwikipediaorg5w5indexphpQ
titleWHopiUtimeUcontroversyLoldidW0$$0&%17%#