Final Draft

Language and culture. Both are the most fundamental elements in every society: people express their minds by using languages, and this way of communicating leads formations of their cultures. For this reason, there have been a lot of researches designed to figure out a relationship between them. The representative as these researches is definitely the research called as Whorfian theory by scholar Whorf. Although not all the arguments have stated same thoughts, there is a basic premise: language and culture are so inseperably connected in human society that it's hard to figure out which one affects another more. But there has been a controversy: language or culture, which one is more dominant in their relationship? There have been some differences in argument between linguists and cultural anthropologists for a long time. However, despite of some arguments, for the answer to the controversy, it is strongly believed that languages have a larger effect on cultures than cultures do on languages.

The idea of linguistic influence on cultures was first officially stated in Whorfian theory by Whorf. Whorfian theory is categorized into two: the strong and weak version. The strong version says that languages could determine the way we think, and in contrast, the weak version says linguistic categories and usages could influence the way we think and certain kinds of non-linguistic behaviors. Specifically, the idea is called linguistic-cultural parallelism according to the study of Robert Leon Cooper, named The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought. This idea is the claim that each language reflects the culture of its speech community. In addition, it explains that language and culture have connections between them. For example, according to Natalia Brophy, Asian languages have a lot of honorifics and low talks becaus Asian cultures put an importance on vertical human relations.

Despite the thesis has a difficulty in showing evidences, it would be explained by the natural progress and common ideas in turn;
First of all, language habits lead to formation and transformation of culture. According to the article that mentions the thesis, culture is defined by the activities of people, sometimes governed by a geographical boundary. People formed their society and made their way of life, and this activity is called as cultural formation. After this process for a time, culture is learned and also changes as time passes. This alteration is passed from parents to children also by language. Like this, language has had a great role in inheritance because it's hard to inherit cultural formation or alteration without language. Therefore, language habits of the era must have influenced these processes such as that we commonly say we need to have better language habits for better society. It means that language habits would also become as a part of the culture.
Secondly, the human mind and behavior affects society. People express their mind by language and behave following their mind all the time in their society, and usually people in one society resemble this naturally. Languages have always been weapons to express one's ideas and feelings. In other words, the human mind and behavior would be expressed by language, which pervades all over the society, and would show lifestyles of the society, so-called culture. In addition, because each person cannot be isolated from society, they would affect each other by their mind and behavior.

Finally, culture usually follows the way of expressing feelings or some things that are helped by language. As you could refer to the first reason and the second reason, culture is formed by the way of expressing feelings (namely, mind). It is easy to know when we just look at ourselves. We always express something by languages, and usually this reflects which culture we have. It is because language is a kind of culture. If people use bad words, their culture becomes to be bad just as the words they say. That's why some argue that people should always be aware of how they say.

I assert once again that languages have a profound effect on cultures. According to the idea of The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought: Essays in Honor of Joshua A. Fishman's Sixty-fifth Birthday on page 17, the thesis has a scientific name, 'linguistic-cognitive parallelism' or 'linguistic-cultural parallelism.':

This is the claim that there is a close correspondence between linguistic patterns, on the one hand, and cognitive and cultural ones, on the other. Each language reflects the culture of its speech community. In the following this claim will be called parallelism, for short.

The thesis can be easily explained by either some papers or our common lifestyles, although there are some conflicts in stating whether a language or a culture has an influence on another.

Obviously the argument is ambiguous when we consider the role of culture. Yes, it has already been a hot issue between linguists and cultural scholars. It is very complicated because both are so intertwined, according to Dr. Boshra EL-Guindy, that there must be an apparent conclusion. Because of this, some of cultural scholars argued that cultures have an influence on languages, not vice versa. They first stated that all the vocabularies of one culture reflects what the cultural area values. This idea is well shown in Korean culture too. Korean has a lot of vocabularies related to honorifics or relatives, which reflect vertical culture or culture that values blood relationship. However, according to the supporting idea of behaviorist Watson, some cultures do not even include certain emotions defined by other cultures in their vocabulary. It means people express their mind first by language, act following their language, and finally those actions form particular culture. Their first idea is flawed because of this reason.

They secondly stated that languages are just a verbal expression of cultures. Namely, languages are just a tool for people. It is flawed in considering the role of language. Cultures will not exist if people don't express their mind and lifestyles by languages. As I mentioned, languages as a tool have a significant effect on forming society and its cultures. To form culture, people should talk with each other.

Related to both of those ideas, in addition, Whorf argued that since grammar is more resistant to change than culture, the influence from language to culture is predominant. Grammar is a kind of structure of languages. Considering common argument that we should analyze language structure to know culture, resistance against change of grammar could be explained that a language is more consistent than culture is. It's hard to say changeable thing affects something just as this case.

Language and culture are so inseparably related to each other that their relationships are easily discussed between scholars. For example, like the thesis, an influence of one on another. Whof and other scholars have discussed this idea, and they called this linguistic-cultural parallelism. Among its categories, the argument of linguistic influence on culture is definitely right. Although cultural anthropologists criticize that cultural influence on language is much bigger than vice versa, linguistic influence on culture is more significant. It's because languages become a part of cultures. Language contributes to formation and transformation of culture. In addition, people express their mind by language or behavior and these things affect everything in society. It means, without language, people could not even contribute to their own culture. The significant role of language is in analyzing human, ourselves. Namely, developed studies on language could even apprehend every thing related to human. Culture is one of the things they already discover. Because people desire communication, it is natural that a language plays a significant role in either forming or affecting culture definitely. Cultures, lifestyles, educations in human life develop as languages change. So alternations of languages strongly affect human life. In conclusion, it is totally persuasive that languages have a larger effect on cultures than cultures do on languages.

References

Robert Leon Cooper, Bernard Spolsky. (1991). The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought: Essays in Honor of Joshua A. Fishman's Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Walter de Gruyter. p. 17

Natalia Brophy. (2012). Reasons Language is Important to Any Culture. Retrieved from http://www.brighthubeducation.com/language-learning-tips/99894-why-language-is-important-to-culture

Dr. Boshra EL-Guindy. (2012, October 18). Retrieved from http://www.myguidon.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15331&Itemid=44

Peer Evaluation for 20301 고건

Grade
According to the rubric above, what grade would you give this essay? Why?
This essay deserves five points. It is great and persuasive.

How does this essay need to improve to get a better grade?
I think introduction should be more attractive.

Thesis
What is the thesis?
The human behavior radically comes from emotions rather than reason.

Is the thesis clear and debatable?
Yes I think so.

If you (The reviewer) wrote this essay, how would you have written the thesis?
Most of the human behaviors comes from emotions rather than reason.

Any other thoughts?
I think it's enough, but he should use clear words than now

Classical Argument
Can you easily identify the 5 parts of the classical argument? If no, what parts are missing?
Yes

Does the introduction catch your attention? Does it comfortably lead to the thesis?
I think he should use more attractive introduction because it's just simple and not unique.

Does the narration give all the necessary background information to understand the topic?
Yes. But I think narration includes some of the contents of refutation...

Does the confirmation adequately support the thesis?
Yes.

Does the refutation and concession address a realistic counterpoint? Does it adequately dispute the counterpoint, or respond in a reasonable manner?
I think refutation and concession part was great.

Does the conclusion summarize the article and address the larger significance of the thesis?
Yes.

What suggestions do you have for improving the classical argument structure?
introduction part should be more attractive, and some contents of narration part should be deleted.

Persuasion
When you started reading the essay, did you agree or disagree with the thesis?
I agreed.

When you finished the essay, did you agree or disagree with the thesis?
I still agree.

If your mind changed, why? What parts of the essay were persuasive?
X

How could the author enhance the persuasive parts of their essay?
I don't think he should change his contentions.

Research
Is the author using research effectively?
Yes

Is the research from appropriate sources?
Yes!

Are the sources obvious?
Yes

Are the pieces of evidence relevant to the thesis or essay?
Usually. He found some scholars' papers.

Are there any parts of the essay that need evidence to support the claims?
I think it's enough.

Peer Evaluation for 20324 한주희

Grade
According to the rubric above, what grade would you give this essay? Why?
This essay deserves five points. It is persuasive and contains all the necessary parts

How does this essay need to improve to get a better grade?
I think it is enough because she already had fixed her contentions for improvement.

Thesis
What is the thesis?
The black death helped the evolution of mankind.

Is the thesis clear and debatable?
Yes

If you (The reviewer) wrote this essay, how would you have written the thesis?
The black death contributed to the evolution of mankind.

Any other thoughts?
I think her thesis is great enough to attract readers

Classical Argument
Can you easily identify the 5 parts of the classical argument? If no, what parts are missing?
Yes

Does the introduction catch your attention? Does it comfortably lead to the thesis?
Yes. Her introduction did its role well.

Does the narration give all the necessary background information to understand the topic?
I think, yes it did.

Does the confirmation adequately support the thesis?
Yes.

Does the refutation and concession address a realistic counterpoint? Does it adequately dispute the counterpoint, or respond in a reasonable manner?
I think concession part is not enough to refute opponents' arguments.

Does the conclusion summarize the article and address the larger significance of the thesis?
Yes. I think it was great.

What suggestions do you have for improving the classical argument structure?
concession part should be improved.

Persuasion
When you started reading the essay, did you agree or disagree with the thesis?
I disagreed with it.

When you finished the essay, did you agree or disagree with the thesis?
I still disagree with this.

If your mind changed, why? What parts of the essay were persuasive?
It was not that persuasive to change my mind.

How could the author enhance the persuasive parts of their essay?
She should develop the concession part

Research
Is the author using research effectively?
Yes

Is the research from appropriate sources?
Yes!

Are the sources obvious?
Yes

Are the pieces of evidence relevant to the thesis or essay?
Usually. She researched once again for her second draft.

Are there any parts of the essay that need evidence to support the claims?
I think it's enough.

Second Draft

Language and culture. Both are the most fundamental elements in every society: people express their minds by using languages, and this way of communicating leads formations of their cultures. For this reason, there have been a lot of researches designed to figure out a relationship between them. The representative as these researches is definitely the research called as Whorfian theory by scholar Whorf. Although not all the arguments have stated same thoughts, there is a basic premise: language and culture are so inseperably connected in human society that it's hard to figure out which one affects another more. However, I thought there must be dominant one between them. When I was searching, there are differences in argument between linguists and cultural anthropologists: language or culture, which one is more dominant? After I found some papers about this controversy, I became to strongly believe that languages have a profound influence on cultures.

The idea of linguistic influence on cultures was first officially stated in Whorfian theory by Whorf. Whorfian theory is categorized into two: the strong and weak version. The strong version says that languages could determine the way we think, and in contrast, the weak version says linguistic categories and usages could influence the way we think and certain kinds of non-linguistic behaviors. Specifically, the idea is called linguistic-cultural parallelism according to the study of Robert Leon Cooper, named The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought. This idea is the claim that each language reflects the culture of its speech community. In addition, it explains that language and culture have connections between them. For example, Korean has a lot of honorifics and low talks because Korean culture puts an importance on vertical human relations.

Despite the thesis has a difficulty in showing evidences, it would be explained by the natural progress and common ideas in turn;
First of all, language habits lead to formation and transformation of culture. According to the article that mentions the thesis, culture is defined by the activities of people, sometimes governed by a geographical boundary. People formed their society and made their way of life, and this activity is called as cultural formation. After this process for a time, culture is learned and also changes as time passes. This alteration is passed from parents to children also by language. Like this, language has had a great role in inheritance because it's hard to inherit cultural formation or alteration without language. Therefore, language habits of the era must have influenced these processes such as that we commonly say we need to have better language habits for better society. It means that language habits would also become as a part of the culture.
Secondly, the human mind and behavior affects society. People express their mind by language and behave following their mind all the time in their society, and usually people in one society resemble this naturally. Languages have always been weapons to express one's ideas and feelings. In other words, the human mind and behavior would be expressed by language, which pervades all over the society, and would show lifestyles of the society, so-called culture. In addition, because each person cannot be isolated from society, they would affect each other by their mind and behavior.

Finally, culture usually follows the way of expressing feelings or some things that are helped by language. As you could refer to the first reason and the second reason, culture is formed by the way of expressing feelings (namely, mind). It is easy to know when we just look at ourselves. We always express something by languages, and usually this reflects which culture we have. It is because language is a kind of culture. If people use bad words, their culture becomes to be bad just as the words they say. That's why some argue that people should always be aware of how they say.

I assert once again that languages have a profound effect on cultures. According to the idea of The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought: Essays in Honor of Joshua A. Fishman's Sixty-fifth Birthday on page 17, my thesis has a scientific name, 'linguistic-cognitive parallelism' or 'linguistic-cultural parallelism.':

This is the claim that there is a close correspondence between linguistic patterns, on the one hand, and cognitive and cultural ones, on the other. Each language reflects the culture of its speech community. In the following this claim will be called parallelism, for short.

My thesis can be easily explained by either some papers or our common lifestyles, although there are some conflicts in stating whether a language or a culture has an influence on another.

Obviously my argument is ambiguous when we consider the role of culture. Yes, it has already been a hot issue between linguists and cultural scholars. It is very complicated because both are so intertwined that there must be an apparent conclusion. Because of this, some of cultural scholars argued that cultures have an influence on languages, not vice versa. They first stated that all the vocabularies of one culture reflects what the cultural area values. This idea is well shown in Korean culture too. Korean has a lot of vocabularies related to honorifics or relatives, which reflect vertical culture or culture that values blood relationship. However, according to the supporting idea of behaviorist Watson, some cultures do not even include certain emotions defined by other cultures in their vocabulary. It means people express their mind first by language, act following their language, and finally those actions form particular culture. Their first idea is flawed because of this reason.

They secondly stated that languages are just a verbal expression of cultures. Namely, languages are just a tool for people. It is flawed in considering the role of language. Cultures will not exist if people don't express their mind and lifestyles by languages. As I mentioned, languages as a tool have a significant effect on forming society and its cultures. To form culture, people should talk with each other.

Related to both of those ideas, in addition, Whorf argued that since grammar is more resistant to change than culture, the influence from language to culture is predominant. Grammar is a kind of structure of languages. Considering common argument that we should analyze language structure to know culture, resistance against change of grammar could be explained that a language is more consistent than culture is. It's hard to say changeable thing affects something just as this case.

Language and culture are so inseparably related to each other that their relationships are easily discussed between scholars. For example, like my thesis, an influence of one on another. Whof and other scholars have discussed this idea, and they called this linguistic-cultural parallelism. Among its categories, I think the argument of linguistic influence on culture is definitely right. Although cultural anthropologists criticize that cultural influence on language is much bigger than vice versa, linguistic influence on culture is more significant. It's because a language becomes a part of culture. Language contributes to formation and transformation of culture. In addition, people express their mind by language or behavior and these things affect everything in society. It means, without language, people could not even contribute to their own culture. The significant role of language is in analyzing human, ourselves. Namely, developed studies on language could even apprehend every thing related to human. Culture is one of the things they already discover. Because people desire communication, it is natural that a language plays a significant role in either forming or affecting culture definitely. I totally agree that language must have a profound effect on culture.

Bibliography

Robert Leon Cooper, Bernard Spolsky. (1991).  The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought: Essays in Honor of Joshua A. Fishman's Sixty-Fifth Birthday. Walter de Gruyter. p. 17

http://www.brighthubeducation.com/language-learning-tips/99894-why-language-is-important-to-culture/

http://www.myguidon.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=15331&Itemid=44

Grammar check for second draft

    Every day we absolutely use languages and we create and develop a culture. We cannot live without language and culture in a society. Think about our daily lives. We naturally use a language to communicate with others to seek a better way to develop our culture. In other words, language could have an influence on culture. You might say this idea is a common belief that most people know so obviously that it doesn't need an explanation such as writing this essay. However, despite of high recognition on this, we are not aware of the importance of it. In fact, most of us don't even know that why this idea could be substantiated.

    The idea of linguistic influence on culture is included in Whorfian theory by Whorf. Whorfian theory is categorized into two, the strong and weak version. The strong version says that a language could determine the way we think, and in contrast, the weak version says linguistic categories and usage could influence the way we think and certain kinds of non-linguistic behaviour. Among the related theories, there were some theories that opposed the topic. However, there was a theory of Fishman that agreed on the topic by proposing that language is a key of culture.

  Specifically, the idea could be called as linguistic-cultural parallelism according to the study of Robert Leon Cooper, named The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought. This idea is the claim that each language reflects the culture of its speech community. In addition, it explains that language and culture have connections between them. For example, Korean has a lot of honorifics and low talks because Korean culture puts an importance on vertical human relations. 

  There is a difference of argument between linguists and cultural anthropologists. It's because the relations between language and culture is not that clear. However, despite of the controversy, many linguists and cultural anthropologists agree on that language and culture are inseparably related. Also, there is a simple idea related to this that society and individuals are connected because culture is formed by society and the society is made of individuals.

 

  Despite the thesis has a difficulty in showing evidences, however, it could be explained by the natural progress and common ideas. First of all, language habits lead to formation and transformation of culture. According to the article that mentions the thesis, culture is defined by the activities of people, sometimes governed by a geographical boundary. People formed their society and made their way of life, and this activity is called as cultural formation. After this process for a time, culture is learned and also changes as time passes. This alteration is passed from parents to children also by language.

  Like this, language has had a great role in inheritance because it's hard to inherit cultural formation or alteration without language. Therefore, language habits of the era must have influenced these processes such as that we commonly say we need to have better language habits for better society. It means that language habits would also become as a part of the culture.

  This argument is exactly same as the reason language habits influence cultural formation and alteration. The second reason that the human mind and behavior affects society could be explained by this argument too. People express their mind by language and behave following their mind all the time in their society, and usually people in one society resemble this naturally. Language has always been a weapon to express one's ideas and feelings. In other words, the human mind and behavior would be expressed by language, which pervades all over the society, and would show lifestyles of the society, so-called culture. In addition, because each person cannot be isolated from society, they would affect each other by their mind and behavior.

  Finally, let's see the third reason that culture usually follows the way of expressing feelings or some things that are helped by language. As you could refer to the first reason and the second reason, culture is formed by the way of expressing feelings (namely, mind). It is easy to know when we just look at ourselves. We always express something by languages, and usually this reflects which culture we have. It is because language is a kind of culture. If people use bad words, their culture becomes to be bad just as the words they say. That's why some argue that people should always be aware of how they say.

  In conclusion, language has a profound effect on culture. According to the idea of The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought: Essays in Honor of Joshua A. Fishman's Sixty-fifth Birthday on page 17, my thesis has a scientific name, 'linguistic-cognitive parallelism' or 'linguistic-cultural parallelism.':

This is the claim that there is a close correspondence between linguistic patterns, on the one hand, and cognitive and cultural ones, on the other. Each language reflects the culture of its speech community. In the following this claim will be called parallelism, for short.

  My thesis already has been a classical argument, and can be easily explained by either some papers or our common lifestyles, although there are some conflicts in stating whether language or culture has an influence on another.

  Obviously my argument is ambiguous when we consider the role of culture. Yes, it has already been a hot issue between linguists and cultural scholar. It is very complicated because both are so intertwined that there must be an apparent conclusion. Because of this, some of cultural scholar argued that a culture has an influence on language, not vice versa. They first stated that all the vocabularies of one culture reflects what the cultural area values. This idea is well shown in Korean culture too. Korean has a lot of vocabularies related to honorifics or relatives, which reflect vertical culture or culture that values blood relationship. However, according to the supporting idea of behaviorist Watson, some cultures do not even include certain emotions defined by other cultures in their vocabulary. It means people express their mind first by language, act following their language, and finally those actions form particular culture.

  They secondly stated that a language is just a verbal expression of culture. Namely, language is just a tool for people. It is flawed in considering the role of language. Culture will not exist if people don't express their mind and lifestyles by language. As I mentioned, language as a tool has a significant effect on forming society and its culture. To form culture, people should talk with each other.

  Related to both of those ideas, in addition, Whorf argued that since grammar is more resistant to change than culture, the influence from language to culture is predominant. Grammar is a kind of structure of languages. Considering common argument that we should analyze language structure to know culture, resistance against change of grammar could be explained that a language is more consistent than culture is. It's hard to say changeable thing affects something just as this case.

  Language and culture are so inseparably related to each other that their relationships are easily discussed between scholars. For example, like my thesis, an influence of one on another. Whof and other scholars have discussed this idea, and they called this linguistic-cultural parallelism. Among its categories, I think the argument of linguistic influence on culture is definitely right. Although cultural anthropologists criticize that cultural influence on language is much bigger than vice versa, linguistic influence on culture is more significant. It's because a language becomes a part of culture. Language contributes to formation and transformation of culture. In addition, people express their mind by language or behavior and these things affect everything in society. It means, without language, people could not even contribute to their own culture. The significant role of language is in analyzing human, ourselves. Namely, developed studies on language could even apprehend every thing related to human. Culture is one of the things they already discover. Because people desire communication, it is natural that a language plays a significant role in either forming or affecting culture definitely. I totally agree that language must have a profound effect on culture.

* * *

This version is just for grammar check based on gammarly.com. I just fixed my gramatic errors.

Self Evaluation

1) What score do you think you deserve?
I think I should get 2 points for my first draft.
2) What did you do well?
I usually did all of my work during classs sincerely, and also I prepared it with various types of information!
3) What could you have done better?
I think I could have organized the contents more specifically.
4) Which part of the classical argument did you use the best?
I did confirmation well. I wrote it for a lot of time because I would like to use all of my information and also to deliver what I want to say to readers as well.
5) Which part of the classical argument did you use the most poorly?

I think my introduction was not good enough to attract my readers.

I had a trouble in planning introduction that is quite different from my former essays.

But I think I failed in that process.

6) What's your strategy to make your second draft better?

I will get some advices from peers and teachers to fix some mistakes.

My First Draft

My First Draft


  Everyday we absolutely use langauge and we create and develop culture. We cannot live without language and culture in a society. Think about our daily lives. We naturally use language to communicate with others to seek better way to develop our culture. In other words, language could have an influence on culture. You might say this idea is a common belief that most people know so obviously that it doesn't need an explanation such as writing this essay. However, despite of our high recognition of this, we are not aware of importance of it. In fact, most of us don't even know that why this idea could be substanitated.

  The idea of linguistic influence on culture is included in Whorfian theory by Whorf. Whorfian theory is categorized into two, the strong and weak version. The strong version says that language could determine the way we think, and in contrast, the weak one says linguistic categories and usage could influence the way we think and certain kinds of non-linguistic behaviour. Among the related theories, there were some theories which opposed the topic. However, there was a theory of Fishman which agreed on the topic by proposing that language is a key of culture.

  Specifically, the idea could be called as linguistic-cultural parallelism according to the study of Robert Leon Cooper, named The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought. This is the claim that each language reflects the culture of its speech community. In addition, it explains that language and culture have connections between them. For example, Korean has a lot of honorifics and low talks because Korean culture puts an importance on vertical human relations.

  There is difference of argument between linguists and cultural anthropologists. It's because the relations between language and culture is not that clear. However, despite of this, many linguists and cultural anthropolgists agree on that language and culture are inseparably related. Also, there is a simple idea related to this that society and individuals are connected too because culture is formed by society and the society is made of individuals.

   Despite the thesis has a difficulty in showing evidences, however, it could be explained by the natural progress and common ideas. First of all, language habits lead to formation and transformation of culture. According to the article which mentions the idea of thesis, culture is defined by the activities of people, sometimes governed by a geographical boundary. People formed their own society and made their own way of life, and this activity is called as cultural formation. After this for a time, culture is learned and also changes as time goes by. This alternation is passed from parents to children also by language.
   Like this, language has had a great role in inheritance because it's hard to inherit cultural formation or alternation without language. Therefore, language habits of the era must have influenced these processes such as that we commonly say we need to have better language habits for better society. It means that language habits would also become as a part of culture.
   This argument is exactly same as the reason why language habits influence cultural formation and alternation. The second reason that human mind and behavior affects society could be explained by this argument too. People express their mind by language and behave following their mind all the time in their society, and usually people in one society resemble this naturally. Language has always been a weapon to express one's ideas and feelings. In other words, human mind and behavior would be expressed by language, which pervades all over the society, and would show the lifestyle of society, so-called culture. In addition, because each person cannot be isolated from society, they would affect each other by their mind and behavior.
   Finally, let's see the third reason that culture usually follows the way of expressing feelings or some things which are helped by language. As you could refer to the first reason and the second reason, culture is formed by the way of expressing feelings (namely, mind). It is easy to know when we just look at ourselves. We always express something by languages, and usually this reflects which culture we have. It is because language is a kind of culture. If people use bad words, their culture becomes to be bad just as the words they say. That's why some argue that people should always be aware of how they say.
   In conclusion, language has a profound effect on culture. According to the idea of The Influence of Language on Culture and Thought: Essays in Honor of Joshua A. Fishman's Sixty-fifth Birthday on page 17, my thesis has a scientific name, 'linguistic-cognitive parallelism' or 'linguistic-cultural parallelism.':

This is the claim that there is a close correspondence between linguistic patterns, on the one hand, and cognitive and cultural ones, on the other. Each language reflects the culture of its speech community. In the following this claim will be called parallelism, for short.

   My thesis already has been a classical argument, and can be easily explained by either some papers or our common lifestyles, although there is some conflicts in stating whether language or culture has an influence on another.

  Obviously my argument is ambiguous when we consider the role of culture. Yes, it has already been a hot issue between linguists and cultural scholar. It is very complicated because both are so intertwined that there must be an apparent conclusion. Because of this, some of cultural scholar argued that culture has an influence on language, not vice versa. They first stated that all the vocabularies of one culture reflects what the cultural area values. This is well shown in Korean culture too. Korean has a lot of vocabularies related to honorifics or relatives, which reflect vertical culture or culture that values blood relationship. However, according to the supporting idea of behaviorist Watson, some cultures do not even include certain emotions defined by other cultures in their vocabulary. It means people express their mind first by language, act following their language, and finally those actions form particular culture.

  They secondly stated that language is just a verbal expression of culture. Namely, language is just a tool for people. It is flawed in considering a role of language. Culture would not exist if people don't express their mind and lifestyles by language. As I mentioned, language as a tool has a significant effect on forming society and its culture. To form culture, people should talk with each other.
  Related to both of those ideas, in addition, Whorf argued that since grammar is more resistant to change than culture, the influence from language to culture is predominant. Grammar is a kind of structure of language. Considering common argument that we should analyze language structure to know culture, resistance against change of grammar could be explained that language is more consistent than culture is. It's hard to say changeable thing affects something just as this case.

  Language and culture are so inseparably related to each other that their relationships are easily discussed between scholars. For example, like my thesis, an influence of one on another. Whof and other scholars have discussed this idea, and they called this linguistic-cultural parallelism. Among its categories, I think the argument of linguistic influence on culture is definitely right. Although cultural anthropologists criticize that cultural influence on language is much bigger than vice versa, linguistic influence on culture is more significant. It's because language becomes a part of culture. Language contributes to formation and transformation of culture. In addition, people express their mind by language or behavior and these things affect every thing in society. It means, without language, people could not even contribute to their own culture. The significant role of language is in analyzing human, ourselves. Namely, developed studies on language could even apprehend every thing related to human. Culture is one of the things they already discover, I argue. Because people desires communication, it is natural that language plays a significant role in either forming or affecting culture definitely. I totally agree that language must have a profound effect on culture.

* * *

I finally finished writing my first draft. However I don't know whether I can have more than two paragraphs per one part (introduction / narration / confirmation / refutation and concession / conclusion). Please give me answer if you see this, Mr. Landfried.