Abstract Linguistic relativity is a notion that has been met with both praise and scorn. We argue that there is correlation between theorists’ general conceptions of the nature of language, and their stance toward linguistic relativity. Starting with the proponents of the thesis, we distinguish between the relativists of the early days (Boas, Whorf) and modern neo-Whofians (Levinson, Slobin), showing that the first but not the latter are committed to a view of language as a monolithic semiotic system contrasting “arbitrarily” with other such systems. Critics of the thesis also come from two diametrically opposed views of language. While universalists see the most significant part of language as pan-human cognitive structure (insulated from thought in general), socio-cultural theorists emphasize the nature of language as contextually situated activity. In both cases the potential for locally sedimented linguistic structures to influence thought is excluded or at best marginalized. In response, we propose that a synthetic ontology of language as an experientially grounded semiotic system for meaning making in actual social contexts allows for the possibility for language to influence thought, though in different ways. These depend on whether we consider language as situated use, as sedimented conventions or as ultimately prelinguistic motivations for “universal” properties like predication. We argue that all three of these perspectives need to be considered. With the help of the Motivation & Sedimentation Model, which is based on such a linguistic ontology, and inspired by the integral linguistics and phenomenology, we show how the deadlock in the debate over linguistic relativity can be resolved, and the possibility for discussion to proceed in less antagonistic manner.

中文翻译：

---

元语言相对性：一个人的本体论是否决定了一个人对语言相对性的看法？

摘要 语言相对论是一个受到赞扬和蔑视的概念。我们认为，理论家对语言本质的一般概念与其对语言相对性的立场之间存在相关性。从论文的支持者开始，我们区分了早期的相对主义者（博阿斯，沃尔夫）和现代新沃尔夫主义者（莱文森，斯洛宾），表明前者而非后者致力于将语言视为一种与其他此类系统“任意”对比的整体符号系统。对这篇论文的批评也来自两种截然相反的语言观点。虽然普遍主义者认为语言最重要的部分是泛人类的认知结构（与一般的思想隔离），社会文化理论家强调语言作为情境活动的本质。在这两种情况下，本地沉积的语言结构影响思想的潜力都被排除在外，或者充其量被边缘化。作为回应，我们建议将语言的综合本体论作为一种基于经验的符号系统，用于在实际社会环境中进行意义创造，这允许语言以不同的方式影响思想。这些取决于我们是否将语言视为情境使用、沉淀的约定或最终的“普遍”属性（如谓词）的前语言动机。我们认为需要考虑所有这三个观点。借助基于这种语言本体的动机和沉淀模型，