Final answer:
Today's anthropologists vary in their belief about the extent to which linguistic relativity influences thought. Research has evolved to consider broader concepts and recognizes linguistic universals, suggesting a more nuanced understanding of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis in modern linguistic anthropology.
Step-by-step explanation:
Anthropologists today hold varying beliefs about the validity of the linguistic relativity principle. While it is acknowledged that language can shape our perceptions and behaviors, the extent to which this occurs is still up for debate. Modern research has shifted from focusing on specific vocabulary to larger abstract concepts such as navigation and space. For instance, some cultures might use cardinal directions rather than body-relative terms, resulting in different mental mapping capabilities. On the other hand, there are also linguistic universals which all human languages share, based on common human biology, suggesting a limit to how much language can shape thought.
The development and sophistication of non-Western languages challenged early 20th-century notions of primitive societies, thanks to the efforts of Franz Boas, Edward Sapir, and Benjamin Whorf. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis or linguistic relativity is a central topic in the study of linguistic anthropology, where the impact of language on thought is a core consideration. Although the hypothesis has evolved over time, it continues to influence linguistic anthropological research, with studies showing that language indeed plays a crucial role in our sociocultural experiences and interpretation of the world.