 The next topic is Criticism on Warf Hypothesis. Why linguists generally agree that linguistic relativism can be shown to be true to some extent. So this aspect of Warf Hypothesis which is related to linguistic relativism, basically it has been received as something which can be considered as true. It is the linguistic determinism which has received lot of criticism. The idea was that not only the variation in terms of people's importation that whether the language determines thought or not the other area was to do with the problem of translitability. So the major criticism has been directed towards linguistic determinism as well as the aspect of translitability. With regard to linguistic determinism the major criticism came from Pinker and the example which Warf gave about Hopi speaker that they do not have the concept of time and that it is primarily due to the lack of the use of tenses in the language. Pinker suggested that Warf had perhaps never met a Hopi speaker and that their concept of time is not different from the western concept of time. With regard to translation and point of translation which is that if the language is basically every language has a distinct reality encoded in it then how it is possible that the work are being translated or work of one language is being translated in another and we see that literature, documents, manuals they are being translated every day. So this is another criticism that has been something that has been received with regard to the linguistic determinism. So now we will look at some of the points that have been put forward by a number of linguists with regard to separate Warf hypothesis. We have the three main arguments on Warf hypothesis. The first one is the grammatical structure is the first one since the syntactic system of a language and the perceptual system of the speakers of that language do not have the kind of interdependent relationship that is a pair of hypothesis claimed to have many grammatical features of a language are purely superficial aspect of linguistic structure. The second one goes to the translation as there is no real translation and it is impossible to learn the language of a different culture unless the learner abandons this own method of thinking and acquires that of the target language according to the strong version of Sapir Warf hypothesis. Actually successful translation can be made between languages for example the conceptual uniqueness of a language such as Hopi can nonetheless be explained in English. The last one belongs to the process of second language acquisition. According to the hypothesis languages have different conceptual system. If it is true then someone who speaks one language will be unable to learn another language because he lacks the right conceptual system. However, since people can learn radically different languages those languages could not have different conceptual systems. Thus the above mentioned three arguments against this hypothesis manifest that there are many deficiencies or doubts under this hypothesis which need us to go and explore further studies to get the verification with regard to the points proposed in the linguistic determinism and the linguistic relativity. To conclude the Sapir Warf hypothesis has strong as well as weak points. It is quite plausible that language influences the way of thinking but the hypothesis exaggerates the decisive role of language and ignores the social and cultural factors of language. It also fails to answer the issue of translatability.