Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (was Re: FLAMEBAIT: Re: Non-linear / full-2d writing systems?)
|From:||Jörg Rhiemeier <joerg_rhiemeier@...>|
|Date:||Saturday, May 14, 2005, 16:02|
On Sat, 14 May 2005 05:12:39 -0400,
"J. 'Mach' Wust" <j_mach_wust@...> wrote:
> On Fri, 13 May 2005 22:22:41 -0400, Paul Bennett <paul-bennett@...> wrote:
> >On Fri, 13 May 2005 22:00:36 -0400, Remi Villatel <maxilys@...> wrote:
> >> I've always believed that a language influences your tought. Another
> >> writing
> >> system, in particular if it's as special as a 2dWS would be much like an
> >> another language. Sapir-Worf and so on...
> >Sapir-Worf could not possibly be true. If it were, we'd still be banging
> >rocks together, if that.
I think there is so much evidence against the "Sapir-Whorf" hypothesis
(which is actually Whorf's, not Sapir's), and so little in favour of it,
that it can be considered disproven (and most linguists do so).
> Neither this nor that. I don't believe that there are fundamental
> differences in thinking depending on different languages. But I do believe
> that language has an influence on though. A Frenchman, for instance, would
> be more prone to associate the concepts of "mother" and "sea" than an
> Englishman, since they are homophonous in his language.
Not really. German has _Mutter_ for `mother' and _Mutter_ for `nut
(of screw)' (but with different plurals) , and yet most Germans
do not associate them closely, except perhaps in occasional puns.
And I assume that the French association between _mère_ and _mer_
is by no means stronger.