[1] Just yesterday, we were wondering if thought precedes language; Mark Liberman at Language Log discusses the opposite question,
Were the basic characteristics of Newtonian physics determined by the way that Indo-European languages treat space and time?
Not surprisingly, the answer is no:
At least in lexicographic terms, the Indo-European languages do not, contrary to what Whorf says, share a linguistic history that predisposes their speakers unconsciously to a particular physics of time, distance, velocity and so on. In particular, the English words for those abstract physical concepts developed rather late, mostly as part of a conscious effort to import or develop explicit physical theories.
[2] Jenny at Light Reading gives her highest compliment to a book (which makes it a must-read):
I read a most delightful novel this weekend while laid low with a bronchial ailment (still fairly under the weather, I’m afraid): Charles Stross’s The Atrocity Archives. Absolutely delightful! Len Deighton-H. P. Lovecraft mashup, with rather entrancing mathematical and computational asides–pretty much the perfect light reading, my highest compliment for any book…
Take a look and have fun!
Tags: Benjamin Lee Whorf, Charles Stross, The atrocity archives
Entertaining Research 
March 9, 2008 at 2:50 am |
Guru,
Interesting post. Of course thought preceded language! I had a dog who had a vocabulary of perhaps 30 or 40 words, even though she could not actually speak them. She understood things like “who’s there?”, “go get (so-and-so)”, “did you do this?”, “sh*t!”(which she took to mean something had upset you), “go upstairs”, “bring my shoes” and so on. I think this indicates the mental capacity for language, although the dog lacked the bio-physical capability of using it.
Regards,
Prem
March 9, 2008 at 7:52 am |
Dear Prem,
Thanks for stopping by and sharing your thoughts; the language capabilities may indeed be innate.
Guru