4 ms·

Regardless of the completeness of the language, I was really stunned by the total lack - as characterized in the article - of natural human curiosity. Does anyo

• Semiapies 17y ago
  Pretty much every component of this story is being filtered through the claims of one man, a man who's one of only two known outsiders who speak their language to any extent - and according to the other person, not very well. Think how very weird you could make any group of people seem to another if you were the only person who could translate between them. These people have no art, but they make impromptu sculptures with moving parts and decorative necklaces. They have no use for change and reject all things of the outside world, except for clothing, cloth, thread, machetes, movies, and random strangers, including families who hang around for decades trying to learn their language. They don't point...except maybe with their chins. Their language is strange and unusual - unless it's in a way that casts doubts on Daniel Everett's understanding, like Keren Everett's claims about prosody. We don't know what these people are saying to Everett, and we have no idea what he's saying to them, due to either deception or a language barrier. Skepticism strikes me as entirely appropriate.
  • wgj 17y ago
    Thanks. That's really what I was thinking but I don't have the background to know.
  • nuncanada 17y ago
    My spouse, being a scientist, watched one of his presentations and was astounded by the lack of real examples that would support Everett's world changing (in Linguistics) thesis. If he has made so much effort to try to convince others, why hasn't yet simply recorded enough data to support it?