4 ms·

I'm curious if there is an emergent component to learning language? Anecdotally, I was raised in a non-religious home, in a community that remains to this day

I'm curious if there is an emergent component to learning language? Anecdotally, I was raised in a non-religious home, in a community that remains to this day very religious. Other kids had the correctness of the Bible hammered into their heads and struggled to accept language that contradicted it. Granted this is through the lens of time, but I vividly remember one kid reacting very strongly to a comic book, as if it's very existence meant reality itself was about to implode. On the other hand, I was exposed to multiple STEM topics early and had it explained that experimentation leading to discovery are the way. I'm not saying religious thinkers are idiots. I've met religious folks that are wicked smart in STEM topics. But in my experience, they too were still encouraged to question, not just accept it, and largely raised under the modern Church acceptance of evolution and the like. Where I'm going is the restricted access to varied language early on impacts this? It seems to fit too with rural areas, small villages, heavily favoring a local slang and "way". Reducing access to alternate "language" (it may still be English, but language of a very narrow scope)? Does anyone know if this is a researched topic?

coreyp_1 10y ago
Your anecdote suggest confirmation bias, because the opposite is equally possible. How do I know? Because I am the counterexample. Nobody in my family speaks anything but English. I am from a small town. I have never had a conversation from anyone from my hometown in anything but English. We grew up in a very conservative church, in a very conservative part of the country. While I was never taught that "questioning" was wrong, it was never an active part of the teaching, either; just indoctrination. No early exposure to STEM. Really, church activities (and the band in school) were my life. At 16, I began teaching myself how to play the piano and to study languages (when the Internet made access to other languages possible). I also taught myself programming, because it was interesting (Pascal, then Assembly, then PHP... I know, it's weird). I had no direction from family (my dad was a butcher (later a salesman), my mom was a nurse) because they didn't know anything about any of it. I just did whatever I thought was interesting on my own. What is the result? My first degree was from a seminary, where I earned a bachelor's in Biblical Studies. I then went to a state university, and earned a BMus in Piano Performance. I then earned a MSci in CS. I'm 3.5 years into my CS PhD program. As for language, I'm comfortable in Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese. I have also studied French, Italian, German, and Russian. This was all done in my late teenage and adult years (again, due to Internet availability).
fny 10y ago
How about Knuth or Planck? Or anyone on this list for that matter? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_science_and_technology https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_scienc...
JoeDaDude 10y ago
In linguistics, there is the Sapir Whorf hypothesis [1], in which it is conjectured that language affects the speakers world view and/or thought processes. If you read the George Orwell novel 1984 [2], you might recall the use of Newspeak, an invented language designed so that dissidents would be unable to express themselves, and thus not have treasonous thought. The Sapir Whorf hypothesis is actively debated and not fully accepted by linguists, you can see some of the debate at [3]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four [3] http://linguistlist.org/ask-ling/sapir.cfm http://linguistlist.org/ask-ling/sapir.cfm
- learc83 10y ago
  Sapir-Whorf is not just "not fully accepted". Most linguists believe that linguistic determinism, which is what most people are talking about when they refer to Sapir-Whorf, is false. Linguistic relativity is the weaker form of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis that is largely accepted, but it doesn't come close to supporting the 1984 can't form treasonous thoughts without the requisite language scenario.
flamedoge 10y ago
If I may extrapolate... I think people can be disingenuous to their almost intuitive longing to satisfy curiousity. They're taught to filter outside information to what fits their sandbox. For most information that is orthogonal, it passes through such filter, for inorthogonal information, they either shape it to make explainable using their axioms or reject/deny it.

coreyp_1 10y ago

Your anecdote suggest confirmation bias, because the opposite is equally possible. How do I know? Because I am the counterexample. Nobody in my family speaks anything but English. I am from a small town. I have never had a conversation from anyone from my hometown in anything but English. We grew up in a very conservative church, in a very conservative part of the country. While I was never taught that "questioning" was wrong, it was never an active part of the teaching, either; just indoctrination. No early exposure to STEM. Really, church activities (and the band in school) were my life. At 16, I began teaching myself how to play the piano and to study languages (when the Internet made access to other languages possible). I also taught myself programming, because it was interesting (Pascal, then Assembly, then PHP... I know, it's weird). I had no direction from family (my dad was a butcher (later a salesman), my mom was a nurse) because they didn't know anything about any of it. I just did whatever I thought was interesting on my own. What is the result? My first degree was from a seminary, where I earned a bachelor's in Biblical Studies. I then went to a state university, and earned a BMus in Piano Performance. I then earned a MSci in CS. I'm 3.5 years into my CS PhD program. As for language, I'm comfortable in Spanish and Brazilian Portuguese. I have also studied French, Italian, German, and Russian. This was all done in my late teenage and adult years (again, due to Internet availability).

fny 10y ago

How about Knuth or Planck? Or anyone on this list for that matter? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_science_and_technology https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Christians_in_scienc...

JoeDaDude 10y ago

In linguistics, there is the Sapir Whorf hypothesis [1], in which it is conjectured that language affects the speakers world view and/or thought processes. If you read the George Orwell novel 1984 [2], you might recall the use of Newspeak, an invented language designed so that dissidents would be unable to express themselves, and thus not have treasonous thought. The Sapir Whorf hypothesis is actively debated and not fully accepted by linguists, you can see some of the debate at [3]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four [3] http://linguistlist.org/ask-ling/sapir.cfm http://linguistlist.org/ask-ling/sapir.cfm

learc83 10y ago
Sapir-Whorf is not just "not fully accepted". Most linguists believe that linguistic determinism, which is what most people are talking about when they refer to Sapir-Whorf, is false. Linguistic relativity is the weaker form of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis that is largely accepted, but it doesn't come close to supporting the 1984 can't form treasonous thoughts without the requisite language scenario.

flamedoge 10y ago

If I may extrapolate... I think people can be disingenuous to their almost intuitive longing to satisfy curiousity. They're taught to filter outside information to what fits their sandbox. For most information that is orthogonal, it passes through such filter, for inorthogonal information, they either shape it to make explainable using their axioms or reject/deny it.