3 ms·

As someone who speaks English, Japanese, and computer programming languages, I will say that language absolutely affects how we think. My trains of thought are

As someone who speaks English, Japanese, and computer programming languages, I will say that language absolutely affects how we think. My trains of thought are very different from someone who only speaks English or Japanese, let alone someone who doesn't speak programming; and I definitely can't fully relate to someone who speaks Spanish, Chinese, etc. either. As far as I'm concerned, that theory is not psuedo science.

Yoric 2y ago
While I'm also multi-lingual, and I also strongly believe in (some version of) the Sapir Whorf hypothesis, to the best of my knowledge, it has never been demonstrated. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity .
- johnisgood 2y ago
  https://mw-live.lojban.org/papri/Sapir-Whorf_Hypothesis https://mw-live.lojban.org/papri/Sapir-Whorf_Hypothesis There was a great writing about it, in great detail. I remember it being "lojban.txt", but I cannot seem to find it. :(
  - mistermann 2y ago
    Considering the logic in these articles through ontology and set theory lenses is...a trip.
    - johnisgood 2y ago
      I found what I have been looking for, you might find it really interesting (and trippy!): https://www.lojban.org/files/why-lojban/whylojb.txt https://www.lojban.org/files/why-lojban/whylojb.txt
      - mistermann 2y ago
        Wow! Thank you for this!
      - mistermann 2y ago
        You may not see this but I am curious: do you have some ~expertise in this general area? The "I found what I have been looking for" comment seems to imply so, so I can't resist asking.
cardanome 2y ago
Note that Orwell promotes an hard form of the Sapir Whorf hypothesis called linguistic determinism meaning that a language would make it impossible think certain thoughts. This is obviously wrong. Have you ever experienced anything for which you didn't have the words to explain? This already proves that you can feel and think things that are not easily expressed in the languages you know. Also some people don't even think in words but are more visual thinkers. But even for the softer version, linguistic relativism, these is not much hard evidence. You subjective experience is not easily measurable. Yes, the act of learning new languages can gives you new perspectives and enrich you as a person because it gives you access to a whole new culture but that is different to saying you can suddenly experience new forms of emotions because you didn't have the words for it before or see more colors. I recommend this Tom Scott video on the issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmZdGo6b5yA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmZdGo6b5yA
- nathan_compton 2y ago
  I think its a mischaracterization to say Orwell promotes it. The State in 1984 wishes to reach this stage, but the book does not really demonstrate that they are able to.
  - dannyobrien 2y ago
    and indeed the appendix that explains Newspeak heavily implies that they failed in their project -- it's written in the past tense
- Dalewyn 2y ago
  >Have you ever experienced anything for which you didn't have the words to explain? Yes, and some of it I'm only aware because it can be easily expressed in one language but not another. For example, "itadakimasu" in Japanese is a very simple phrase that you say when you start eating to signify appreciation for the food. It may surprise you that there is no suitable translation in English. "Thank you for the food." is awkward and strangely esoteric, "Amen." has religious implications that did not exist in "itadakimasu". "Itadakimasu" also means "to take", in this context meaning you will consume the food, but expressing that makes the English even more esoteric. What's more, there's also "gochisou-sama", literally "Mr. Feast" (yes really), that you say when you're done eating to, again, signify appreciation for the food. "Thank you for the food." is again awkward and esoteric and doesn't fully translate the original phrase, but what's more Japanese clearly has two similar but very different concepts that cannot be adequately separated and expressed in English. Moving away from Japanese, some languages like Spanish and French apply the concept of gender to their words and grammar. That's something completely foreign to me and I certainly can't think like that since I don't speak such languages. The ease with which someone can conceptualize something depends significantly on their vocabulary, the language(s) they speak. If you don't know or can't speak certain words, you will naturally gravitate towards trains of thought that don't require as much complicated brain power. Speaking more fundamentally, knowing or not knowing a language determines whether you can or can't understand someone. That difference is going to vastly change how you think about him, demonstrating once again that language affects thought. This is why freedom of speech has become such an important human right and why it's a very good thing to learn more languages than just your native one. Speaking more languages opens your mind to more versatile trains of thought that would otherwise not be possible. Suggesting that language doesn't affect thought is a very ignorant claim, particularly in this day and age when more people of all backgrounds desperately need to communicate more effectively with each other.
lmm 2y ago
My experience learning Japanese, and more importantly living in Japan, has convinced me of the complete opposite: that linguistic differences are almost entirely downstream of cultural differences. The things you initially think are unique to the Japanese language are actually preserved fully when speaking with Japanese people in English (bearing in mind that a Japanese person who learns English fluently will inherently be atypical in various ways), and the experience of speaking with a Japanese person in English is far more "Japanese" than speaking Japanese with someone who has never lived here.
cbnotfromthere 2y ago
[dead]

Yoric 2y ago

While I'm also multi-lingual, and I also strongly believe in (some version of) the Sapir Whorf hypothesis, to the best of my knowledge, it has never been demonstrated. See also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity .

johnisgood 2y ago
https://mw-live.lojban.org/papri/Sapir-Whorf_Hypothesis https://mw-live.lojban.org/papri/Sapir-Whorf_Hypothesis There was a great writing about it, in great detail. I remember it being "lojban.txt", but I cannot seem to find it. :(
- mistermann 2y ago
  Considering the logic in these articles through ontology and set theory lenses is...a trip.
  - johnisgood 2y ago
    I found what I have been looking for, you might find it really interesting (and trippy!): https://www.lojban.org/files/why-lojban/whylojb.txt https://www.lojban.org/files/why-lojban/whylojb.txt
    - mistermann 2y ago
      Wow! Thank you for this!
    - mistermann 2y ago
      You may not see this but I am curious: do you have some ~expertise in this general area? The "I found what I have been looking for" comment seems to imply so, so I can't resist asking.

cardanome 2y ago

Note that Orwell promotes an hard form of the Sapir Whorf hypothesis called linguistic determinism meaning that a language would make it impossible think certain thoughts. This is obviously wrong. Have you ever experienced anything for which you didn't have the words to explain? This already proves that you can feel and think things that are not easily expressed in the languages you know. Also some people don't even think in words but are more visual thinkers. But even for the softer version, linguistic relativism, these is not much hard evidence. You subjective experience is not easily measurable. Yes, the act of learning new languages can gives you new perspectives and enrich you as a person because it gives you access to a whole new culture but that is different to saying you can suddenly experience new forms of emotions because you didn't have the words for it before or see more colors. I recommend this Tom Scott video on the issue: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmZdGo6b5yA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmZdGo6b5yA

nathan_compton 2y ago
I think its a mischaracterization to say Orwell promotes it. The State in 1984 wishes to reach this stage, but the book does not really demonstrate that they are able to.
- dannyobrien 2y ago
  and indeed the appendix that explains Newspeak heavily implies that they failed in their project -- it's written in the past tense
Dalewyn 2y ago
>Have you ever experienced anything for which you didn't have the words to explain? Yes, and some of it I'm only aware because it can be easily expressed in one language but not another. For example, "itadakimasu" in Japanese is a very simple phrase that you say when you start eating to signify appreciation for the food. It may surprise you that there is no suitable translation in English. "Thank you for the food." is awkward and strangely esoteric, "Amen." has religious implications that did not exist in "itadakimasu". "Itadakimasu" also means "to take", in this context meaning you will consume the food, but expressing that makes the English even more esoteric. What's more, there's also "gochisou-sama", literally "Mr. Feast" (yes really), that you say when you're done eating to, again, signify appreciation for the food. "Thank you for the food." is again awkward and esoteric and doesn't fully translate the original phrase, but what's more Japanese clearly has two similar but very different concepts that cannot be adequately separated and expressed in English. Moving away from Japanese, some languages like Spanish and French apply the concept of gender to their words and grammar. That's something completely foreign to me and I certainly can't think like that since I don't speak such languages. The ease with which someone can conceptualize something depends significantly on their vocabulary, the language(s) they speak. If you don't know or can't speak certain words, you will naturally gravitate towards trains of thought that don't require as much complicated brain power. Speaking more fundamentally, knowing or not knowing a language determines whether you can or can't understand someone. That difference is going to vastly change how you think about him, demonstrating once again that language affects thought. This is why freedom of speech has become such an important human right and why it's a very good thing to learn more languages than just your native one. Speaking more languages opens your mind to more versatile trains of thought that would otherwise not be possible. Suggesting that language doesn't affect thought is a very ignorant claim, particularly in this day and age when more people of all backgrounds desperately need to communicate more effectively with each other.

lmm 2y ago

My experience learning Japanese, and more importantly living in Japan, has convinced me of the complete opposite: that linguistic differences are almost entirely downstream of cultural differences. The things you initially think are unique to the Japanese language are actually preserved fully when speaking with Japanese people in English (bearing in mind that a Japanese person who learns English fluently will inherently be atypical in various ways), and the experience of speaking with a Japanese person in English is far more "Japanese" than speaking Japanese with someone who has never lived here.

cbnotfromthere 2y ago

[dead]