3 ms·

The idea that all non-western practices, language included, have a deep and amazing and metaphysical quality that westerners simply couldn't understand is so ti

The idea that all non-western practices, language included, have a deep and amazing and metaphysical quality that westerners simply couldn't understand is so tiresome. No language is more expressive than another, some are more expressive for particular very specific things, like Inuit languages might be much better at describing the varieties of snow, but no language has a monopoly on describing dualism of ideas. It's just as silly to be overly dismissive of the language you're familiar with as it is to be overly dismissive of others.

gsf_emergency_6 11mo ago
How about tripartism of ideas? https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0888613X23001639 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S08886... https://www.academia.edu/45462252/The_Logic_Structure_of_Tao_Philosophy https://www.academia.edu/45462252/The_Logic_Structure_of_Tao... Okay, these are probably posthoc retcons
- inavida 11mo ago
  I've just noticed this hierarchal tripartism so I'm happy to see that other people have retconned it too.
rramadass 11mo ago
> The idea that all non-western practices, language included, have a deep and amazing and metaphysical quality that westerners simply couldn't understand is so tiresome. The author did not say this; this is your unnecessarily negative take. However the author is comparing Chinese with English where this is somewhat true and well studied; eg. A Comparison of Chinese and English Language Processing - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/chapter/bookseries/abs/pii/S0166411508616593 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/chapter/bookseries/abs... Google will give you lots more info. on this. > No language is more expressive than another, Objectively false. This is the same meaningless logic that since almost all programming languages are Turing Complete and can simulate any Turing Machine therefore they are equivalent. In a abstract sense they are but for all practical purposes the notion is useless as anybody trying to program in C++ vs. Haskell vs. Prolog will tell you. This is why you have the concept of "Paradigms" and "Worldviews". Every culture imposes a "Philosophical Worldview" on the Languages it invents. An ancient Indian Philosopher named Bhartṛhari (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhart%E1%B9%9Bhari https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhart%E1%B9%9Bhari) actually founded a school of philosophy where language is linked to cognition-by-itself with cognition-of-content i.e. subject+object+communication as a "whole understanding". He called this Sphota (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spho%E1%B9%ADa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spho%E1%B9%ADa) defined as "bursting forth" of meaning or idea on the mind as language is uttered. This is the reason why in ancient Sanskrit literature there is so much emphasis on oral tradition i.e. using right words, right utterances, right tones etc. Previous discussion Words for the Heart: A treasury of emotions from classical India - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43249766 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43249766 Also see the book The Word and the World: India's Contribution to the Study of Language by Bimal Krishna Matilal which gives an overview of Bhartrhari's (and others) ideas - https://archive.org/details/wordandtheworldindiascontributiontothestudyoflanguagebimalakrishnamatilal_202003_376_e https://archive.org/details/wordandtheworldindiascontributio...
- popalchemist 11mo ago
  Thank you. Exactly the frame of reference I was speaking from.
  - rramadass 11mo ago
    See also the psychologist Richard Nisbett's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_E._Nisbett https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_E._Nisbett) works specifically; The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently...and Why - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geography_of_Thought https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geography_of_Thought
- idiotsecant 11mo ago
  It is pretty unanimously agreed by linguists that all language is equally expressive, which makes sense considering they were all made by humans to do the same thing.
  - rramadass 11mo ago
    No; I had already refuted this in my earlier comment. Language is a product of Geography and Culture to express a "Philosophical Worldview". Mere study of its Phonology, Morphology, Syntax and Grammar are not enough. What is important is whether a given language has specialized technical vocabulary to express specific concepts/ideas i.e. the "complexity of semantics" involved. These are usually context/culture dependent. As an example, compare the language of the Xhosa people living in equatorial Africa with that of the Chukchi people living in the Arctic Circle. It should be obvious that they each have concepts expressed via language unique to their Geography/Culture and which are unknown to the other. As another example, consider the Sanskrit word Karma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma). It is impossible to understand this word in all its connotations (it actually is a stand-in for a whole lot of concepts) without having an idea of Reincarnation which is specific to Hinduism/Buddhism philosophical worldviews.
    - idiotsecant 11mo ago
deleted 11mo ago
[deleted]

gsf_emergency_6 11mo ago

How about tripartism of ideas? https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0888613X23001639 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S08886... https://www.academia.edu/45462252/The_Logic_Structure_of_Tao_Philosophy https://www.academia.edu/45462252/The_Logic_Structure_of_Tao... Okay, these are probably posthoc retcons

inavida 11mo ago
I've just noticed this hierarchal tripartism so I'm happy to see that other people have retconned it too.

rramadass 11mo ago

> The idea that all non-western practices, language included, have a deep and amazing and metaphysical quality that westerners simply couldn't understand is so tiresome. The author did not say this; this is your unnecessarily negative take. However the author is comparing Chinese with English where this is somewhat true and well studied; eg. A Comparison of Chinese and English Language Processing - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/chapter/bookseries/abs/pii/S0166411508616593 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/chapter/bookseries/abs... Google will give you lots more info. on this. > No language is more expressive than another, Objectively false. This is the same meaningless logic that since almost all programming languages are Turing Complete and can simulate any Turing Machine therefore they are equivalent. In a abstract sense they are but for all practical purposes the notion is useless as anybody trying to program in C++ vs. Haskell vs. Prolog will tell you. This is why you have the concept of "Paradigms" and "Worldviews". Every culture imposes a "Philosophical Worldview" on the Languages it invents. An ancient Indian Philosopher named Bhartṛhari (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhart%E1%B9%9Bhari https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhart%E1%B9%9Bhari) actually founded a school of philosophy where language is linked to cognition-by-itself with cognition-of-content i.e. subject+object+communication as a "whole understanding". He called this Sphota (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spho%E1%B9%ADa https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spho%E1%B9%ADa) defined as "bursting forth" of meaning or idea on the mind as language is uttered. This is the reason why in ancient Sanskrit literature there is so much emphasis on oral tradition i.e. using right words, right utterances, right tones etc. Previous discussion Words for the Heart: A treasury of emotions from classical India - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43249766 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43249766 Also see the book The Word and the World: India's Contribution to the Study of Language by Bimal Krishna Matilal which gives an overview of Bhartrhari's (and others) ideas - https://archive.org/details/wordandtheworldindiascontributiontothestudyoflanguagebimalakrishnamatilal_202003_376_e https://archive.org/details/wordandtheworldindiascontributio...

popalchemist 11mo ago
Thank you. Exactly the frame of reference I was speaking from.
- rramadass 11mo ago
  See also the psychologist Richard Nisbett's (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_E._Nisbett https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_E._Nisbett) works specifically; The Geography of Thought: How Asians and Westerners Think Differently...and Why - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geography_of_Thought https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geography_of_Thought
idiotsecant 11mo ago
It is pretty unanimously agreed by linguists that all language is equally expressive, which makes sense considering they were all made by humans to do the same thing.
- rramadass 11mo ago
  No; I had already refuted this in my earlier comment. Language is a product of Geography and Culture to express a "Philosophical Worldview". Mere study of its Phonology, Morphology, Syntax and Grammar are not enough. What is important is whether a given language has specialized technical vocabulary to express specific concepts/ideas i.e. the "complexity of semantics" involved. These are usually context/culture dependent. As an example, compare the language of the Xhosa people living in equatorial Africa with that of the Chukchi people living in the Arctic Circle. It should be obvious that they each have concepts expressed via language unique to their Geography/Culture and which are unknown to the other. As another example, consider the Sanskrit word Karma (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karma). It is impossible to understand this word in all its connotations (it actually is a stand-in for a whole lot of concepts) without having an idea of Reincarnation which is specific to Hinduism/Buddhism philosophical worldviews.
  - idiotsecant 11mo ago

deleted 11mo ago

[deleted]