3 ms·
> the provable aspects revolve mostly around concepts like the colour "grue". That is, people whose languages lack separate words for blue and green, using inst
by PavlovsCat 13y ago
> the provable aspects revolve mostly around concepts like the colour "grue". That is, people whose languages lack separate words for blue and green, using instead a single word for both that could be rendered in English as "grue", take longer to distinguish between blue and green.
What about languages that require the speaker to keep track of their spatial orientation?
And how come thinking and talking in English and German are both slightly different for me? Those languages aren't even far apart, but in my mind one can't replace the other.
> In the human world, the ability or inability to express a thought has a lot more to do with experience and culture than with any limitations that the language you speak may impose on you.
And again with the strawmen. Where did I claim such radical difference as being completely unable to express a specific thought, or seeing the world completely differently? Nowhere.
There's one big difference though, jokes. You can make some jokes in some languages, but they just don't work in others.
- stan_rogers 13y agoThat is, though, precisely what the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis claims -- I never said you were claiming anything of the sort, merely that the hypothesis did. Linguistics, in general, is a fascinating area of study (though if you are good at spotting straw men where none exist at all, you'll find yourself twitching a lot).