Languages and Thought

Craven, the most of a response I ever got before you came in was something from Wy about how everyone else said it was so, and everyone else couldn't be wrong, right? So I was fishing for a better response when you showed up and twisted everything. I know you didn't mention Sapir and Whorf - that's why I'm saying you were off-topic.

Rufio - that is a major bending of reality. I suggest you re-read the thread.

I love Whorf, both the Klingon and the Fisherman's thingy in San Fran.

A Whorf to the Wise?

Whorf! I had that dream again, where I leave the house without pants!

That was no dream...I am still blushing....

Whorf on, brave sonling, with Graptath in hand, and slay the boohiven Dargnulin!

Oh wait, I thought I was in the surrealism thread...

Confooozled, ain't we?

Yes, it's not like I responded to anything, for example.

I haven't had time, and still don't, but I want to read up, see what's dangling, see what's been covered, as it is a very interesting subject.

rufio,

The only thing I twisted was your arm. "Sapir and Whorf" do not change that you made demonsratably false claims and that they were given the credence that they were due.

I'd like to see the discussion about the mind progress, perhaps you can open a thread about how "Sapir and Whorf" justify your absolutisms and those who wish to join you can do so.


rosborne,

I am very much interested in the information you speak of. Do you know of any refenece material on it?

Does anyone else? Later on I'll explain why this is of such interest to me, it has to do with a theory I've had since I was 12.

Hi Craven,

I'll try to find something on it, but at the moment, all I can remember is a PBS show called Linguistic Acquisition. Most of the show was dedicated to studying growth and behavior of newborns as they learn how to speak. The show talked about Chomsky (sp?) and a few other theorists (and something about a "language box" theorized to exist in the brain somewhere, but never confirmed). But the middle of the show included CAT and MRI scans of brains during various stages of life. The colors on the scan indicated the growth activity and the amount of sugar being burned (energy converted).

I may still have the tape, but I'll have to dig through VHS archives covered with dust to find it.

And I can't wait to hear the theories of a 12 year old craven

Where is this not true, dlowan? Quote something, if you don't believe me.

Sozo, I already pointed out to Craven that we'd already completed conversation on language facilitating thinking. He doesn't believe me though.

I don't think you even understand who they were or what the debate is about Craven. Since this clearly isn't your area of expertise, perhaps you should go.

Rosborne, if that's true, than how can we learn other languages?

rufio,

I will stay and address the discussion that is taking place. Language is one of my areas of expertise and I enjoy these discussions. The game of "L'Enfant Provocateur" wears thin, and my suggestion was that it deserves it's own thread.

Hi Rufio,



I believe it's because the neural pathways which are used less are not completely lost, they are simply less easily stimulated than those pathways which are used more often.

Therefor, new languages, and new things in general, are still learnable, just not as easily as in the original neural complex (because there is no bias in the neural pathways of a new brain).

Well, I think it's pretty clear that learning a language after the critical period is not going to be as easy, even if it is very similar grammatically to the one(s) that you did learn. I don't know if that really says anything about that theory though.

What kinds of things were they suggesting required different nueral pathways? All languages seem to have some kind of verb, noun, adjective, or something used in that same purpose... all have some sort of inflection or transformation - and people can learn the sounds of other langauges - i.e. the accents long after that period, as we've already been over.

I think you had the right instinct there.

The theory is that the mind alters depending on its use. Langauge is a very large part of it's use so the ways language changes the mind are being explored.

Rosborne,

Second (and subsequent) language learning is often undertaken for specific purposes resulting in a subset of skills relative the "full set" of the native speaker. In this respect "other pathways" may be utilized for "doing the job".

At this point I am tempted to a slight diversion into entertaining world of missionary/pidgin English with such gems as "Kerosene lamp bilong Jesus Christ" for "the sun". Reading this, how people can still argue that such "language" does not influence thought is beyond me.

Yes, but the implication of *why* it's not as easy is the interesting part, don't you think?



Yes, I meant to clear this up earlier. The show was primarily focused on linguistic acquisition, but the general message on neural pathways was not limited to language. It was a more general statement which governs thought (thus my reference to atheletes learning more physical skills).

I'm going to have to look this stuff up, but here is my off-the-cuff memory of how neural pathways et al work:

There is an actual building process, that results in the "eureka!" lightbulb moment when a new connection is forged. I think that could work in tandem with pathways which are not being used falling into dormancy. But I have a very clear memory of having read some article (The New Yorker?) a few years ago and then right afterwards happening to attend a party with a linguistics professor from Caltech, on the cutting edge of this kind of research at the time. We had a really fascinating discussion, and the clear memory part is that we talked about the breakthrough. How when you learn a new language or a new skill there are a few phases, ending with a new neural connection being forged.

For example, in learning a new language, (in my case, ASL), first I just did the physical motions, copied the teacher, copied the video, copied the books. Neural pathways were on their way, but no connections had been made yet. If I'd stopped at that point, they would have just shriveled again. But I kept going, kept going, the pathways inched (well, of course, some measurement much smaller than an inch) forward, the visual pathway say inching toward the language pathway, and then voila! After I had practiced enough, there was this rather abrupt moment when I got it. I thought in ASL, I dreamed in ASL, (by the way, dreams are thought to help with this pathway building, but that's another thread), and the connection was made.