Languages and Thought

Of course you couldn't, rufio, but that does not negate the fact that math, physics and human language all share a system of recognizeable patterns in common, and therefore constitue individual languages of their own.

I mean the languages people use to talk to each other, Thomas, not the languages computers use to talk to each other. I mean languages that people grow up speaking as children. Obviously, you can do more with specialized langauges like math and science than you can with human languages, but is there anything in any human, natural language that cannot be done in any other?

According to a friend of mine who is a professor of philosophy, discussing philosophy in Chinese is extremely difficult, because it's much it harder than in Indo-European languages to disassemble words into small parts and re-assemble them in order to produce a different meaning. It's not a show-stopper. There are examples of Chinese philosophers. But according to my friend, the structure of Chinese is a significant constraint on the thoughts Chinese philosophers can think.

Hmm....rufio, I might suggest express love. Mating calls amongst animals are all fine and dandy, but they ain't no Shakespeare sonnet, or John Donne poem. I believe that the celebration of love through language is one thing that is unique to humans.

I agree, cav. That's why I said, human, natural languages.

Thomas, what kinds of things, specifically? (I'm not making "forceful" "statments" here, I'm just asking a question. Just so you don't misinterpret what I'm saying accidentally.)

I don't know because I'm neither familiar with Chinese nor with philosophy. That's why I was giving my friend's account of the situation.

One related thing I do remember: I once saw a documentary, "From Mozart to Mao", documenting one of the first appearances of a Western classical musician (Isaac Stern) in China after the Cultural revolution. At one point in the film he gives a lecture, starting with the rhetorical question: "What is music all about?" The Chinese translation took about 10 seconds, maybe as many as 15. That might give you an impression.

Well, it doesn't, really. Languages that are inflected take less time to speak than languages that aren't, and so forth. If I had said that, people would be breating down my neck for a complete class on Chinese, since I was obviously claiming to know so much about it.

1) I forgot to say that other parts of the translation took about as long as the original text in English.

2) The reason people are not jumping on me is that I made clear who my source was, and everybody was able to decide for themselves how much to trust it. You don't get jumped on for posting unconfirmed information. You get jumped on for misrepresenting your information as well-confirmed when in fact it isn't.

The grapevine is a more confirmed source than a class or a textbook? Not that I think you should be attacked, I'm just curious why they only reserve it for me.

It's probably your style of communication. It was pointed out earlier in this thread that you come across as confrontational and that puts people on the defensive. I think Thomas, from the few comments I've read is trying to show you ways of avoiding becoming a 'victim'.

When I first started posting on the web, about a decade ago, I didn't fully understand the power that my words carried - perhaps, I'd been brought up in an environment where people didn't listen to me, so I ended up overcompensating and ramming my opinions down other people's throats, or so it appeared to others - I was just saying what I thought.

Iain

Also note that Thomas was not saying that his friend was a better source than a textbook, he was actually saying something closer to the opposite of that and was merely highlighting the importance of qualifying the opinion and not overstating the case.

Well, he did say that "The reason people are not jumping on me is that I made clear who my source was" as if I hadn't.

I've always had this same style, dduck, and no one has had any problems with it until now.

rufio,

You hadn't. You had to be asked, and you construe the asking as being "jumped on".

So at that point, you were "jumped on" for not citing a source.

What didn't I cite a source for?

I think it's our capacity to learn from new experiences that makes us most human. Don't you agree?

Iain

I think languages affect the way we think
Linguists argue both sides of this question. However, I believe there is an influence. For example, some languages classify words as masculine, feminine, and neuter. This classification is not the same for all words in those languages that classify words this way.

I've read that certain Indian languages describe things using precise geometric terms. For example, while we may say that the rock formation looks like two elephants. These Indians would describe this formation using geometric language. We make a description based on analogy while they use a different method.

Alan

Isn't geometry just another form of analogy though? Language IS analogy....

In fact it is logical: as some words or concepts do exist in a language, and do not in another, one can not form his thoughts the same way as another if their are different (as we think in our language)...
By the way, it was the subject of phylosophy when I gradued (in France): "Can language influence thoughts" (And I had a good grade :wink: )

The vocabulary of a language isn't fixed though. Meanings of words can be changed by the people who speak them, and more words can be invented if the words don't exist already. Any thought that a human being can think they can express in langauge somehow, no matter what language they speak. Language didn't exist before thought - it can't shape it.

It depends on what you call "thought".
If it is a kind of "primary thought", of course, it does nto depends on language, as it is pure feeling. It just doesn't need words.
However, the "mature thought" depends on language, because it uses reason, which is founded on certain concepts, formulated in a given language (am I clear? I don't speak English perfectly...)
An example: "Sodade" (a portuguese word) means "to be nostalgic by the miss of someone or something". It is a concept that is very present in the portuguese and in the brazilian culture (lots of books and songs deal with this concept), but it is not so much present in other cultures, just because this precise word has no translation. It is a very specific feeling, in a very specific context.