|
|
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661
Carpal Tunnel
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,661 |
...errant spelling and punctuation...
Spoken like a true prescriptionist.
What's the difference if you make a mistake with linguistic *protocol, intend to alter it, don't know "better" and/or have someone misinterpret ones' intentions?
-----------
That is, does the loss of words restrict our choices in thinking or do we lose words because they have no more use?
What see ye the difference between these two?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
That is, does the loss of words restrict our choices in thinking or do we lose words because they have no more use?
What see ye the difference between these two?
I think Zed's post answers this, at least partially: I'm afraid that losing words will simplify the way we think. The first example which comes to mind is color, things used to be cerulean or teal or azure or periwinkle blue. Now they are light, dark or "sort of a medium bluey-greeny kind of colour". If we only have a generic word for it do we only see a generic colour.
Faldage, the "b" part of your question, we lose words because they have no more use, is much more common than the "a" part, I feel sure. I think we very much need to be on guard against a; although this will inevitably lead to disagreements, as exemplified by this thread. I really hate the idea of our whole society being dumbed down.
Hmm--do you-all think that our harried, hurried lifestyle contributes to this [off-the-cuff thought e]? I was looking back at Zed's example; I can envision a person needing to direct someone to their car, let's say, and simply saying, "It's the blue Nissan", without worrying about specifying azure, midnight blue, etc. Can anyone think of any other examples, or am I off the wall, here? (I may well be; I haven't had the best of days, so far.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,511 |
I think Zed's post answers this, at least partially:
I'm afraid that losing words will simplify the way we think.
The first example which comes to mind is color, things used to be cerulean or teal or azure or periwinkle blue. Now they are light, dark or "sort of a medium bluey-greeny kind of colour". If we only have a generic word for it do we only see a generic colour.
Well, this here is an example of the old Sapir-Whorf hypothesis; i.e., language shapes thought. Eskimos have forty-eleven names for snow so this must mean they can distinguish as many. Some Polynesian groups have only two words for colors, meaning warm and cool, therefore they can only see two colors. Hogwash®, I say!! While this theory once pulled me by my little college-girl ears, I think it's for the most part a bunch of baloney.
We discussed this elsewhere, can anyone with time and talent do a YART search?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613
Carpal Tunnel
|
|
Carpal Tunnel
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 11,613 |
Well, dunno about the time and especially the talent, but: http://wordsmith.org/board/showthreaded.pl?Cat=&Board=miscellany&Number=100849Odd--in the Search window, the markup tags are spelled out, and not carried out. Thanks for the reminder; I still find that theory fascinating. Have to point out, though, that it didn't seem to me that Faldage's question, or my quote from Zed, involved actual capability: it seemed to me (let me emphasize seemed) that they were speaking more of habitual thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,154
Pooh-Bah
|
|
Pooh-Bah
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,154 |
Yes, I was referring to habitual thinking. I should have said do we bother to notice differring colours or specifics. not can we see them.
|
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics13,913
Posts229,580
Members9,187
| |
Most Online3,341
Dec 9th, 2011
|
|
|
0 members (),
941
guests, and
0
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
