[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [jboske] Re: [lojban] lo'edu'u
At 11:05 AM 12/7/02 +0000, And Rosta wrote:
> >Isn't it fairly uncontroversial that what speakers actually say in
> >their sentences is quite heavily determined by what things the
> >language makes easy to say and what things the language makes hard?
>
> If I understand the anti-Whorfians (Chomskyists, in general), then it
would
> be controversial for them
I doubt it. Antiwhorfianism is normally a rejection of the idea that
language determines or constrains how we think, not what we say.
The concept that what we say is unrelated to what we think (or how we think
for that matter) seems mind-bogglingly wrong, which is probably why SWH is
accepted by assumption by most people who presume that language structure
determines what we say.
Also, the idea that (in possibly trivial ways) language enables
certain thoughts is not very controversial.
The question Loglan/Lojban tries to resolve is whether language
restrictions LIMIT certain thoughts (makes them more difficult if not
unthinkable).
lojbab
--
lojbab lojbab@lojban.org
Bob LeChevalier, President, The Logical Language Group, Inc.
2904 Beau Lane, Fairfax VA 22031-1303 USA 703-385-0273
Artificial language Loglan/Lojban: http://www.lojban.org