Subject: Re: [jboske] Re: [lojban] lo'edu'u

From: John Cowan <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2002 08:59:36 -0500 (EST)

Robert LeChevalier scripsit:

> 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.

BTW, this week's edition of _New Scientist_ magazine has a cover article on
neo-neo-Whorfianism, positioned as anti-Chomskyism.

-- 
A poetical purist named Cowan [that's me: [email-masked]]
Once put the rest of us dowan. [on xml-dev]
"Your verse would be sweeter http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
If it only had metre http://www.reutershealth.com
And rhymes that didn't force me to frowan." [overpacked line!] --Michael Kay