segunda-feira, 27 de dezembro de 2010
TEc debate motion "The language we speak shapes how we think" - It exercises influence but does not bound up thought.
What an exciting debate this is that I rush to comment wishing I could vote for both sides of the argument.
Thought and thought processes are triggered in multiple ways by any number of inputs.
While languages certainly make a great difference on the outwardly expression of thought I am not so sure that thought has been framed by language, mother-tongue I assume, upstream.
There is bound to be an interplay between the two which makes people meaning basically the same thing say it differently in different languages according to usage types and expressions of their particular culture.
That said I am led to believe that this is not a straight clear-cut motion statement defined by yes or no.
I just had to drop these lines even before reading what the guests and the moderator are saying.
But I'm afraid I will have to come back later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the debate moved on it has only become harder for me to make up my mind. Not being into philology puts me at a disadvantage with those who may easily grasp the influence of languages on thought.
But what does emphatically come first: thought or language?
Or both simultaneously, or is there any precedence at all?
I remain as hesitant as ever for there is doubtless an interplay more acutely verified in some languages relative to others.
English is a good case in point.The very language we are using writing in on this debate.
English is a particularly versatile and practical language that delivers in short sentences - written and spoken, briefly and to the point.
In my native Portuguese it generally takes many more words to produce the same content.
That, however, does not alter my thinking the least bit.
Whatever my abstract thinking on a given subject matter will then be released in the required language.
The form, the style, the fluency will be determined by command of the language rather than any alteration to the essential thought.
While some languages do make it easier to sum things up and may indeed shape the way we think practical, I cannot accept that they are the main driver.
Do the Japanese and the Chinese with their painfully exquisite plentiful characters and sounds think entirely different from us in a Western mindset speaking Western languages?
To some extent yes but would that be enough to concede that thought is shaped by language?
I have thrown up a few questions here but at the end of this linguistic journey I am now more confident to disagree with the house motion.
Even if I may partially agree, and I do, on language influencing thought it does not go as far as considering that the latter is actually formatted by the former.
Thought and thought processes are triggered in multiple ways by any number of inputs.
While languages certainly make a great difference on the outwardly expression of thought I am not so sure that thought has been framed by language, mother-tongue I assume, upstream.
There is bound to be an interplay between the two which makes people meaning basically the same thing say it differently in different languages according to usage types and expressions of their particular culture.
That said I am led to believe that this is not a straight clear-cut motion statement defined by yes or no.
I just had to drop these lines even before reading what the guests and the moderator are saying.
But I'm afraid I will have to come back later.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As the debate moved on it has only become harder for me to make up my mind. Not being into philology puts me at a disadvantage with those who may easily grasp the influence of languages on thought.
But what does emphatically come first: thought or language?
Or both simultaneously, or is there any precedence at all?
I remain as hesitant as ever for there is doubtless an interplay more acutely verified in some languages relative to others.
English is a good case in point.The very language we are using writing in on this debate.
English is a particularly versatile and practical language that delivers in short sentences - written and spoken, briefly and to the point.
In my native Portuguese it generally takes many more words to produce the same content.
That, however, does not alter my thinking the least bit.
Whatever my abstract thinking on a given subject matter will then be released in the required language.
The form, the style, the fluency will be determined by command of the language rather than any alteration to the essential thought.
While some languages do make it easier to sum things up and may indeed shape the way we think practical, I cannot accept that they are the main driver.
Do the Japanese and the Chinese with their painfully exquisite plentiful characters and sounds think entirely different from us in a Western mindset speaking Western languages?
To some extent yes but would that be enough to concede that thought is shaped by language?
I have thrown up a few questions here but at the end of this linguistic journey I am now more confident to disagree with the house motion.
Even if I may partially agree, and I do, on language influencing thought it does not go as far as considering that the latter is actually formatted by the former.
Subscrever:
Enviar feedback (Atom)
Sem comentários:
Enviar um comentário