John McWhorter is Professor of Linguistics at Columbia University and author of many books, including The Power of Babel: A Natural History of Language, Our Magnificent Bastard Tongue: The Untold Story of English, and What Language Is, What It Isn't, and What It Could Be. He also writes on language, as well as race and cultural issues, as Contributing Editor at The New Republic and Columnist at Time. His work has appeared in The New York Times, Time, and The New Yorker, and he has appeared often on National Public Radio, CSPAN and MSNBC.
发表于2024-12-29
The Language Hoax 2024 pdf epub mobi 电子书
图书标签: 语言学 語言學 NewBooksNetwork Culture 非虚构类 哲学 theory epub
Japanese has a term that covers both green and blue. Russian has separate terms for dark and light blue. Does this mean that Russians perceive these colors differently from Japanese people? Does language control and limit the way we think? This short, opinionated book addresses the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which argues that the language we speak shapes the way we perceive the world. Linguist John McWhorter argues that while this idea is mesmerizing, it is plainly wrong. It is language that reflects culture and worldview, not the other way around. The fact that a language has only one word for eat, drink, and smoke doesn't mean its speakers don't process the difference between food and beverage, and those who use the same word for blue and green perceive those two colors just as vividly as others do. McWhorter shows not only how the idea of language as a lens fails but also why we want so badly to believe it: we're eager to celebrate diversity by acknowledging the intelligence of peoples who may not think like we do. Though well-intentioned, our belief in this idea poses an obstacle to a better understanding of human nature and even trivializes the people we seek to celebrate. The reality - that all humans think alike - provides another, better way for us to acknowledge the intelligence of all peoples.
成功批评了popular Whorfianism,对语言-文化-思维-人性四者的关系有不少漂亮的阐述,比如language structure does not correlate meaningfully with culture; languages got the way they are by chance; there is wonder in how differently languages express the same basic cognitive process called humanity; our differences (in language) are variations on being the same. 缺点是不如G. Deutscher会讲故事。
评分很不错的批评沃尔夫主义的作品,观点很中肯,缺点就是缺乏建设性。一些沃尔夫主义的缺陷在于观念先行,所以调查语言有问题,这一点很多后期研究都有揭示。不过沃尔夫的初衷是好的,人家为了保护小语种嘛,但是最终还是被传媒玩坏了。新沃尔夫主义其实很强大了,他的优点就是建设性地化理论为技术,这比作者这种论述强,但是新沃尔夫主义有一个大问题,就是把统计学上的相关性当成因果。作者把各种语言中标志的不同归结于chance实在和前人把此归结于进化没多大理论进步(其实可以从信息论和演化角度做)作者没有把篇幅赋予沃尔夫主义如何在传媒中壮大这一点让人遗憾,传播才是真正的问题。就像民族主义的根源从来不是基因。近来以为沃尔夫主义的思路辨析及批判可以推广到极多的学科,他山之石,可以攻玉。ps洪堡、黑格尔都是沃尔夫主义先驱呐。
评分很不错的批评沃尔夫主义的作品,观点很中肯,缺点就是缺乏建设性。一些沃尔夫主义的缺陷在于观念先行,所以调查语言有问题,这一点很多后期研究都有揭示。不过沃尔夫的初衷是好的,人家为了保护小语种嘛,但是最终还是被传媒玩坏了。新沃尔夫主义其实很强大了,他的优点就是建设性地化理论为技术,这比作者这种论述强,但是新沃尔夫主义有一个大问题,就是把统计学上的相关性当成因果。作者把各种语言中标志的不同归结于chance实在和前人把此归结于进化没多大理论进步(其实可以从信息论和演化角度做)作者没有把篇幅赋予沃尔夫主义如何在传媒中壮大这一点让人遗憾,传播才是真正的问题。就像民族主义的根源从来不是基因。近来以为沃尔夫主义的思路辨析及批判可以推广到极多的学科,他山之石,可以攻玉。ps洪堡、黑格尔都是沃尔夫主义先驱呐。
评分很不错的批评沃尔夫主义的作品,观点很中肯,缺点就是缺乏建设性。一些沃尔夫主义的缺陷在于观念先行,所以调查语言有问题,这一点很多后期研究都有揭示。不过沃尔夫的初衷是好的,人家为了保护小语种嘛,但是最终还是被传媒玩坏了。新沃尔夫主义其实很强大了,他的优点就是建设性地化理论为技术,这比作者这种论述强,但是新沃尔夫主义有一个大问题,就是把统计学上的相关性当成因果。作者把各种语言中标志的不同归结于chance实在和前人把此归结于进化没多大理论进步(其实可以从信息论和演化角度做)作者没有把篇幅赋予沃尔夫主义如何在传媒中壮大这一点让人遗憾,传播才是真正的问题。就像民族主义的根源从来不是基因。近来以为沃尔夫主义的思路辨析及批判可以推广到极多的学科,他山之石,可以攻玉。ps洪堡、黑格尔都是沃尔夫主义先驱呐。
评分成功批评了popular Whorfianism,对语言-文化-思维-人性四者的关系有不少漂亮的阐述,比如language structure does not correlate meaningfully with culture; languages got the way they are by chance; there is wonder in how differently languages express the same basic cognitive process called humanity; our differences (in language) are variations on being the same. 缺点是不如G. Deutscher会讲故事。
The Language Hoax 2024 pdf epub mobi 电子书