Thanks for the book reference, I'll check it out I guess my question mostly relates to whether or not learning more > languages than one, (perhaps when one gets to about three different > languages to some level of proficiency and deep study), causes one to form > a pre/post-linguistic awareness as I referenced in my original post.
Hmm.. I probably fit the criteria of multiple languages. I tried to expose myself to different language families, so I have Slavic, Germanic, Asiatic, and Arabic familiarity to various degrees (sorry if those aren't correct groupings :D). I'm fluent in only two, but both of those were learned as a kid. I haven't thought about what you're describing. Perhaps it was the fish-thinking-about-water phenomenon? I assumed that everyone thinks in free form and then solidifies it into language when necessary for clarity or communication. However, I do recall my surprise at experiencing first hand all the different grammar structures that still allow people to communicate well. From what I can tell about my thoughts, there's definitely some abstraction going on, where the thought comes before the words, and then the word shuffle needs to happen to fit the grammar structure of the language being used. So there appear to be at least two modes I think in. One being almost intuitive and without form, the other being expressed through language. (I've written poetry that other people liked, so I'm ok at both). However, I thought that the free form thought had more to do with being good at mathematics and the very abstract thought that promotes. I didn't link it to knowing multiple languages. So what about mathematical thinking? It seems it does more for my abstract thinking than multiple languages. Trying to imagine mathematical structures/concepts that are often impossible to present in the solidity of the real world did more for me "loosening" my thought boundaries and abandoning language structure than any language I learned as far as I can tell. Mathematics can also be considered a language. But there are also different mathematical languages as well. I experienced this first hand. Perhaps I'm not as smart as some people, but the biggest mental challenge, and one I had to give up on to maintain my sanity (literally), was learning physics and computer science at the same time and for the first time. It was overwhelming. Where I studied it, physics math was all continuous mathematics. In contrast, Computer Science math was all discrete mathematics. On a physics quiz, my professor did a little extra credit, and asked the students to describe how they would put together a model of the solar system. Even though the quiz was anonymous, he knew exactly who I was, because I was the only one to describe an algorithm for a computer simulation. The others described a mechanical model. There was also something very weird that was happening to my brain at the time. The cognitive dissonance in switching between discrete and continuous math paradigms was overwhelming, to the point where I ended up picking the discrete/computer science path and gave up on physics, at least while an undergrad. I don't think knowing only one language is "bad". It's sort of like saying, oh, you're only a doctor, and you do nothing else. However, there appears to be something to knowing multiple languages. Part of the reason why I mentioned the metaphor stuff in the first place, is because it resonates with me in what I understand about how the human neocortex works. The most compelling explanation for the neocortex that I found is Jeff Hawkins' Hierarchical Temporal Memory model. A similar concept also came up in David Gelenter's "Mirror Worlds". And that is, in very general terms, that our neocortex is a pattern recognition machine working on sequences in spatial and temporal neuron activation. There is nothing in it at birth, and over our lifetimes, it fills up with memories of more and more complex and abstract sequences. Relating this back to our language discussion, with that as the background, it seems intuitive that knowing another language, i.e. memorizing a different set of sequences, will enable different patterns of thought, as well as more modes of expression. As to building a series of tiny LISPs. I see that as being similar as arguing for knowing only one family of languages. We would be missing entire structures and modes of expression by concentrating only on LISP variants, would we not? The Actor Model resonates deeply with me, and sometimes I have trouble explaining some obvious things that arise from thinking in Actors to people unfamiliar with that model of computation. I believe part of the reason is that lots of the computation happens as an emergent property of the invisible web of message traffic, and not in the procedural actor behavior. How would one program a flock in LISP? On Sun, Apr 7, 2013 at 3:47 AM, Julian Leviston <jul...@leviston.net> wrote: > > On 07/04/2013, at 1:48 PM, Tristan Slominski <tristan.slomin...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > a lot of people seem to have the opinion the language a person >> communicates in locks them into a certain way of thinking. > > > There is an entire book on the subject, "Metaphors We Live By", which > profoundly changed how I think about thinking and what role metaphor plays > in my thoughts. Below is a link to what looks like an article by the same > title from the same authors. > > http://www.soc.washington.edu/users/brines/lakoff.pdf > > > > Having studied linguistics, I can tell you there are MANY books on this > subject. I can point to at least the following reference work on the topic: > > http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/language-thought-and-reality > > I wasn't interested in this discussion. I would agree that semi-educated > ordinary man definitely thinks in language and it definitely shapes the > thoughts that they're capable of, however what I'm talking about is really > only found in people who speak more than two other languages than their > "native" language, and/or in languages not touched by that "modern culture" > (such as the Australian Aborigines "dreamtime" metalinguistic awareness). > > I guess my question mostly relates to whether or not learning more > languages than one, (perhaps when one gets to about three different > languages to some level of proficiency and deep study), causes one to form > a pre/post-linguistic awareness as I referenced in my original post. > > I think learning only one language is bad for people who want to > understand each other, and the same thing with programming languages. Less > than 3 languages doesn't allow one to "triangulate" meaning very well, > perhaps even properly. > > Julian > > _______________________________________________ > fonc mailing list > fonc@vpri.org > http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc > >
_______________________________________________ fonc mailing list fonc@vpri.org http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
