In a message dated 1/30/09 2:02:04 PM, [email protected] writes:

> Are you implying that in a zero-copula, one cannot make the error that 
> one makes in a copulating language when one says "Sentimentalism is X"?
>
> If so (i.e., zero-copula is not susceptible of this error), how does 
> the use of "to be" produce the error? Or to put it conversely, if the 
> two languages produce essentially equivalent statements, why does the 
> zero-copula  syntax not produce the error?
>
The extent to which our thinking is led astray is vast -- especially abstract
philosophical topics like ontology, phil of mind, phil of language. And the
edges are very fuzzy. Here's a suggestive though inconclusive fact: The number
of people who speak zero copula languages is in the billions (Chinese,
Indonesian, Russian, Arabic, Hebrew, Irish, Amerindian, Turkic, Hungarian,
'Ebonic',
American Sign Language, and more). And yet very few philosophers who
speak/think in those languages are globally well known in those abstract
topics I
mention.

Zero copula languages vary.   Strangely (to us) though they don't have
copulas in the present tense, some have them in the past tense. Others don't.
The
absence of 'is' is something you're already familiar with from black and white
movies with Amerindians or Chinese. "He good man, I sure!" "That my dead horse
in driveway!" While, say, pointing at candy: "That chocolate!"

Some of those languages don't have tenses at all. "I eat chocolate
yesterday." (We often accept that as correct English: "I fly to London
tomorrow. I eat
with the Prime Minister tomorrow night.")

To answer your question, my guess is they all hypostatize and reify like
crazy. And I'm fairly sure their minds are led by their words to discrete and
stabilize the words' alleged referents. I'm fairly sure -- but not totally
sure.
We have Indonesian housekeepers, and when I explain"zero copula" to them, they
grasp the notion quickly, but that could be because they have already learned
English (or Dutch when they were children) and thus are already familiar with
one of the many peculiar differences between Indonesian and English. And yet I
sense a certain surprise when I explicitly cite some of the manifestations of
the differences.

I have, happily for them, never tried to broach the subject of reification to
them.   "Do you reify in Indonesia?" "Oh, no. My father forbid that in our
house."

Lest I seem to be saying that from a great height, I should report that at
least two of them strike me as sharp enough to have been academic standouts in
the U.S. if, when they were growing up, they'd had the opportunities now
available in America.





**************
Know Your Numbers: Get tips and tools to help you improve your
credit score.
(http://www.walletpop.com/credit/credit-reports?ncid=emlcntuswall00000002)

Reply via email to