At 03:06 AM 8/18/2007, Thaths wrote:
Wow! Quoting Sapir-Whorf against Chomsky in a non-linguistics debate.
I thought that might get a rise out of you (and a few others) :-)
Would you posit that any argument is, by definition, framed in a manner certain to lead towards desired conclusions?
Sure. However, what is of interest is whether it is also framed in a manner as to _exclude_ certain undesired *topics*, by putting them out of the frame of reference altogether.
At 03:07 AM 8/18/2007, Thaths wrote:
I caution you that Sapir-Whorf is a contentious hypothesis and is not to be considered scientific truth (or falsehood) till there is more evidence gathered.
Fair enough, but it offers a useful way to think about the matter, and language to do so. ;-)
Udhay -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
