Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Linguistics question

Expand Messages
  • Popplestone, Ann
    I just came across this. I am sure that it is old news to Linguistics specialists, but could you please share your expert opinion(s) on it with the rest of
    Message 1 of 5 , Dec 12, 2005
    • 0 Attachment
      I just came across this. I am sure that it is old news to Linguistics specialists, but could you please share your expert opinion(s) on it with the rest of us?



      Humbly,



      Ann





      Source:

      Columbia University Teachers College



      Date:

      2004-08-20

      URL:

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/08/040820083420.htm

      ________________________________


      Study Of Obscure Amazon Tribe Sheds New Light On How Language Affects Perception


      During the late 1930s, amateur linguist Benjamin Lee Whorf posed the theory that language can determine the nature and content of thought. But are there concepts in one culture that people of another culture simply cannot understand because their language has no words for it?

      No one has ever definitively answered that question, but new findings by Dr. Peter Gordon, a bio-behavioral scientist at Teachers College, Columbia University, strongly support a "yes" answer. Gordon has spent the past several years studying the Pirahã, an isolated Amazon tribe of fewer than 200 people, whose language contains no words for numbers beyond "one," "two" and "many." Even the Piraha word for "one" appears to refer to "roughly one" or a small quantity, as opposed to the exact connotation of singleness in other languages.

      What these experiments show, according to Gordon, is how having the right linguistic resources can carve out one's reality. "Whorf says that language divides the world into different categories," Gordon said. "Whether one language chooses to distinguish one thing versus another affects how an individual perceives reality."

      When given numerical tasks by Gordon in which they were asked to match small sets of objects in varying configurations, adult members of the tribe responded accurately with up to two or three items, but their performance declined when challenged with eight to 10 items, and dropped to zero with larger sets of objects. The only exception to this performance was with tasks involving unevenly spaced objects. Here, the performance of participants deteriorated as the number of items increased to 6 items. Yet for sets of 7 to 10 objects, performance was near perfect. Though these tasks were designed to be more difficult, Gordon hypothesizes that the uneven spacing allowed subjects to perceive the items as smaller "chunks" of 2 or 3 items that they could then match to corresponding groups.

      According to the study, performance by the Piraha was poor for set sizes above 2 or 3, but it was not random. "Pirahã participants were actually trying very hard to get the answers correct, and they clearly understood the tasks," Gordon said. Participants showed evidence of using methods of estimation and chunking to guess at quantities in larger set sizes. On average, they performed about as well as college students engaged in more complex numerical estimation tasks. Their skill levels were similar to those in pre-linguistic infants, monkeys, birds and rodents, and appeared to correlate to recent brain imaging studies indicating a different sort of numerical competence that seems to be immune to numerical language deprivation. Interestingly, Gordon noted, while Pirahã adults had difficulty learning larger numbers, Piraha children did not.

      While the Pirahã words for "one" and "two" do not necessarily always refer to those specific amounts, Gordon also found that members of the tribe never used those words in combination to denote larger quantities. In the study, they also used their fingers in addition to their verbal statement of quantity, but this practice, too, was found to be highly inaccurate even for small numbers less than five.

      The Pirahã language has no word for "number," and pronouns do not designate number--"he" and "they" are the same word. Most standard quantifiers like "more," "several," "all," and "each" do not exist. In general, while containing a very complex verb structure common to many Native American languages, the Pirahã language does not allow for certain kinds of comparative constructions. For example, it was not possible to ask participants whether one group of objects "has more nuts than the other" because of the lack of that construction in the Pirahã grammar. Yet, the word they use for "many," which in that language was derived from a form ob the verb meaning "to bring together," is distinct from a word that means something like "much."

      Details of the study will appear in the Thursday, August 19, issue of the journal Science.

      Teachers College is the largest graduate school of education in the nation. Teachers College is affiliated with Columbia University, but it is legally and financially independent. The editors of U.S. News and World Report have ranked Teachers College as one of the leading graduate schools of education in the country. For more information, please visit the college's Web site at http://www.tc.columbia.edu

      ________________________________

      This story has been adapted from a news release issued by Columbia University Teachers College.





      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Popplestone, Ann
      http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_colapinto?cu rrentPage=all Can anybody with a better background than mine comment on this? Ann
      Message 2 of 5 , Jun 26, 2007
      • 0 Attachment
        http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_colapinto?cu
        rrentPage=all



        Can anybody with a better background than mine comment on this?



        Ann Popplestone AAB, BA, MA

        CCC Metro TLC



        216-987-3584

        FAX: 330-867-6375





        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Linda Light
        I read this article a week or so ago and was absolutely flabbergasted. I want to research it further, by going to the source (Everett) and other linguists,
        Message 3 of 5 , Jun 26, 2007
        • 0 Attachment
          I read this article a week or so ago and was absolutely flabbergasted. I want to research it further, by going to the source (Everett) and other linguists, maybe inquiring on the linguistics listserve I belong to, but I've been so busy since then and am at the moment getting ready to go to Mongolia for 3 weeks, so I've put it all off. Linguists have made some sweeping statements about the "universals of languages," many of which this language seems to contradict. Not only that, from what I can gather from the article, they also contradict the cultural universal about religion and belief in the supernatural-- they just don't seem to have it. I'd love to know more.
          Linda

          "Popplestone, Ann" <ann.popplestone@...> wrote:
          http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_colapinto?cu
          rrentPage=all

          Can anybody with a better background than mine comment on this?

          Ann Popplestone AAB, BA, MA

          CCC Metro TLC

          216-987-3584

          FAX: 330-867-6375

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






          ---------------------------------
          Be a PS3 game guru.
          Get your game face on with the latest PS3 news and previews at Yahoo! Games.

          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • anthropmor@AOL.COM
          Check the anthrolist archives- we discussed this guy before. The consensus was that the language did have syntactical rules. Mike Pavlik
          Message 4 of 5 , Jun 26, 2007
          • 0 Attachment
            Check the anthrolist archives- we discussed this guy before.
            The consensus was that the language did have syntactical rules.
            Mike Pavlik



            ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • Linda Light
            They never claimed that Piraha doesn t have ANYsyntactic rules, just that it doesn t have recursive syntax rules that allow for embedded sentences.
            Message 5 of 5 , Jun 27, 2007
            • 0 Attachment
              They never claimed that Piraha doesn't have ANYsyntactic rules, just that it doesn't have recursive syntax rules that allow for embedded sentences.

              anthropmor@... wrote: Check the anthrolist archives- we discussed this guy before.
              The consensus was that the language did have syntactical rules.
              Mike Pavlik

              ************************************** See what's free at http://www.aol.com

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






              ---------------------------------
              Yahoo! oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links.

              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.