Those rival theories do seem a bit hard to swallow. I to am new to the theories and yes, Pinker is not a proponent of the theories, but I also agree he is presenting a fair estimation of them.Loricat wrote:Julian:Well, if it helps any, none of my professors at my university were fans of Linguistic Determinism in its extreme forms.Here's a concern that came to mind when reading that part of the book. Since I wasn't previously familiar with those theories, my sole exposure to them came from someone who disagrees with them. Though Pinker puts forth a good-faith effort to describe opposing theories, it still seems a little one-sided to learn about them from Pinker.
So, while I don't think that the language we speak creates our perception of the world we live in, I think that learning new words/concepts can alter how we think. For example, the means of communication open to us because of the invention of the Internet has forever changed the meaning of the word "communicate"...
The Extreme nativism is the most problematic to me. I mean, just the idea that the word 'carburator' already exists in our minds is a bit insane, as I mentioned above. I just cannot find any way to make that idea makes sense.
As for Determinism, I agree with Loricat, and I also remember Pinker saying as much, that words we use and learn can impact our thoughts, but not to the extent that words have a profound influence on HOW we think and how we create and utilize language.
I am enjoying this book. This is a totally new topic to me and the reading is slow going, but I feel rewarded after each chapter.
Mr. P.