this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2025
20 points (100.0% liked)
Linguistics
773 readers
23 users here now
Welcome to the community about the science of human Language!
Everyone is welcome here: from laypeople to professionals, Historical linguists to discourse analysts, structuralists to generativists.
Rules:
- Instance rules apply.
- Be reasonable, constructive, and conductive to discussion.
- Stay on-topic, specially for more divisive subjects. And avoid unnecessary mentioning topics and individuals prone to derail the discussion.
- Post sources when reasonable to do so. And when sharing links to paywalled content, provide either a short summary of the content or a freely accessible archive link.
- Avoid crack theories and pseudoscientific claims.
- Have fun!
Related communities:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Good article. I'll mostly nitpick, and add further info.
That 1.5 billion number is a red herring. It's mostly non-native speakers, using English as a lingua franca. However, the impact of your native language over your thinking is clearly bigger than the one of some lingua franca; as such these numbers here are more relevant.
And for most part you don't see stable communities shifting their language into a lingua franca. Most of the time they do it because their government explicitly or implicitly backs up another language - i.e. a "national language".
But Macron et al. won't mention that, right? Of course he won't; because once you acknowledge that national languages are the problem, specially when associated with a colonial past, then French is part of the problem alongside English. (Plus quite a few other languages.)
That's a great way to phrase it.
And, really, strong Sapir-Whorf (language dictates thought) is so blatantly false that it isn't even interesting any more. The moderate/"weak" hypothesis, more aligned with what Whorf himself said, is likely true - and we should be studying how and when it is true.