I think it's widely accepted in linguistics (IA kind of AL) that language influe... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

morsch on July 26, 2012 | parent | context | favorite | on: Norvig vs. Chomsky and the Fight for the Future of...

I think it's widely accepted in linguistics (IA kind of AL) that language influences conceptualisation (sometimes called the weak Sapir-Whorf hypothesis) but that it does not determine conceptualisation (the strong version).

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity

mcguire on July 26, 2012 | [–]

I've always had this suspicion that the "strong" form of any theory is a caricature made up by the theory's opponents.

zzzeek on Aug 1, 2012 | [–]

right, I'm familiar with sapir-whorf...but the parent comment here specifically refers to sapir-whorf as "mumbo-jumbo". Seems like the linguists still aren't keen on it.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact