Essay on the origin of language herder meaning
In the seventeenth century, philosophers began to examine the relationship of language to thought in a more deliberate way. For example, Francis Bacon in his (published 1620) discusses the fallacies which hinder most men from gaining true knowledge of various things, and he arranges these fallacies under the heads of various “idols” of the popular mind. Under “idols of the market” he discusses the effects of ordinary language upon thought:
Essay on the origin of language herder - Little Ones
“Perhaps some will object that men of genius ... might have borrowed of the learned languages that assistance which they could not receive from their mother tongue. I answer that people having been accustomed to conceive things as expressed in the language which they had learnt from their infancy, their minds must have been naturally confined. They could not be offended with the want of precision, because they had habituated themeselves to it; consequently they were not as yet capable of deriving such assistance from the learned languages.” (§148, p. 288-9)
Every human being is, on the one hand, in the power of the language he speaks; he and his whole thinking are a product of it. He cannot, with complete certainty, think anything that lies outside the limits of language. The form of his concepts, the way and means of connecting them, is outlined for him through the language in which he is born and educated; intellect and imagination are bound by it. On the other hand, however, every freethinking and intellectually spontaneous human being also forms the language himself. For how else, but through these influences, would it have come to be and to grow from its first raw state to its more perfect formation in scholarship and art?
Rousseau essay on the origin of languages text
Although Nida later expressed disagreement with Whorf’s stronger formulations of the theory of linguisitic relativity, and insisted that “anything that can be said in one language can be said in another,” in 1986 he acknowledged that most scholars do accept a weaker formulation which says that language thinking: “Whorf regarded language as largely determinative, but most other scholars have taken the position that the structure of language simply increases the facility with which people recognize certain distinctions …”
The Effect of Language upon Thinking - bible …
Evidently it is not uncommon for those who spend their time out monitoring or at least mingling with wildlife to witness occurrences that go beyond conventional assumptions about what animals can know or do. When “elephant whisperer” Lawrence Anthony died in 2012, the two herds of traumatized rogue elephants crossed the vast South African game reserve where they lived, apparently to pay their last respects. The elephants had not been anywhere near the house for a year and a half prior, , and the trek across the park could take a day, but within hours of his death they all showed up.
Do Elephants Have Souls? - The New Atlantis
Unpacking this remarkable exchange yields several items of note. First, there is the dynamic presence of the unknown in daily life. Second, there is the question of what to do about it. Because it is unknown does not mean that it is necessarily unknowable — nor that it isn’t. The choice to tell about it represents a hopeful effort that it might be understood, though not a presumptive one: there is no undue effort to explain, to impose some kind of theory on it, but an openness to whatever it might reveal. But finally, on the optimistic side of understanding, there is a reminder of the awesome significance of language in the urging to . What could be more crucial in the search for truth than this ability to translate individual experience into common comprehensibility? You just tell what happened, and someone else will hear it.
What Makes America Great? | The Weekly Standard
Whatever we may personally think of structural analysis as divorced from meaning or of the influence of grammatical categories on thought processes, we must certainly admit the close relationship between language and culture. Language cannot be properly treated except in terms of its status and function as a part, a process, and, to some degree, a model of culture, with a high degree of reciprocal reinforcement. Though one may not wish to go all the way with Whorf, nevertheless, one cannot escape the fact that language seems to provide the ‘grooves for thought’ in the same way that cultural patterns constitute the molds for more general modes of behavior.