> Not to spiral too quickly off-topic, but I wanted to point out that
> Sapir-Whorf has been thoroughly discredited, and although it makes for
Not thoroughly. Whorf was credited, Sapir wasn't.
Which is okay by me because I don't think Sapir even
appeared in one episode. Whorf was in at least two
of the movies.
Now, if it weren't for weak linguistic determinism, how
would I have made such a lame Star Trek joke? Thus,
Sapir-Whorf has not been thoroughly discredited.
:)
-----Original Message-----
From: Joshua Allen [mailto:]
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2003 1:50 PM
To:
Subject: RE: [xml-dev] The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint
> > Tools do affect the way we think just as languages, a tool of sort,
> > affects the way we think. It has less to do with the audience or
Not to spiral too quickly off-topic, but I wanted to point out that
Sapir-Whorf has been thoroughly discredited, and although it makes for
good plotlines in books like "Snow Crash" and lends an air of mysterious
authority to persons like Chomsky; the thesis that language shapes
cognition is highly overrated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org <http://www.xml.org>, an
initiative of OASIS <http://www.oasis-open.org>
The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/
To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>
