is the reduction of language constricting the thought of society

is this true? for instance the way we think is through language, if we did not have it how would we think? therefore does a devolving language suggest a simplification/ reduction of complex thought? is it political influenced? (re 1984, G.Orwell) or is it culturally and socially produced? are text messages or emails a source for a possible devolution of language? (ie becoming increasingly abbreivated and reduced)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Most people don't think through language, but through pictures, concepts, and metaphors.

Simplifying something doesn't mean you're devolving it, and a simplified language doesn't reduce complex thought. The Chinese language is one of the simplest major languages in the world, and the Chinese are just as capable of complex thought as the rest of us.

That a written language is being abbreviated and reduced says nothing of the spoken language which it represents. A written language is simply a visual representation of a spoken one, and it can be as simple or as complex as you please. Again, look at the Chinese language: very simple when spoken, very intricate when written.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Language is required for both communication and for complex thought processes. You require either words or corresponding internal abstract symbols, pictures, whatever.

Imagine carying on a conversation without having words like: House, tree, car, Charlie Brown, et cetera. You would have to describe a house, tree, car, Charlie Brown, et cetera every time you wanted to reference the object, person, whatever. A simple conversation would be so complex that it would be unintelligible.

Just as you could not carry on an intelligible conversation without a language, you could not think about anything but the simplest concepts without getting confused.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't think we're losing any more language than we're gaining.

Laser and scuba were once acronyms. Now one's a verb.

 

I understand communication, and articulating complex thought into something which can be communicated, but I don't understand why you need a method of communicating your complex thoughts in order to have them in the first place. For example, I would say that I think in concepts, pictures, and metaphors rather than words and sentences.

Do you have some source concerning this? I don't think that I think in words much, but if I'm wrong, I'd like to know.

I don't think we're losing any appreciable amount of language, period.

 

What pictures did you use to formulate that response?

 

Losing? No.
But going out of style....

 

I remember thinking about some sort of cypher, and using it to decrypt something (language is a "cypher" for your thoughts). And then I thought about the fact that something that's encrypted is still there even if the cypher is gone.

Concepts: encryption, decryption. Pictures: a cypher. Metaphors: language is a cypher.

 

ur wierd.

Concepts: u; wierdness.

 

I think in words, like a proper person.

 

Really?

So when you think of how to describe your house to someone, you imagine the words "house", "big", "red", etc., instead of picturing your big red house?

 

As a big red house.
How would you interpet "estimates that the frequency of heteropaternal superfecundation among dizygotic twins whose parents were involved in paternity suits was approximately 2.4%"

 

While I read, the words that I know or can figure out make me picture their referrent. For example, "heteroparental" makes me think of a couple made up of a man and a woman. The pictures and concepts run together to form the entire thought that the sentence conveys.

Now, here's a good, and related, example that I just thought of that shows we think more often in pictures than in words. While I read a book, the words make me picture what the words are talking about, and as I read along, the pictures tie together to form the story. Then after I'm done reading the book, I can remember it by thinking about what happened. What's more, it's easiest to remember it through thinking about what happened, because I remember how the story went. If I try to remember through the words in the book, it doesn't get me far, because I often don't remember how the words went.

I could translate my memory of the story into words which would have a similar effect to the words from the book. But I'm still thinking mostly through concepts, pictures, and metaphors in order to acheive this.

 

wierdo

 

I read in words. When I go into recall, I can remember where words were located that contain the info I'm looking for– top of the page, side of the page, etc. I remember words. Like any normal person.

 

language is constricting the though ot society.. the fact of the matter is that language centers develop earlier and faster than do the areas responsible for quantitative and abstract thought. there is a substantial body of research to support this.language does infact play a vital role in thought

 

A long time ago I read an article which claimed that there are three types of internal processing.

• Some people think using words. Typically, but not exclusively journalists, writers, et cetera.
  
• Some think using pictures. Typically but not exclusively, artists, photographers, sculptors, et cetera.
  
• Some think in some unknown abstract symbols. Typically, but not exclusively mathematicians, engineers, et cetera. This group (to which I belong) cannot describe much about their thought processes because they cannot draw pictures or write an essay about their internal thought processes.

I suspect that everyone makes some use of the third mechanism in order to deal with abstract concepts.

I have often wondered how I can dream in color, but cannot create a mental image of anything when I am awake. If told to describe my father, I can use words, but I do not have an image of him in my mind as I am saying the words. I am not aware of the words internally until I say them. I am obviously a member of the third group.

 

Is the dictionary getting bigger? Aren't they adding new words every year? How do they keep track if old words fall into disuse? Is the total number of words in common use stable, increasing, or decreasing? Is the vocabulary variable with geography?