<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name="ProgId" content="Word.Document"><meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><meta name="Originator" content="Microsoft Word 11"><link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CRon%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:SimSun;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;
mso-font-alt:宋体;
mso-font-charset:134;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 135135232 16 0 262145 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Arial Unicode MS";
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;
mso-font-charset:128;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-1 -369098753 63 0 4129279 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@Arial Unicode MS";
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;
mso-font-charset:128;
mso-generic-font-family:swiss;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:-1 -369098753 63 0 4129279 0;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@SimSun";
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;
mso-font-charset:134;
mso-generic-font-family:auto;
mso-font-pitch:variable;
mso-font-signature:3 135135232 16 0 262145 0;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{mso-style-parent:"";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
mso-pagination:widow-orphan;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";
mso-fareast-font-family:SimSun;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;
text-underline:single;}
span.hccdpe
{mso-style-name:hccdpe;}
span.ep8xu
{mso-style-name:ep8xu;}
span.ldacoc
{mso-style-name:ldacoc;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;
mso-header-margin:.5in;
mso-footer-margin:.5in;
mso-paper-source:0;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center;" align="center"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";">===========================================<br>
L O W L A N D S - L - 12 January 2009 - Volume 06<span style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102);"><br>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>
Please set the encoding mode to Unicode (UTF-8).<br>
If viewing this in a web browser, please click on<br>
the html toggle at the bottom of the archived page <br>
and switch your browser's character encoding to Unicode.</span><br>
===========================================</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";"><br>
From: <span class="ep8xu"><span><span style="color: rgb(91, 16, 148);">Sandy Fleming</span></span></span><span class="hccdpe"> </span><span class="ldacoc"><<a href="mailto:sandy@scotstext.org">sandy@scotstext.org</a>></span><br>
Subject: <span class="hccdpe">LL-L "Language programming" 2009.01.12 (01)
[E]</span><br>
<br>
> From: Mark Dreyer <<a href="mailto:mrdreyer@lantic.net">mrdreyer@lantic.net</a>><br>
> Subject: LL-L "Language programming" 2009.01.11 (02) [E]<br>
<br>
> This is a very important string. I cannot immediately
motivate my<br>
> thesis, but I know I am not alone in my assurance that language<br>
> 'programs' the Mind, to its possessor's great advantage or otherwise.<br>
<br>
I don't believe it for a moment! Time to motivate your thesis if you<br>
can, Mark :)<br>
<br>
> For a modern example, until Einstein developed the concept
of a<br>
> 'Local Frame of Reference', Classical Newtonian Physics was at a loss<br>
> to explain phenomena already subject to observation.<br>
<br>
But what's that got to do with language? The language involved (let's<br>
say German in Einstein's case?) has nothing to do with the concepts. If<br>
you were saying that Newtonian physics couldn't explain the precession<br>
of Mercury's orbit because the explanation couldn't be expressed in<br>
English but Einstein managed to explain it because it could be expressed<br>
in German, then I might agree that language programs the mind. But it's<br>
not the case.<br>
<br>
> Sandy, you
ultimately wrote:<br>
><br>
> > Re Bushmen, I was somewhat wrong, they happen to count to four (not<br>
> > three) and then say many. Maybe their system matches the five<br>
> fingers<br>
> > of one hand, with which they may want to sign those numbers...<br>
><br>
> And:<br>
><br>
> Traditionally, Bushmen are hunter-gatherers, so their language is<br>
> probably still rooted in that stage. Once agriculture took off, the<br>
> notion of "property" must have boomed, making new ideas
necessary...<br>
<br>
I didn't write any of that! Nor would I have, even ultimately.<br>
Especially not the bit about being wrong :)<br>
<br>
It seems obvious enough that there's some sort of nonsense going on<br>
behind the idea of human beings who can't count past three. I suspect it<br>
was just European colonials trying to say the natives are inferior.<br>
<br>
You don't need language in order to count. Perhaps you need a language<br>
of some sort (even if it's only the language of sticks and notches) to<br>
_communicate_ numbers, but you don't need language to employ numbers as<br>
a concept if you're a lone hunter.<br>
<br>
I think much of this idea of language "programming the mind" is about<br>
the way people tend to inflate the importance of their own subject in<br>
their minds. Mathematicians tend to think that maths is everything and<br>
everything is maths, geographers tend to think similarly about geography<br>
(I know this because I've had this discussion with a geographer!) and<br>
linguists tend to think language is everything.<br>
<br>
> BTW It may be the elevation & the thin atmosphere of our Highveld, but<br>
> not a few of European stock with young eyes can see & are on record as<br>
> having seen from here the four moons of Jupeter with the unaided eye.<br>
<br>
Yes, as I said, I wouldn't have seen this as unlikely. I suspect that<br>
given good atmosphere and youthful eyesight you could also see the<br>
crescent of Venus. I thought I could when I was a teenager, though<br>
others assured me I must be imagining it!<br>
<span style="color: rgb(136, 136, 136);"><br>
Sandy Fleming<br>
<a href="http://scotstext.org/" target="_blank">http://scotstext.org/<br>
<br>
</a></span><span style="color: black;">----------<br>
<br>
</span>From: <span class="ep8xu"><span><span style="color: rgb(91, 16, 148);">Sandy Fleming</span></span></span><span class="hccdpe"> </span><span class="ldacoc"><<a href="mailto:sandy@scotstext.org">sandy@scotstext.org</a>></span><br>
Subject: <span class="hccdpe">LL-L "Language programming" 2009.01.12
(01) [E]<br>
<br>
</span>> From: Mark Dreyer <<a href="mailto:mrdreyer@lantic.net">mrdreyer@lantic.net</a>><br>
> Subject: LL-L "Language programming" 2009.01.11 (02) [E]<br>
><br>
> Mark:<br>
><br>
> The Bushmen I know can certainly count beyond three. Their system is<br>
> decimal as I can understand. We all have ten fingers, but their<br>
> numeral terminology goes up to twenty. Well we have toes also. Beyond<br>
> that they go up in multiples of men under the same system. What I<br>
> can't understand is the development in the Middle-East of numerology<br>
> in base 12 & base sixty.<br>
<br>
I missed this bit but had meant to answer it.<br>
<br>
Bases 12 and 60 have a mathematical motivation much more sensible than<br>
finger and toe counts, because the most difficult of the four basic<br>
mathematical operations is division and 12 can be divided evenly by more<br>
numbers than ten.<br>
<br>
Twelve divides by 2, 3, 4 and 6, as opposed to 10 dividing by just 2 and<br>
5. I think the existence of base 60 does suggest this as the motivation,<br>
because it's as if someone thought about the fact that five was excluded<br>
from division in base 12, but multiply 12 by five and get base 60: then<br>
you can divide by all integers up to 6.<br>
<br>
Of course this many numerals begins to put a strain on the memory,<br>
otherwise they'd surely have included 7 by using base 420 :)<br>
<span style="color: rgb(136, 136, 136);"><br>
Sandy Fleming<br>
<a href="http://scotstext.org/" target="_blank">http://scotstext.org/</a></span><br>
<span style="color: black;"><br>
----------<br>
<br>
<span style="word-spacing: 0px;">From: R. F. Hahn <<a href="mailto:sassisch@yahoo.com" target="_blank">sassisch@yahoo.com</a>><br>
Subject: Language programming<br>
<br>
Sandy:<br>
<br>
</span></span></span></p><div style="margin-left: 40px;"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);">It seems obvious enough that there's some sort of nonsense going
on</span></span><br style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);">
behind the idea of human beings who can't count past three. I suspect it</span></span><br style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 153);">
was just European colonials trying to say the natives are inferior.</span></span><br><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";"></span></div><p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";">
<br>
I often think that too. And then I come across (reliable?) data that seem to
support the claim that Australian languages range in counting between up to 3
and up to 6; e.g.<br>
<br>
Alyawarr:<br>
1. anyent [<span lang="ZH-CN">ʌˈɲə</span>nt<span lang="ZH-CN">ʰ</span>]<br>
2. atherr [<span lang="ZH-CN">ʌ</span>'t<span lang="ZH-CN">θəɾ<sup>ə</sup></span>] <br>
3. irrpety [i<span lang="ZH-CN">ɾ</span>'pit<span lang="ZH-CN">ʃ</span>]<br>
4. irrpetyap [ir'pit<span lang="ZH-CN">ʃʌ</span>p] (lit.: 'a few' )
5. akngerr [<span lang="ZH-CN">ʌ</span>k'<span lang="ZH-CN">ŋəɾ<sup>ə</sup></span>]
(lit.: 'many' )<br>
6. akngerr innga [<span lang="ZH-CN">ʌ</span>k'<span lang="ZH-CN">ŋə</span> in'<span lang="ZH-CN">ŋʌ</span>] (lit.: 'very many' )<br>
<br>
Anmatyerr:<br>
1. (a)nyent [(<span lang="ZH-CN">ʌ</span>)<span lang="ZH-CN">ˈɲə</span>nt<span lang="ZH-CN">ʰ</span>]<br>
2. atherr [<span lang="ZH-CN">ʌ</span>'t<span lang="ZH-CN">θəɾ<sup>ə</sup></span>] <br>
3. urrpety [u<span lang="ZH-CN">ɾ</span>pit<span lang="ZH-CN">ʃ</span>], rrpwety [<span lang="ZH-CN">ɾ</span>pwit<span lang="ZH-CN">ʃ</span>] (lit.: 'a few' )<br>
4. akngerr [<span lang="ZH-CN">ʌ</span>k'<span lang="ZH-CN">ŋəɾ<sup>ə</sup></span>]
(lit.: 'many' )<br>
<br>
Eastern Arrernte:<br>
1. anyente [<span lang="ZH-CN">ʌˈɲə</span>nt<span lang="ZH-CN">ʰə</span>] <br>
2. atherre [<span lang="ZH-CN">ʌ</span>'t<span lang="ZH-CN">θəɾə</span>] <br>
3. urrpetye [u<span lang="ZH-CN">ɾ</span>pit<span lang="ZH-CN">ʃə</span>] (lit.:
'three or more' )<br>
<br>
Ngaanyatjarra:<br>
1. kutju [kucu]<br>
2. kutjarra [kucar]<br>
3. mankurrpa [ma<span lang="ZH-CN">ŋ</span>kurpa]<br>
4. kutjarra kutjarra ( 2 + 2 )<br>
5. mara [ma<span lang="ZH-CN">ɻ</span>a ]<br>
6. pirni [pi<span lang="ZH-CN">ɻ</span>ni] (lit.: 'many' )<br>
<br>
[Source: <a href="http://lingweb.eva.mpg.de/numeral/">http://lingweb.eva.mpg.de/numeral/</a><br>
<br>
However, the data are scarce and many of the languages are moribund or extinct.
I don<span lang="ZH-CN">'</span>t know if we can really be sure that there was
not some other system that allowed counting beyond that, such as while sharing
food (e.g. roots, berries or grubs). Furthermore, I don<span lang="ZH-CN">'</span>t know how well especially
early European researchers understood those languages.<br>
<br>
When you look comparatively at the Eskimo-Aleut family it looks as though
counting up to 1000 is native and above it you deal with European loans.
However, in today<span lang="ZH-CN">'</span>s reality loan numerals are much more
widespread, even below 1000. Listen to Greenlandic Inuktitut, for instance, and
you will hear Danish numerals flying around all over the place, especially in
combination with prices and measures, i.e., within <span lang="ZH-CN">"</span>European
contexts<span lang="ZH-CN">"</span>. Let this trend continue and people will
begin claiming that those languages can only count up to X or Y.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Reinhard/Ron</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size: 11pt; font-family: "Arial Unicode MS";"> </span></p>