One, Two, Many - Language Shapes Thought 919
Chuck1318 writes "The Piraha tribe in the Amazon has only three words used in counting, that mean one, two, and many. A psychologist testing them has found that they are unable to accurately perform tasks involving quantities as few as four or five. He says that this shows that, at least for numbers, language shapes and limits how people can think." I can't help but be reminded of the gully dwarves from Dragonlance when reading this.
Inca's and Zero (Score:3, Interesting)
There are 0 spoons
psych 101 (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Language is key (Score:4, Interesting)
No, I can learn how to make a gun, plow a field, fetch water from a well from an Asian person with whom I have no common language - almost as easily as I could with an English speaking person.
I posted previously to this topic that it's all about the willingness of the people to learn,and the access to information that they are willing to subject themselves to is what forms thought and intelligence.
(US) English Language (Score:2, Interesting)
With us or with them; there is no neutral ground.
Credible threat; How credible (little, none highly)?
Imminent danger; Like Hurricane Charly or collision of earth and moon
Coalition of willing; How willing or paid
...
superior language implies superiour thoughts? (Score:4, Interesting)
This makes one wonder if a another language would give us the ability to better reason about other things. Would we be smarter if we had a better language in which to think?
There is an artifical language called lojban (http://www.lojban.org/ [lojban.org]) based on predicate logic but which is meant to be used as other "real" languages (compare with eg. esperanto, interlingua and swahili). The question is, would native speakers of lojban be better a rational thought? As far as I know there are no native speakers of lojban but what would happend if I raised my (hypothethical) children to speak if from birth?
Mathias
Re:Inca's and Zero (Score:2, Interesting)
If the Inca's came up with it Europe wouldn't have learned about it until the 16th century, and arabic numerals (which of course inlucde zero) had been used for quite some time then AFAIK.
Personality depends on language, too (Score:5, Interesting)
Many fluently multilingual people will tell you that they are a slightly different person when they speak a different language.
I'm fluent in English and Japanese, and I can attest to this. In fact, there have been occasions when I was out of touch from Japanese speakers for a long time, and I began to miss my "Japanese self" because it hadn't had a chance to surface for so long.
Haven't you read Orwell's 1984? (Score:2, Interesting)
They use language control for thought control.
funny but missing the point (Score:5, Interesting)
If this tribe calculated 0, 1, 2, many, many 1, many 2 or something like it there would be no trouble. Just confusing for base 10 users.
But it seems this tribe doesn't have/need the concept of higher numbers.
What I would like to know if they understand the concept of zero. The invention of 0 is a usually considered a pretty big step in western culture and one arabs like to claim as their contribution to the world. If this tribe wich can only count to 2 understands 0 then it would make an intresting find.
They may not have a need to count higher numbers but me thinks it is very important to know the difference between 1 fish and 0 fish.
What may also be intresting is that if you need language to count and animals can count does that mean that all animals that can count have a language. And not just a language of "food" "danger" "sex" but a language with "1" "2" "3" etc?
Counting sheep? (Score:2, Interesting)
They couldn't count above 3, but if they had 200 sheep they could instantly tell if one was missing.
Maybe they know exactly how many sheep they have, but no way to verbalize it. Simply because they have no need to.
Re:Inca's and Zero (Score:1, Interesting)
Later on the arabs (round 1100 years later) "discovered" all this indian knowledge ...
and they (those evil terrorists them) brought
it to Europe. It took some 3,4 hundred years
more until you heard of the Incas.
Re:Where have I heard this before? (Score:5, Interesting)
Which makes them smarter than Hottentot tribesmen....
Chicken or the Egg? (Score:2, Interesting)
This is not surprising; several studies on language have had similar findings. For example, a article I read last month in an issue of Discover ties the level of technological advancement with an increasing need to define more colors.
For example, in 1st world countries, the basic ROYGBIV colors are defined as well as variations within (Gee, honey, magenta or fuschia curtains? Chartreuse or pea soup, even!). In one South American tribe, there are only two words, those essentially describing "hot" and "cold" colors.
What I find most intriguing is whether or not it is the language that limits the culture, or the culture that limits the language. After all, as a culture, civilization grows and comes into contact with others, it is only reasonable that some things are assumed by each. Language is always one of the first aspects of a culture to change.
Re: Sapir-Whorf (Score:2, Interesting)
No more than two.... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:superior language implies superiour thoughts? (Score:5, Interesting)
That's the problem with this psychologist's study--it doesn't say whether or not they learned larger numbers and applied them effectively.
Babel-17 (Score:5, Interesting)
more detailed paper (Score:1, Interesting)
There's a lot more that's interesting about the Piraha (pronounced "pee-da-HAN") language and culture. See the paper "Cultural Constraints on Grammar and Cognition in Piraha" [man.ac.uk] by Daniel L. Everett.
Everett argues not so much that language influences thinking, but that cultural values influence both. He's a strong proponent of preserving endangered languages in order to preserve cultural knowledge.
Re:Inca's and Zero (Score:3, Interesting)
I am afraid not.Indian mathematicians were the first to postulate Zero [wikipedia.org]
Infact the first person to discuss this was Brahmagupta [wikipedia.org]
What are commonly known as Arabic numerals were infact Indian Numerals.About 6th century A.D. saw the advent of tradesman in the arab peninsula.Relying on the monsoon winds they would often travel to India,where they found and started using the Indian numeral system.
When the crusades took place ,European scholars came in contact with the numeral system in use by the Arabs.They adopted it ,as it was superior to the Roman System and called it Arabic as it was encountered in Arabia.Hence the term Arabic numerals.
Do read up on the history of Mathematics as its a very fascinating subject.Though I am afraid Wikepedia is seriusly lacking in Content over this.
Re:Where have I heard this before? (Score:4, Interesting)
A crow given a hook made of metal wire used it to fish a snail out of its shell. A second crow allowed to watch, but given only a straight piece of wire almost immediately grabbed it, put it under one foot and using the other bent it into a hook, then used it to eat the snail it was given.
Personally, I think maybe congress should outlaw testing on crows. If a few of them get ahold of cell phones for instance, it's difficult to say just what kind of trouble we'd be in for...
It's definitely true (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Actually, it is surprising (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Where have I heard this before? (Score:3, Interesting)
Junk Science? (Score:3, Interesting)
"Science Express" has its own paraphrasal of the paper at its website [sciencemag.org] but you have to pay for the full text. There is also a link to "supporting online material" that includes a free document describing some of the methds and results.
Subject to the caveat that I did not fork over the $$$ for the full article, I'd say the conclusions appear unremarkable. Humans raised in cultures that lack counting can't count beyond 3, and also can't express the concept. I see no experiment that indicates causality between what I consider two aspects of the same phenomenon.
Nothing new in the paper (Score:2, Interesting)
Is it just me or is this a long paper about something everyone already knew? George Orwell's book 1984 extensively covered an extremely plausible use of language control to shape what it is possible for an individual to think. Heck, entire U.S. industries are devoted to nothing more than massaging numbers to help people know what they should think (it's called statistics). Kerry leads Bush (in U.S. presidential elections) by 48% to 42%. Ralph Nader only has about 7%, so only idiots who want to throw away their vote will vote for him. 9 out of 10 dentists prefer Crest toothpaste. More than 85% of desktop computer run Microsoft Windows as their OS, so it must be better. It takes a true genius to suddenly discover (and write an impressive paper) that numbers may shape human thought!
I'll even go one step further than the startling theory of the original authors. Cultural needs shapes the evolution of language, and of thought. Amazon Indians who are in survival mode of hunt-and-gather do not need high mathematical skills. Seriously, what would they need a number greater than 2 for? Ook, how many days since we last ate?, It has been 3.7 days, mostly due to a 56% drop in acceptable game in the area. If we extrapolate from our current situation, in about another 1.5 days we will suffer a 80% decrease in operational efficiency due to insufficient food. I wish to propose that we may have hunted this area out and need to move to the next valley 8 miles over, where the game density is much higher. If they did need a number greater than 2, they would have invented it. People make fun of Eskimos and their many words for snow. Think of our society and how many words for computer we have, and the different connotations they have. Is it a Linux box, or a Windows box? A game machine, a home unit, a business computer, or a uber-133t-box? We have invented the words because there was a need. Words that aren't needed by a society disappear (when did you last hear someone say phithee, as in Phithee my good sir, may thou tellest me the road to Whenst?).
A much better paper covering language is here [lionsgrip.com] (A View of Man's Linguistic Development).
Hmmm... perhaps I should write a nice looking scholarly paper on this. Even better, I'll web-publish it and shock everyone with this new theory. Call the television networks!!
Re:Babel-17 (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems to me, as a layman and parent of two children, that the thoughts and ideas occur anyway regardless of the ability to express them in a language that can convey meaning to others.
Now, to throw another sci-fi reference into the mix, I seem to recall that Caesar, the ape that lead the revolution in the Planet of the Apes mythology, got his start with a single word: No.
Re:Personality depends on language, too (Score:4, Interesting)
Actually, no. I am bilingual (German/English) and live in the US. On business trips to Europe, I wa ssurprised to notice that my presentation style is very different, depending on the language I give it in. Even if I walk into the auditorium not knowing which langage I am giving it in in advance. That happens occasionally when I speak in front of a group in a German speaking country and realize that non-German speakers are part of the audience.
Even weirder, I have to keep myself from lapsing back into English when I talk about my work to Germans. This never happens when I talk about anything else. Seems like my work is intimately associated with English.
Sapir-Whorf refuted (Score:5, Interesting)
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, however, even though long proven wrong, has shaped the thinking of a whole generation of people, including those in the feminist movement, proposing "politically correct" words (female forms e.g.) hoping that they would induce a new thinking.
Language may be a result of knowledge and cultural concepts, thus reflect it. But it does not shape it, because - and that's known as de Saussure's work - the word is not equal to the concept. Whether you call something a small feline animal or a cat, it's still the same entity that you are thinking of. Whether you call someone a nigger, an african american, a 'brother', a black person -- the name does force us to change our thinking. (It may prompt us to think about misconceptions, of course!)
Steven Pinker's book "The Language Instinct" is a good read.
Haven't read Feigenson's original article. But it seems painfully obvious to me that given all the other linguistic evidence, the Brazilian tribe might simply have established a culture of arithmetics that doesn't allow you to count more than two things.
Re:Actually, it is surprising (Score:5, Interesting)
Without counting, or saying any number to yourself, or using a word to describe the concept of quantity, or referring to your fingers, tell me how many X's are on the next line:
X X X X X X
Think about it. You want to count them up to six, then remember "Six" and not remember " X X X X X X". This is the problem with the study. Language is, by definition, symbolic. That' the whole point of it, to not have to remember each experience in its totality, but to be able to share it symbolically with someone, so it is a) easier to remember and b) easier to transfer. Otherwise you'd be telling stories with models and pantomime. Now then, back to our experiment. How many were there? Draw it. See? Much harder than just saying "Six. I see Six X's" (you might have said "two groups of 3 X's", which you HAVE words for, but still, harder than "Six". The problem is that, as describe above, not that language affects how we think, but our vocabulary affects how we are able to recall and describe the world. You can still tell the difference between five X's and six X's... and you may even be able to build up "groupings" by using your own words for things. Does it mean you're not as smart as people who can describe "six"? No, you just are less able to recall and describe parts of the world you don't have words for.
I'm sure some day, aliens will come down and say to us "Electrons do not orbit nuclei, fools! Slithy toves gyre and gimbol in the wabe!" and then laugh into their tentacle-sleeves at us. (apologies to David Gribbin)
Re:Babel-17 (Score:2, Interesting)
Although it would be nice if I didn't have to hear "no!" all the time (she's 19 months and in the terrible twos), even if I never taught her that word, she'd still find a way to refuse to do what I want her to do.
Re:Where have I heard this before? (Score:2, Interesting)
On our way to Breakfast, we're not real rugged campers, we were driving through the Gettysburg
Battlefield and saw a large heard of deer. I asked
him how many. His counting went, " One, Two, Three, Lots, Many".
He hadn't learned all the numbers, but the concept
was there. You don't need to be in a tribe in outer
anywhere to see primative counting at work.
uncertainty prinssipuls (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: Sapir-Whorf (Score:5, Interesting)
Oddly enough, that's pretty much how the word "Dutch" got into English: it's a corruption of "Deutsch" (one of the things Germans call themselves) -- the assumption at the time being all non-French continentals were the same people.
Back on topic, you can't take the "one -- two -- many" thing too far: almost every language shows at some stage of its development a "one two many" noun declension. Old English had specific dual endings; as did all the Germanic languages; dual was present in Proto Indo European and survived into most of the child languages.
Many semitic languages show vestiges of a 1 2 many number system (Arabic and Hebrew still retain a dual declension for some nouns). Swahili retains a separate noun class entirely for objects that come naturally in pairs (maono rather than *nyono, for instance).
I think all this points towards the fact that the distinction between one and two, and the distinction between two and many, is simply more important to people than the distinctions among various numbers greater than two, and that "one two many" is a natural linguistic response to the conditions of human life throughout most of human history -- people only develop more complex plural systems when agriculture and trade make it neccessary to develop them.
New words for new concepts (Score:2, Interesting)
Check out http://folk.uio.no/alied/TMoL.html [folk.uio.no] for more
Not linguistic, cultural (Score:3, Interesting)
Damn, that's confusing. Sorry.
Russian colors (Score:5, Interesting)
So what I know is that in Polish there are also two words for blue: niebieski and blekitni. (Okay so I had to strip-off the accents because slashcode did not like them.) They are light-blue and dark-blue respectively. (Really niebieski is related to the word for sky so you might think of this word as sky-blue, I do and that is what I meant earlier about learning Polish from a linguist probably was different from a native Polish speakers experience.)
Now you might think this is simple, well not really. Here is a translation of what happens in practice with some regularity. My wife says, "Bring me the blue one," where blue is the word for either light-blue or dark-blue depending on the color of the object. I oblige but then hear a response of, "No I said the blue one not the green one." Bizarre because notice I wrote blue and green. It is not like she said light-blue and I brought the dark-blue widget. Sometimes she claims I brought the purple thing instead. These exchanges are entirely in Polish because this what we speak predominantly at home.
Okay now I am not color-blind. For my work I need to pass a test every two years and in the report I always pass all of the tests, even those for which a certain percentage of people that are not typically considered color-blind would not pass. I can clearly distinguish between a wide spectrum of colors.
After a while of this my mother noticed it once so we did a little test with the family. My mother, father, uncle, aunt, and grandmother were all part of it. All of them had spent the majority of their lives in Poland and almost without fail they would agree with the colors that my wife gave to objects. Then we repeated the test with my brother and his girlfriend who except for a vacation had not spent any time in Poland. They agreed with me the majority of the time.
Now this test was not scientific in any way and it did involve alcohol because it happened during a family get-together, but I still think that native Polish speakers vs English speakers think of colors as different because of their languages. What I mean is that there are many shades of colors that are sort of between green and blue and others that are between green and purple and given a proper ambiguous color such as this Polish speakers will tend to identify it differently than English speakers.
So what I am trying to say after all of this is that the example of the Russian language having two words for blue is sort of a red herring. It is irrelevant to the real issues. In fact given two people that are not color blind, one a Russian and one an English speaker, they should not have any extra difficulty in being able to distinguish between color chips as being different or not. What I am saying is that they will think of the same color chip as a different color in their minds. Now this is subtle, and I tend to agree with the parent poster that it is a special case, but definitely an example of how language influences understanding and meaning. Here is a final true story to illustrate this idea.
My wife's favorite color is light-blue. Once I bought her a gift that was a light blue dress. When she got it she said that the dress was nice, but that, "Don't you know by now that I do not like the way I look in green?" Think about intend and effect in that example and you will see what I mean about language being important.
Re:Chicken and Egg. (Score:4, Interesting)
What a load of crap.
What happens is you have an understanding of something that you are unable to put into words.
Re:Babel-17 (Score:5, Interesting)
It's an "it" to the French, too. It's not that the table 'has' gender - it's that the word belongs to a certain class of words that behave like it - that is, they're preceded by "la", "une", etc. In French, it's not "table", it's "la table" - the article is linked to the word itself (much like in English the infinitive is two words, but one idea).
In truth, it has nothing to do with the object itself. The French don't know why it's "la table" and not "le table", other than to tell you that it doesn't sound right as "le table".
The problem really comes because teachers like to teach it as if it really is confusing, and massively different from English, so you have to start seeing the gender in things. That's crazy. It's not different. It's just something you have to memorize, just like they have to memorize which adjectives you use "more", "most" with, and not "-er", "-est".
In truth, you can see the obvious bias in the study, as well. If your society has no language for counting above "two", then it likely has no need for counting above two, and so when presented with a situation where they need to count above two, they will be confused, because it's something they haven't done before. After all, when you're taught numbers, you're taught to count! So is it linguistic? I doubt it. I think the reverse is more true - thought (and society) shapes language.
I'd have to find out more about the study, but it seems really weak. You'd need a very careful control - that is, someone who lived in the same society as the Piraha, but spoke a different language that contained numbers higher than 2, and even that would be touchy because, as I said before, learning numbers above 2 means you were taught to count. But anyway, obviously no one like that exists, and I find it ludicrous that the psychologist made the leap "language directs thought" rather than "society directs language".
Re:Where have I heard this before? (Score:5, Interesting)
As a one-time owner of an African Grey, I can testify to this. I got my bird, Caesar, for my 11th birthday, and hand-fed him. Anyway, these days he lives with my grandparents (who have another African Grey) since it was too hard to keep him in a small New York apartment when my family moved here when I was 15 (I'm 25 now, so the bird is about 14 years old now, still a kid by Grey standards - they often live 50-60 years or even longer in captivity, sometimes as long as 70 or 80, barring illness. In fact, I'm pretty sure he'll outlive my grandparents and I'll end up with him again some day.
In any case, he had a vocabulary of at least 60-80 words when he was 3 or 4 years old. He exhibited exactly the kind of word combination that you reference - often semi-sensical, sometimes very amusing, sometimes scarily accurate and meaningful. They are fast to pick up on words or phrases, often times without a clear idea of what the words or phrases mean, but just as often they clearly DO associate meaning. "Caesar good boy", "Caesar good bird" or just "good bird" were often cooed out when he was feeling mellow after a meal. He seemed to take delight in yelling my name from across the apartment in my mother's voice to get my attention (they definitely learn names and associate them with people).
Interestingly, Greys have long memories - Caesar recognized my mother when she visited my grandparents in Florida recently even though he hadn't seen her in at least 3 or 4 years. The first thing he tried to do was regurgitate some food for her (yuck, but that's just their way of showing love).
I actually did a prize-winning middle school science project on Caesar, working on teaching him object differentiation skills, by color and shape, and associating them with words. He was pretty decent at simple object differentiation and fetching tasks administered verbally when you could get him to cooperate (he was less good at wanting to cooperate).
These birds can have AMAZINGLY strong personalities, be very willful and sometimes even nasty. Caesar was prone to losing his temper (okay, now I'm definitely ascribing human traits here, but he would have these fits of anger) and biting my fingers and ears. My fingers still bear the scars to this day. He was always timid or downright scared around strangers and could get nasty with even other less-favored family members who he saw every day, despite having been hand raised, lovingly treated, well fed and so on. He could also be very sweet and loving, desired affection, petting and human contact.
But Greys are the only animals I've ever seen capable of what I can only label "deceit". When a dog comes up to you and licks you, he wants to be petted, and if you pet him, he'll be happy. Caesar would sometimes play a nasty trick on people where he'd say "Rub my head" and cock his head like he wanted the attention. Somebody would slowly approach and gently extend their fingers to rub his head, then he's suddenly turn his head and take a big nip at their finger, usually accompanied by "OW! Stop That!" or "Bad bird!". I think it was mostly a way of getting more attention, which they do crave, but the effect was downright spooky coming from an animal.
Other interesting language facts (Score:2, Interesting)
Cherokee [tripod.com] and Arabic [wordiq.com] has three numbers. Not like 1, 2, 3; but, singular, dual, and plural.
Chinese [wordiq.com] as a spoken language does not exist. Each "dialect" (not an entirely acurate word depending on its intention) is mutually uninteligible when spoken. Hence, may be considered seperate languages. The term dialect is applied to them because they share a common writing system. A Mandarin speaker will not understand a Cantonese speaker, but can read a message from the Cantonese speaker easily.
Re:Russian colors (Score:3, Interesting)
She has the same problem with distinguishing light blues from light greens that you describe. I suspect that she has cones with a slightly different response curve [gsu.edu] than mine, with the difference probably in the mid-range cones. The other possiblity is that her ``blue boosting'' [gsu.edu] mechanism is slightly different than mine. This seems a bit more plausible, since it's apparently based on something in the nervous system rather than having a different chemical in her cones.
Lost in translation? (Score:2, Interesting)
When people are asked to imitate, they tend to focus only on the important parts. For instance, if I wave, and ask a person to imitate me, they'll probably focus on my waving, and ignore my saccadic eye movements. One could then conclude that lack of short word for "saccadic eye movement" causes people to not see it.
The only way to reliably make sure they understand the task is to evaluate their performance on a validation set. IE one would give several examples of researcher tapping N times (>2), and assistant repeating N times. After the subject could successfully imitate the assistant on those examples, he should get previously unheard number of taps, and be asked to imitate it.
Yaroslav
Artificial Intelligence in Python: yaroslav.hopto.org/pubwiki/index.php/ai-python
Re:Babel-17 (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually, counting and comparison of two numbers are different cognitive activities. I would bet that tribal people with no concept of numbers beyond two or three are still quite capable of comparing quantities.
Re:number of objects in a group (Score:3, Interesting)
Three is the highest number most people can "count" instantly when the objects are in a random pattern. This is easy, and fun, to test at home. When you "count" higher groupings quickly you are either seeing known patterns (eg dots on a die), or quickly re-grouping as you stated.