When I entered the university, I was not interested in linguistics at all. What I wanted to study was international relations. Last year, I took a basic English linguistics class and a basic English phonetics class, because they were required classes. But, I found them interesting and useful to learn language. So, this semester, I took an advanced linguistics class, not basic one. The class is only in English. So it is difficult, but also very enjoyable.
In the class, we try to find answers to questions such as "Why is it hard to learn a second language?" and "Does language equal thought?", "Can computers learn language?".
Don't you think they are interesting questions? My teacher said that you can find the answers by analyzing your daily language experience. What he said seems to be true!!
In the class, we try to find answers to questions such as "Why is it hard to learn a second language?" and "Does language equal thought?", "Can computers learn language?".
Don't you think they are interesting questions? My teacher said that you can find the answers by analyzing your daily language experience. What he said seems to be true!!
|
|
|
|
コメント(5)
I think these are interesting questions. If I don’t need to work, I want to learn more other academic subjects. But now I have a lot of things to do. It’s sad reality. Moreover classes in basic course tend to decrease in both independent administrative schools because of decreasing of budget from government.
How do you think about "Does language equal thought?"
How do you think about "Does language equal thought?"
>>ふじいさｎ
The answer to the quwstion is NO. If language equaled thought, it means language and thought are the same thing, and you cannot think without language. It seems nonsense to me.
Think about a person who got damage to his brain and lost language ability. If "language equals thought" was correct, he can't think anymore. But, when he is hungry, he still eats something or tries to tell it someone.
Some people are born completely deaf. Without hearing, you can't learn language, but deaf people think, even before they learn sign language. I'm not very sure, but someone told me that sign language takes twice as much time as spoken language takes to express something. If the answer to the question is yes, does it mean deaf people think slower than ordinary people do? It is not reasonable.
The answer to the quwstion is NO. If language equaled thought, it means language and thought are the same thing, and you cannot think without language. It seems nonsense to me.
Think about a person who got damage to his brain and lost language ability. If "language equals thought" was correct, he can't think anymore. But, when he is hungry, he still eats something or tries to tell it someone.
Some people are born completely deaf. Without hearing, you can't learn language, but deaf people think, even before they learn sign language. I'm not very sure, but someone told me that sign language takes twice as much time as spoken language takes to express something. If the answer to the question is yes, does it mean deaf people think slower than ordinary people do? It is not reasonable.
It’s interesting question and your opinion.
I try to discuss from opposite position of you.
I believe language enable us to think quickly. Do you know a popular play, ‘the Miracle Worker’, which is a story about Helen A. Keller? In the story, Helen became deaf and blind by high fever of disease when she was 2 years old. She grew like an animal because nobody could teach her a language. The miracle worker, Anne Sullivan managed to teach her a word in the last of the play after her a lot of effort. We know Helen became an educator. I think her change was caused by a recognition of a language.
And I also think primitive behavior like eating do not need language, because an animal can eat.
I try to discuss from opposite position of you.
I believe language enable us to think quickly. Do you know a popular play, ‘the Miracle Worker’, which is a story about Helen A. Keller? In the story, Helen became deaf and blind by high fever of disease when she was 2 years old. She grew like an animal because nobody could teach her a language. The miracle worker, Anne Sullivan managed to teach her a word in the last of the play after her a lot of effort. We know Helen became an educator. I think her change was caused by a recognition of a language.
And I also think primitive behavior like eating do not need language, because an animal can eat.
I don't think language enables us to think quickly. We can think quicker, if we don't use language. I'm going to show you an example. Look at the following conversation between two speakers.
1, I hate snakes.
2, Do you remember Mrs. Bicknell?
1, Our eighth-grade social studies teacher?
2, Yes.
1, Sure, I remember her. Why?
2, Well,when you said snakes, I remembered the day I
went to talk to her after school about how my
family was falling apart, and she asked me what the
matter was and if Patrick had walked some other
girls home, and she was so condenscending that I
just left and walked home alone and saw this twisted
stick by the sidewalk and I said "You look like a
crazy snake. Hello, you crazy snake." I thought I
was alone, but Patrick was walking right behind me
and he said, "I always thought you were crazy, but
now I know."
1, Oh.
When the second speaker goes into that long speech, you can see how much thought she's reporting, thought that apparently took place between the first utterance("I hate snakes.") and the second("Do you remember Mrs. Bicknell?") If all that thought took place in actual English sentences, they would have had to come at a remarkable speed. It is more natural to think that the second speaker didn't use laguage. And that means people can think quiker, if they don't use language.
I think language enable us to think about something complicated. But it doesn' enable us to think quikly.
1, I hate snakes.
2, Do you remember Mrs. Bicknell?
1, Our eighth-grade social studies teacher?
2, Yes.
1, Sure, I remember her. Why?
2, Well,when you said snakes, I remembered the day I
went to talk to her after school about how my
family was falling apart, and she asked me what the
matter was and if Patrick had walked some other
girls home, and she was so condenscending that I
just left and walked home alone and saw this twisted
stick by the sidewalk and I said "You look like a
crazy snake. Hello, you crazy snake." I thought I
was alone, but Patrick was walking right behind me
and he said, "I always thought you were crazy, but
now I know."
1, Oh.
When the second speaker goes into that long speech, you can see how much thought she's reporting, thought that apparently took place between the first utterance("I hate snakes.") and the second("Do you remember Mrs. Bicknell?") If all that thought took place in actual English sentences, they would have had to come at a remarkable speed. It is more natural to think that the second speaker didn't use laguage. And that means people can think quiker, if they don't use language.
I think language enable us to think about something complicated. But it doesn' enable us to think quikly.
- mixiユーザー
- ログインしてコメントしよう！
|
|
|
|
A small English community 更新情報
-
最新のイベント
-
まだ何もありません
-
-
最新のアンケート
-
まだ何もありません
-
