White horses and orphan colts
Thursday, June 21st, 2001 05:01 pmOn the recent discussion of radial categories (see replies to Oops, I did it again), what do the linguists/philosophers out there make of these statements attributed to Huizi (a leading member of the "School of Names"):
"A white horse is not a horse."
"An orphan colt has never had a mother."
Oops, that wasn't Huizi, it was Gong-sun Long (the other main person in that particular school). Huizi (also known as Hui Shi) was the guy who said things like "The heavens are as low as the earth; mountains are on the same level as marshes."
"A white horse is not a horse."
"An orphan colt has never had a mother."
Correction (28/6/01)
Oops, that wasn't Huizi, it was Gong-sun Long (the other main person in that particular school). Huizi (also known as Hui Shi) was the guy who said things like "The heavens are as low as the earth; mountains are on the same level as marshes."
Newspeak
Date: 2001-06-29 06:22 am (UTC)A totalitarian govenrment could maybe restrict people's ability to criticise by restricting vocabulary in other ways - the overall effect would be not to make them agree with the official ideology as such, but to lessen the effectiveness of criticism. Functional illiteracy does the same trick.
Actually, I quite like some of the changes to English found in Newspeak, such as getting rid of adverbs and irregular verbs.
Actually,
get rid of irregular verbs?
Date: 2001-06-30 05:50 pm (UTC)Re: get rid of irregular verbs?
Date: 2001-07-01 06:04 am (UTC)Incidentally, I read somewhere that there are moves - how serious, I don't know - to establish a "European English" analogous to "British English", "American English" etc. This would be based on English as spoken in an EC context, and would include -ed as the universal past tense marker, and "isn't it" as the universal question tag (replacing "wasn't it", "aren't you" etc.).
functional illiteracy
Date: 2001-06-30 05:52 pm (UTC)Re: functional illiteracy
Date: 2001-07-01 05:44 am (UTC)Re: functional illiteracy
Date: 2001-07-01 06:16 pm (UTC)Re: functional illiteracy
Date: 2001-07-02 08:18 am (UTC)There again ILLITERATE is one of those weird categories that change according to context and communicative intent, so I may describe a student as "illiterate" because they hadn't read Plato. Then you've got all the radial categories like COMPUTER ILLITERATE. In the context of the discussion of my last post, I could be described as "phenomenologically illiterate", perhaps!
mofos
Date: 2001-06-30 05:53 pm (UTC)Re: mofos
Date: 2001-07-01 05:51 am (UTC)Actually, I have a couple of questions arising from Seinfeld.
1. Is "step off" the same as "back off"?
2. Does "I'm down" mean "I'm in"? And what kind of kooky image schema does that come from?
Re: mofos
Date: 2001-07-01 06:29 pm (UTC)I've never heard "That's absolutely tits"; nor would that make much sense to me if I heard it! I don't watch "South Park," though!
Yeah, "step off" is the same as "back off." Incidentally, if you "step to" someone, you're challenging him, like, trying to instigate a fight.
"I'm down" means something like "I'm in" or "I'm hip to that." Like, "I'm down with cognitive linguistics" means that you know something about it, that you're interested in it. Or as a friend of mine jokingly said to me, "I'm down with the 65 too!" meaning that she took the same bus I did. I would imagine "I'm down" is related to "get down."