Date: Tue, 8 Nov 1994 01:06:21 -0800
From: Dan Alford dalford[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]S1.CSUHAYWARD.EDU
Subject: FYI -- hot debate shaping up on LINGUIST re: Whorf
I know this will be repetitious for some of you who are cross-subscribed (you
can delete any time!), but I thought the others might like to peek in, and
maybe even cross-discuss (but no cross replies, please!).
It started with this posting:
Date: Sun, 06 Nov 1994 09:59:38 -0500 (EST)
From: "Leslie Z. Morgan" MORGAN[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]LOYOLA.EDU
Subject: Re: 5.1239 Eskimo "snow"
The returned discussion of "snow" in Eskimo has brought my
thoughts around to a related issue which I do not recall having
seen discussed on _Linguist_ since I've subscribed: the Sapir-
Whorf hypothesis. I just read an article in _Foreign Language
Annals_ 27.3, "Awareness of Text Structure: Is There a Match
Between Readers and Authors of Second Language Texts?" by
Sally A. Hague and Rene'e Scott (343-363), where one of the
hypotheses in examining Spanish texts is that they will differ
because of the difference in culture-set ways of writing (based
on articles by Kaplan (1966 & 1976). In fact, their sample DOES
NOT show such a difference.
I was under the impression that the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is
generally NOT accepted and is somewhat of an error in interpre-
A dean here has cited the hypothesis (without knowing that is
what he was citing) as the main reason for studying foreign
languages. Does anyone have some suggestions of readable
refutations of Sapir-Whorf, something one could send students,
deans, etc. to? Or is this a returning issue that is under
Thank you- I'll summarize responses for the list.
Leslie Morgan MORGAN[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]LOYOLA.EDU or MORGAN[AT SYMBOL GOES HERE]LOYVAX.BITNET
To which I replied -----------