January 8, 2003

Language, thought & reality

Linguistic relativity (the "Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis", as re-stated by Gumperz & Levinson):

1. Languages differ substantially in their semantic structure.
2. Linguistic categorizations, implicit or explicit, may determine or co-determine or influence aspects of non-linguistic categorization, memory, perception or thinking in general.

For instance, languages have two primary types of systems for representing position: relative direction (front, back, left, right) or compass direction (North, South, East, West). Which system you use does affect the way you remember the scene.

Language as choice

That observation relates to differences among languages and cultures. But even within a single language/culture, we have choices in what type of categorization we use to represent things.

The relationship between things in the world and words is a very indirect one. For almost every physical object or event in the world, there are many choices for how to refer to it. Typically, the more interested we are in a thing, the more kinds of choices we have in referring to it (so we have many more choices for people than for inanimate objects, for instance).

First, there are "synonyms": pairs of words with exactly the same meaning, like "couch" and "sofa". Linguists believe that there are no true synonyms: any choice you make has some basis, even if it only indicates what part of the country you come from.

One source of apparent synonyms comes from various technical domains: "port" and "starboard" for "left" and "right". (Where would you use which term?)

Second, we can categorize things at a higher or lower level of generality. Consider the grapefruit tree in my backyard. It can appropriately be called
· a ruby-red grapefruit tree
· a grapefruit tree
· a tree
· a plant
· a thing

Third, we can categorize things according to different attributes or roles. For instance, my friend Jill can be referred to as
· a woman
· an adult
· a person
· a professor
· a linguist
· a democrat
· a liberal
· a wife
· a daughter
· a patient
· a friend

We normally think of names as specifying a unique individual, but every one of us has various possible "names", which reveal different "takes" on a person:
· Jill
· Dr. Smith
· Jill E. Smith
· Mrs. Joseph Smith

Finally, we have many terms which explicitly reveal an attitude. Jill can also be
· a sweetie
· a jerk
· a geek
· a darling
· a genius

And, Jill can be referred to "metaphorically" as if she were something else -- generally also implying an attitude:
· a babe
· a bitch
· a monster
· a fox
· an asshole
· a tyrant

A contentious example

JANUARY 13, 03:55 EST: Ore. Anti-Abortion Defendant Talks

By JOSEPH B. FRAZIER, Associated Press Writer

PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - An anti-abortion activist conceded that he has advocated the use of lethal force to halt abortions, but denied direct links to a Web site plaintiffs say amounts to a hit list.
[SC: The web site has a picture of a prisoner being confronted by a judge in a courtroom, and the heading "Visualize abortionists on trial".]

Andrew Burnett testified Tuesday in a federal trial to determine whether fliers made to look like wanted posters and the Web site that lists the names, addresses and phone numbers of abortion doctors is constitutionally protected free speech.

``From my information, all the information in those files can be legally obtained,'' said Burnett, publisher of Life Advocate magazine.

His testimony is key because the plaintiffs' lawyers claim his refusal to condemn slayings of abortion doctors added to the threatening nature of the ``Deadly Dozen'' fliers and the Web site called ``The Nuremberg Files,'' even though they contained no explicit threats.

Several doctors have testified they began wearing bulletproof vests and disguises after their names appeared on the Web site as ``baby butchers.''

They said their fear intensified in October, when the name of Dr. Barnett Slepian was crossed off the list shortly after he was killed by a sniper at his suburban Buffalo, N.Y., home.

Burnett said he had no direct involvement in putting together the site, and said he never personally used violence against abortion clinics or doctors.

He said his group has published pictures of, and picketed, abortion doctors and their homes to put pressure on those doctors to stop their practices.

``It's a perfectly legal thing to do,'' he said.

Burnett was asked whether he signed a petition distributed by Paul Hill, who was later convicted in the 1994 murder of an abortion doctor in Pensacola, Fla. The petition read in part: ``The use of lethal force is justified if it is carried out for the purpose of protecting the lives of unborn children.''

``I gave permission for my name to be used,'' Burnett replied.

Burnett is one of 14 individual defendants in the lawsuit. The defense claims the fliers and the Web site are a form of political protest protected by the Constitution.

The plaintiffs, including abortion doctors and clinics, contend the materials violate a 1994 federal law that bars activists from inciting violence against abortion doctors and their patients.