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-

tation.

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

debate?

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 -----------