Sonic Youth Gossip - View Single Post

!@#$%! · 04.26.2006, 12:03 PM

oh fuck, saussure, how could i have forgotten!! i had to read his little book of notes (he didn't write it, his students took it down). this just proves what a sucky student i was

actually during gradschool i became more interested in neuroscience of language than traditional linguistics. here is where the hot stuff is happening RIGHT NOW. the humanities are a load of balls in this respect-- they still follow the whorfian hypothesis (upon which sapir kinda built his own stuff) and the false antrhopological idea that people can be shaped into whatever according to their upbringing (the New Man didn't ever exist, remember? he went to macdonalds as soon as the berlin wall fell).

anyway, good solid linguistics complements neuroscience very well. it helps to define the objects of study and to make good experiments. so it's not all a load a bollocks. there is a lot of interesting stuff on the acquisition of phonetic capabilities, syntax, and so on-- semantics still remains kind of obscure but apparently we ARE instinctually determined to have categorical thinking, kind of what kant has speculated (kind of-- let's not get into the gory details). for example it appears that there are certain brain connections that make a distinction between animate and inanimate objects, and so forth. it'a all very complicated and i'm not going to write a paper on this, much less unpaid.

anyway, i once saw chomsky speak on this-- he went on to talk about the waste of time in experiments with such things as "talking monkeys" and pleaded for a return to good philosophy of science to guide -- science. because science without philosophy behind it is a wild goose chase.

anyway there is a lot of material but again i'd recommend most emphatically to begin with pinkert's book. it will give you a whole panoramic perspective and provide a good bibliography as well.

on a side note, one of my favorite classic linguists is jakobson, who wrote such beautiful things about poetry and linguistics. his article about baudelair'es "les chats" (co-written with this anthropologist... whatsisname... hm levi-strauss!!)... this article might not be scientific fact but it's such a delight everyone interested in literature should read it.

ok ive regurgitated enough. have fun.

04.26.2006, 12:03 PM	#10
!@#$%! invito al cielo Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: mars attacks Posts: 42,711	oh fuck, saussure, how could i have forgotten!! i had to read his little book of notes (he didn't write it, his students took it down). this just proves what a sucky student i was actually during gradschool i became more interested in neuroscience of language than traditional linguistics. here is where the hot stuff is happening RIGHT NOW. the humanities are a load of balls in this respect-- they still follow the whorfian hypothesis (upon which sapir kinda built his own stuff) and the false antrhopological idea that people can be shaped into whatever according to their upbringing (the New Man didn't ever exist, remember? he went to macdonalds as soon as the berlin wall fell). anyway, good solid linguistics complements neuroscience very well. it helps to define the objects of study and to make good experiments. so it's not all a load a bollocks. there is a lot of interesting stuff on the acquisition of phonetic capabilities, syntax, and so on-- semantics still remains kind of obscure but apparently we ARE instinctually determined to have categorical thinking, kind of what kant has speculated (kind of-- let's not get into the gory details). for example it appears that there are certain brain connections that make a distinction between animate and inanimate objects, and so forth. it'a all very complicated and i'm not going to write a paper on this, much less unpaid. anyway, i once saw chomsky speak on this-- he went on to talk about the waste of time in experiments with such things as "talking monkeys" and pleaded for a return to good philosophy of science to guide -- science. because science without philosophy behind it is a wild goose chase. anyway there is a lot of material but again i'd recommend most emphatically to begin with pinkert's book. it will give you a whole panoramic perspective and provide a good bibliography as well. on a side note, one of my favorite classic linguists is jakobson, who wrote such beautiful things about poetry and linguistics. his article about baudelair'es "les chats" (co-written with this anthropologist... whatsisname... hm levi-strauss!!)... this article might not be scientific fact but it's such a delight everyone interested in literature should read it. ok ive regurgitated enough. have fun.
	\|QUOTE AND REPLY\|