Page 84-86
I found the example in extract B, the Piraha tribe in Brazil to be very interesting. The group does not have words or the concept of some numbers, which was very confusing to me. I can't understand how it's possible to have a language without those numbers, as someone who comes from a place where numbers are clearly defined. I think the findings of Benjamin Lee Whorf are very right, language influences and even determines thought. If a language doesn't have a word for something, than the people speaking probably don't have a concept for it either. I also think that languages only develop words and therefor concepts of things they need. If people have no need to talk or communicate about something, there's no reason for it.
1. To what extent to the needs of a group using a language effect the way the language evolves?
2. How does the ambiguity of the language of the Piraha effect their language
I found the example in extract B, the Piraha tribe in Brazil to be very interesting. The group does not have words or the concept of some numbers, which was very confusing to me. I can't understand how it's possible to have a language without those numbers, as someone who comes from a place where numbers are clearly defined. I think the findings of Benjamin Lee Whorf are very right, language influences and even determines thought. If a language doesn't have a word for something, than the people speaking probably don't have a concept for it either. I also think that languages only develop words and therefor concepts of things they need. If people have no need to talk or communicate about something, there's no reason for it.
1. To what extent to the needs of a group using a language effect the way the language evolves?
2. How does the ambiguity of the language of the Piraha effect their language
