Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] RE: The Cognitive Style of PowerPoint
 > > > Not to spiral too quickly off-topic, but I wanted to point out that > > > Sapir-Whorf has been thoroughly discredited, > > > > By no means. Certain strong forms have been discredited, but no SW > examples -- there are some contemporary cogitive researchers, > including one at MIT, who are presently reinvigorating debate about Chomsky was MIT as well. As long as there are people who wish to identify their race, culture, or political bias as being "superior" in order to justify neo-eugenics or genocide, you'll have interest in this brand of pseudo-science. The existence of contemporary interest does not make a bad idea better. The researcher you point to should illustrate the general pattern of these arguments. The example in "mandarin speakers vs. English speakers (2001)" is truly pathetic. As far as I can tell, the research simply proves that you are more effective in communicating when you communicate in the listener's preferred representational system (or context as Simon puts it). It's easy to think of people who speak mandarin, but conceive of time as horizontal, and there are certainly people who speak English and conceive of time as vertical -- if the experimenter had separated people into groups that way, the correlation would obviously have been even stronger. The researcher completely ignores the fact that representational systems vary across individuals, and to make a statement that "English think of time as horizontal" is even more absurd than saying "when a person looks up and to the left, she is accessing visual memories, unless she is left-handed". These are very easy to disprove experimentally, or even anecdotally. Time for me is a thread extending off and up into the haze, and when I use time-comparison words, my brain is smart enough to situate things on the thread. As another example, Mandarin Chinese uses numerical names for some things that English speakers use symbolic names for (example month names). It is patently obvious that someone asked "quick, which comes first, three-month or five-month" would respond more quickly than someone asked "which is higher, march or may?" I really challenge people to read the research and make up their own minds before getting hoodwinked too quickly by these things. Most of the so-called research is putrid. 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
