![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
So far, Through the Language Glass has been enlightening. (I am on page 126, nearly done with the first part.)
The author's account of studies of how languages deal with colour starts at least a century before Berlin and Kay, and points out that their work wasn't the first to come to its conclusions, just the better known one.
I giggled at the analogy involving the "Munsell Taste Test" - I'm not sure how funny this would be without a background in linguistics of colour.
It's also given me some references for recent (2009) research about language typology and its relation to speaker population size - I'm looking forward to catching up with this.
I'm not so fond of some of his rhetoric, for example on p. 125:
but that's just because I assume that the differences in opinions and directions of research are not as emotionally charged as "zealously suppressing" and "heresy" would imply, and I am reading more of an analogy to plucky-hero-versus-monolithic-empire into "daring" than the author probably intended.
As for academic reading, it doesn't have footnotes but it does have a list at the back that follows up references in the text, and a bibliography. Yay. :)
The author's account of studies of how languages deal with colour starts at least a century before Berlin and Kay, and points out that their work wasn't the first to come to its conclusions, just the better known one.
I giggled at the analogy involving the "Munsell Taste Test" - I'm not sure how funny this would be without a background in linguistics of colour.
It's also given me some references for recent (2009) research about language typology and its relation to speaker population size - I'm looking forward to catching up with this.
I'm not so fond of some of his rhetoric, for example on p. 125:
For decades, linguists have elevated the hollow slogan that 'all languages are equally complex' to a fundamental tenet of their discipline, zealously suppressing as heresy any suggestion that the complexity of any areas of grammar could reflect aspects of society. As a consequence, relatively little work has been done on the subject. But a flurry of publications from the last couple of years shows that more linguists are now daring to explore such connections.
but that's just because I assume that the differences in opinions and directions of research are not as emotionally charged as "zealously suppressing" and "heresy" would imply, and I am reading more of an analogy to plucky-hero-versus-monolithic-empire into "daring" than the author probably intended.
As for academic reading, it doesn't have footnotes but it does have a list at the back that follows up references in the text, and a bibliography. Yay. :)
