?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
02 February 2006 @ 03:39 pm
From the "theory-of-the-moebius" dept. *  
Researchers at UC-Berkeley and U-Chicago reasoned that, since language is predominantly processed in the left hemisphere of the brain, any effect on perception should have an effect predominantly on the right visual field, which is also processed on the left. After comparing reaction times for hues of blue-green -- colors with distinct names in one language but not another -- they concluded, in a just-published paper, that the Whorf hypothesis holds for the right visual field, but not the left.

--- From Slashdot.



* I really wish this was mine and not Slashdot's, because it's perfect.
 
 
 
prof_vencireprof_vencire on February 3rd, 2006 07:44 am (UTC)
I'm not sure I entirely agree with their conclusions. It could be due to association strength rather than just a language effect.
Hoc Est Qui Sumusdiscoflamingo on February 3rd, 2006 03:26 pm (UTC)
What exactly do you mean when you say association strength? I find conflicting definitions on teh intarweb.
prof_vencireprof_vencire on February 3rd, 2006 08:37 pm (UTC)
BUT I'm only offering it as another possibility. I have to go over the results some more.
prof_vencireprof_vencire on February 3rd, 2006 08:54 pm (UTC)
Crap it all got lost.

Ok. What I mean is, "neurons that fire together, wire together." The more you use something, the more it's reinforced. They imply that internal language structures/processes affect perception. I suggest that, potentially, external effects of language-as-a-tool might be the cause. Basically, though, I'm just suggesting a more indirect path to the whorfian hypothesis, but I'm not endorsing it. It sounds like they're on to something.

Neat stuff, but it makes me feel like there was something I'm supposed to make with it. Hmmh.
Epic Dudemorecake on February 3rd, 2006 12:43 pm (UTC)
Cool. I studied Whorf at university.