Re: the relevance of Chomsky

etaonsh wrote:

>
> --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Peter
> T. Daniels" <grammatim@...> wrote:
> > etaonsh wrote:
> >
> > > Chomsky has succeeded in getting the
> > > message that language influences
> > > thought into the media. This is
> >
> > Really? Where?
> >
> Popular scientific journals.

Chomsky has never written for one of those. (I suppose you mean
*Scientific American* and *Discover* and *The Smithsonian* and *Natural
History* type things?)

> > You'll find plenty of references
> to "The Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis,"
> which
> > deals with that topic. No one
> refers to a "Chomsky Hypothesis"
> along
> > those lines.
> >
> This is an example of how Academe is
> in a completely different world to
> the outside world (without implied
> criticism of either).

Ok, so who refers to a "Chomsky Hypothesis"? The "Chomskyan Revolution,"
which happened over 40 years ago, has been popularized, but it has
nothing to do with the Whorfian notions you seem to endow it with.

What does this have to do with writing systems?
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...