So, I've been reading a lot of colonial space fiction over the last few years, and I do think at some point I want to write some long piece comparing and contrasting their themes. Colonialism as military might and violence; vs colonialism as control of resources; vs colonialism as language; colonialism as cultural dominance; colonialism through technology. Etc.
The one thing that kinda sticks out to me, like spinach between my teeth, is the Locked Tomb. Because it's not so much that that stuff isn't there, just that it's out of focus, blurry in the background. But while perhaps less realistic, its take of "colonialism as one very old, very pathetic man's personal grudge" is absolutely compelling.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
Lingthusiasm Episode 102: The science and fiction of Sapir-Whorf
It's a fun science fiction trope: learn a mysterious alien language and acquire superpowers, just like if you'd been zapped by a cosmic ray or bitten by a radioactive spider. But what's the linguistics behind this idea found in books like Babel-17, Embassytown, or the movie Arrival?
In this episode, your hosts Lauren Gawne and Gretchen McCulloch get enthusiastic about the science and fiction of linguistic relativity, popularly known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. We talk about a range of different things that people mean when they refer to this hypothesis: a sciencey-sounding way to introduce obviously fictional concepts like time travel or mind control, a reflection that we add new words all the time as convenient handles to talk about new concepts, a note that grammatical categories can encourage us to pay attention to specific areas in the world (but aren't the only way of doing so), a social reflection that we feel like different people in different environments (which can sometimes align with different languages, though not always). We also talk about several genuine areas of human difference that linguistic relativity misses: different perceptive experiences like synesthesia and aphantasia, as well as how we lump sounds into categories based on what's relevant to a given language.
Finally, we talk about the history of where the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis comes from, why Benjamin Lee Whorf would have been great on TikTok, and why versions of this idea keep bouncing back in different guises as a form of curiosity about the human condition no matter how many specific instances get disproven.
Click here for a link to this episode in your podcast player of choice or read the transcript here.
Announcements:
In this month’s bonus episode we get enthusiastic about two sets of updates! We talk about the results from the 2024 listener survey (we learned which one of us you think is more kiki and more bouba!), and our years in review (book related news for both Lauren and Gretchen), plus exciting news for the coming year.
Join us on Patreon now to get access to this and 90+ other bonus episodes. You’ll also get access to the Lingthusiasm Discord server where you can chat with other language nerds.
Here are the links mentioned in the episode:
Babel-17 by Samuel R. Delany on Goodreads
Lingthusiasm episode on the linguistics of the movie Arrival
History and Philosophy of the Language Sciences podcast episode 31: The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
Lingthusiasm episode 'Colour words around the world and inside your brain'
Wikipedia entry for 'Edward Sapir'
‘The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis’ by Harry Hoijer (1954) (archive.org)
Wikipedia entry for 'Ekkehart Malotki'
Wikipedia entry for 'Hopi time controversy'
'Key is a llave is a Schlüssel: A failure to replicate an experiment from Boroditsky et al. 2003' by Anne Mickan, Maren Schiefke, and Anatol Stefanowitsch
'Do Chinese and English speakers think about time differently? Failure of replicating Boroditsky (2001)' by Jenn-Yeu Chen
'Does grammatical gender affect object concepts? Registered replication of Phillips and Boroditsky (2003)' by Nan Elpers, Greg Jensen, and Kevin J. Holmes
'Future tense and saving money: no correlation when controlling for cultural evolution' by Seán G. Roberts, James Winters, and Keith Chen
Lingthusiasm bonus episode ‘North, left, or towards the sea? Interview with Alice Gaby’
'Samuel R. Delany, The Art of Fiction No. 210' Interview by Rachel Kaadzi Ghansah for The Paris Review (unpaywalled photos here)
You can listen to this episode via Lingthusiasm.com, Soundcloud, RSS, Apple Podcasts/iTunes, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. You can also download an mp3 via the Soundcloud page for offline listening.
To receive an email whenever a new episode drops, sign up for the Lingthusiasm mailing list.
You can help keep Lingthusiasm ad-free, get access to bonus content, and more perks by supporting us on Patreon.
Lingthusiasm is on Bluesky, Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Mastodon, and Tumblr. Email us at contact [at] lingthusiasm [dot] com
Gretchen is on Bluesky as @GretchenMcC and blogs at All Things Linguistic.
Lauren is on Bluesky as @superlinguo and blogs at Superlinguo.
Lingthusiasm is created by Gretchen McCulloch and Lauren Gawne. Our senior producer is Claire Gawne, our production editor is Sarah Dopierala, our production assistant is Martha Tsutsui Billins, our editorial assistant is Jon Kruk, and our technical editor is Leah Velleman. Our music is ‘Ancient City’ by The Triangles.
This episode of Lingthusiasm is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial Share Alike license (CC 4.0 BY-NC-SA).
the technical writing is fine. Perdido Street Station is all over the place when it comes to pacing, but it's one of those books that could work if you're in it for the journey, not the destination.
my specific issue is that when you peel away the fantastic elements, what his stories actually say is reprehensible.
Embassytown
the plot of Embassytown is basically:
galactic empire sets up a colony on an inhabited planet at edge of the known universe, for trade/etc.
due to the native inhabitant's biological quirk (two mouths/one mind) and how they conceptualise language (literal/similies, devoid of speculation, lying, etc) the aliens can't communicate with humans or even recognise our speech as language
humans develop a method to communicate in their language (bio-engineered clones conceptualising themselves as one person, therefore getting past the two-mouths/one-mind problem)
a method for two separate people to speak their language is developed and trialled
the contradiction of two mouths/two minds, speaking as one, is such a mindfuck that it has a drug-like effect on the aliens.
most aliens become mindlessly enthralled by listening to this type of speech. it is so extreme that they can no longer think for themselves, but are slaves to their addiction.
other aliens are literally mutilating themselves so that they don't succumb, and can keep their minds in-tact.
a solution is found by the main character: she teaches some aliens to basically think in metaphor, and eventually to lie, therefore allowing them to think in a way that's compatible with the two-mouths/two-minds contradiction.
the aliens adopt a human-like approach to language (lying, metaphor), which fundementally changes the way that they think.
the book ends on an optimistic note looking forward, like this is all progress.
so, what we have is a book about an empire setting up colonies, desecrating the local population, destroying their (primative, child-like) language (they can't lie), and replacing it with their own. the characters who resist are portrayed as terrorists holding back progress.
torture is a contentious topic. many people (even those who believe it's wrong) still think that torture is alright under the right circumstances: what if there's a bomb and this guy knows where it is? what if the victim deserves it? what if the victim is a paedophile?
these emotionally-laden arguments that lend credibility to the idea of torture by removing it from its context: a weapon of the state. if torture is effective, or if it's an acceptable measure to take against some people, then ultimately that means torture is okay.
but the real value of torture is not as an information-gathering tool, nor as an effective deterent for heinous crimes. it's a threat against enemies: this is what we'll do to you if you don't pack it in. the idea that it's justified in certain circumstances is propaganda to that end.
this book repeatedly presents torture as effective, justified, and a reasonable method of punishment.
about halfway through Isaac tortures a guy. this is presented as the correct thing to do. while unpleasant, via torture he's able to gather critical, time-sensitive information. also, his victim is a horrible man in favour of mutilation as a punitive measure (remaking).
his victim is also presented as undignified and cowardly while being tortured; this is presented as a weakness on his part, basically being unmanly and unworthy of the respect awarded to victims.
meanwhile, Yagharek's introduced as a victim of a different type of punitive mutilation, which is rightfully regarded as a disturbing violation. for most of the book, he's a sympathetic figure; it's acknowledged that he didn't deserve this, and that Isaac is right for helping him recover.
then it's revealed that Yag's crime is (basically) rape. Isaac is so disgusted that he backs out of helping Yagharek, which is seen as the uncomplicatedly correct position.
other examples of torture in this book are treated as disturbing, violating sources of horror and tragedy. but, critically, it's only bad when someone else does it; when Isaac tortures someone, or condemns Yagharek, it's okay.
essentially: torture is fine so long as the justification is compelling enough.
but in this case, the story itself is built on the idea that torture is not bad -- it's only bad when it's deployed by the wrong people, against the wrong people. it's threaded so consistently through this book, alongside ideas about which victims are sympathetic and which are inconsequential losses, that I find it impossible to separate this aspect from the rest of the story.
neither cultural genocide nor torture are fictional. but for both, even in the real-world, they're very rarely acknowledged as serious issues; what acknowledgement exists often misunderstands it completely.
there are many people, for example, who actively think that languages like Irish or Welsh should be abandoned and left to die, because everyone speaks English now, so what's the point?
likewise, while many people do acknowledge that torture is bad, the severity of it is often understated, and many people do just straight-up think it's okay.
Anya is live and ready to show you everything. Watch her strip, dance, and perform exclusive shows just for you. Interact in real-time and make your fantasies come true.
✓ Live Streaming✓ Interactive Chat✓ Private Shows✓ HD Quality✓ Free Actions
Free to watch • No registration required • HD streaming
people who are physically incapable of talking to you
people who are physically incapable of comprehending AI generated text
eye stalks for days
government shaped by distant imperial power
plug your phone into your pet dog
so bad at speaking Language that you accidentally caused a linguistic apocalypse
the houses grew ears
space freighter blew up
your helicopter got addicted to listening to some annoying asshole’s childhood memories so now we have to use the shitty helicopter made of like, metal or something
