I'm a bit amused by a trend I've noticed recently with regard to the old "X words for snow" nonsense.
Writers often used to use it to preface their similar nonsense. So time after time we would see,
"Just as Eskimo has <choose a number> words for snow, <choose a language> has <choose a number> words for <choose a concept>..."

Of course nowadays almost everyone knows it's nonsense but it refuses to die.
Instead we see things prefaced with

"Just as people used to say Eskimo has..."
or
"Eskimo may not have... but...".

The original idea may be dead but it's like a corpse in the moat, it keeps floating past the window every few minutes.

Here's an example brought to you via Language Log. (First sentence when you scroll down away from the graphic.)

Some of these, like the Hebrew phrases and the Italian "ti voglio bene" aren't even one word - so much for the whole point of this exercise! Ti voglio bene means "I like you". כואב לי הלב is "it breaks my heart".

via Language Log

quote:

Let's take the tired old example of Schadenfreude. The idea is either (world to word) that (i) the feeling of experiencing joy at the misfortune of another person is so important for Germans that they made sure they developed a special word to name it, or (word to world) that (ii) German speakers only see Schadenfreude because they have that word, and English speakers in exactly the same contexts don't see it because they don't have the word for it (unless they manage to borrow the word Schadenfreude for it, of course, which seems to drive a coach and horses through the notion we're talking about; but set that aside for now).

Thought you'd like to drop him a line about the e-word, Kalleh.

I was too tired last night to read the Language Log entry. I read it tonight...and saw that, z. Clearly Pullum has little respect for Bailey's Dictionary.

quote:

The other, the word-to-world flavor, says that we can't form a concept if we don't have a word to serve as the name for it.

Common sense tells you this isn't true. After all, babies and small children form concepts, in their own ways, much before they learn the appropriate words. I think, however, that people read things like the number of words for snow in Alaska, or whatever, believe what they read (because it's by an "acclaimed" linguist or English expert) and pass it on without really thinking about it. I think, early on here, I believed that, too, because I remember thinking that the Inuits had more words for snow. Shame on me for not critically thinking and checking it out.