Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Nebu_chad_nezzarII t1_jaghh5c wrote

This was a great read. Beeing bilingual, I have often been asked by my friends if I think in english or my native language. I allways found it an odd question, because my thoughts are definitely not happening in word-format inside my head - If I had to describe them, I would say they are more “visual” than verbal in nature, and therefore I often say I think more visually than verbally - but this is not a fully accurate description either.

Thoughts are a unique experience and part of your conscious existence and that is an experience infinitely richer than words can convey. Of course, the broader your vocabulary, the greater the chance that you will be able to “translate” your thoughts to words at high fidelity - but much is “lost in translation” when two people speak - even if they are both fluent in a language and competent speakers.

34

Hazzman t1_jagn18t wrote

It reminds me of how some languages have words for emotions, concepts or scenarios that other languages don't have, but are emotions people can experience - just without the words to express them succinctly or even at all. Like Schadenfreude. We know what that means - and it is precise in its expression. Without that word, an English speaking person would have to deliberately express "Their failure, pain and or harm is satisfying to me" which is cumbersome.

But what about emotions we can feel that we don't have words for in any language. I'm sure there are many of these across different languages that aren't present in English but that we would understand if presented with them.

I also think of 1984's 'Newspeak' where the dictatorship of the future controls people's thoughts by eroding their language. Until the concept of revolution or rebellion no longer has a word or a phrase to describe it, and therefor doesn't exist as a possibility for the people.

7

MisterBilau t1_jahxtlm wrote

The fact that some languages have one word for something where others don't means nothing to me. What matters is if it's possible to describe or not, regardless of the number of words needed. Saying "Schadenfreude" or "Their failure, pain and or harm is satisfying to me" is the same - you can get the point across. Therefore, you can think it.

The real issue that matters is if it's possible to express a thought at all in a language but not in another, that's what's interesting. The idea of 1984 was just that, making certain thoughts impossible for lack of language. But that has nothing to do with everything being one unique word or not. As long as there is a string in a language, no matter how complex or how long, that can express it, it's fine.

Now, some languages can be more efficient or cumbersome than others, but that just doesn't matter nearly as much as being possible or not to express something.

0

Yessbutno t1_jags4kz wrote

> I would say they are more “visual” than verbal in nature, and therefore I often say I think more visually than verbally

I am the same way, for me it's that thoughts feel multidimensional in terms of structure as well as temporal ordering, while language/verbal communication is often linear and ordered in particular ways. So much is lost trying to put thoughts into words I often don't bother unless I have to.

Whereas visual languages feel more naturalistic.

7

BE3F t1_jagsney wrote

I started noticing my internal monologue changing to English within a year and now, 20 years on, it’s almost permanently in English unless I visit my home country in which case it starts changing back slowly and I pick up my accent again, I usually visit for a week at most.

This doesn’t apply when doing maths, counting especially always reverts back to my native language!

5

dunnowhattowriteM t1_jalk8k5 wrote

Great thought dude. I also think that emotions are something so unique and "spiritual" that no word will ever be able to figure em and describe em. Maybe, what comes closer to showing our feeling as purely as they are, is art, and music in particular.

All in all, words are the result of our experience, and we should never take our own experiences as the universal law.

3