Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

slate.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 178 posts

Re: A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

#141

Post by remarkEon »

wmeredith wrote: post #132
remarkEon wrote: post #65

One thing that I think always confuses me about any science fiction work that deals with Humans meeting Aliens for the first time is that it seems to assume it's all on us to figure out a common language. I have to admit, my assumption if that if some species is sufficiently advanced to figure out interstellar travel they'd likely be able to decypher our language and find a way for us to communicate.

Contact is a nice break from this, if you're so inclined. [Spoiler alert] The "aliens" speak perfect english and go so far as to present themselves as a human form in an Earth-like environment so as to keep our little human brains from exploding.

Love Contact. In some ways, it's also a really interesting commentary on religion in modern life.

Re: A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

#142

Post by Jare »

jinfiesto wrote: post #140
Jare wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would it make sense? There's nothing supporting the idea that if we "work it out" we will understand better, faster, or some other kind of -er. It's certainly an easy way out, but I at least find it unsatisfying.

That's a fair criticism, though I would assume that since the heptapods can see the future, there's some rationale for specifically wanting "Louise" to learn the language first instead of just distributing a copy of "Heptapod for dummies."

Yeah I tried to go that route but acting upon knowledge of the future is a narrative slippery slope. It's valid for a story setup I think, but not for explaining details. The movie acts like memories of the future are not fully under one's control and, with that imperfect knowledge, you can't expect humans or aliens to make perfect plans or optimal choices. But when memories come right when needed to solve situations like Chang's ultimatum, well, no more suspension of disbelief for me.

Re: A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

#143

Post by erispoe »

wmeredith wrote: post #131
skizm wrote: post #25

What bothered me the most is that the way they start the "conversation" with the aliens is by using names and human concepts (walking, eating, etc.). I'm not a trained linguist or anything, but it seems to me they should start with concepts that are universal: mainly numbers. Maybe as a CS guy I'm biased (since my language is symbols and numbers), but literally every conceivable language has to contain numbers of som…

The way they started the conversation in the film was with identity which is pretty damn universal to intelligent life.

How do we know that? I'm not sure identity as we know it is required for intelligent life to develop. We know other mammals share it but they're pretty close to us evolutionary speaking. Eusocial intelligence (ant-like) wouldn't need that, because they're not individuals, and each colony or group of colonies form one big organism. Could eusocial intelligence develop to the point of being capable of interstellar travel? It seems plausible under the right circumstances. Such an intelligence probably wouldn't understand the concept of individual identity...

Re: A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

#145

Post by jcranmer »

panglott wrote: post #101
3131s wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the reasons Everett is talked about so much is because his claims are controversial. Many linguists have criticized his methodologies. I have a background in linguistics but have never looked into Everett's work too thoroughly, but from what I have seen I am skeptical of his claims that Piraha lacks recursion. Still, an interesting line of inquiry and it would be nice if there were enough linguists to actually…

AIUI, the controversy was generated based on definitions within generative linguistics that were ambiguous; the Chomskyans clarified what they meant by "recursion" for their purposes, and the controversy should have evaporated. That didn't stop the Chomskyans from getting Everett barred from conducting research among his friends the Pirahã or documenting their language. http://www.chronicle.com/blogs/linguafranca/201…

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=3857 has the best summary of the affair. Several of the principles even show up in the comments.

The short of it is that Chomskyan hypothesis has a giant edifice built upon a single central idea. A fraca in popular science (i.e., outside academic journals) arises between Chomsky and Pinker over these ideas. Some unknown researcher announces that his obscure language brings the whole edifice crashing down. Add in a touch of Sapir-Whorf to make accusations of racism credible, and Chomsky's well-known fondness for dismissing critics rather than engaging them in scholarly debate.

Basically, there were two debates (did Pirahã have recursion in the sense that Everett meant? and what constitutes proof or disproof of universal grammar?) that went on simultaneously, while someone apparently took the opportunity to smear Everett with the Pirahã study ban.

Re: A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

#146

Post by devdas »

GenerocUsername wrote: post #133
alanbernstein wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm intrigued by this use of "masala", can you explain? Urban dictionary has a few options, not sure which of those you mean, if any.

I can try to shine a light on this idiom. Masala is a popular indian dish here in the US... so popular in fact that it is expected at any indian restaurant. Because of this, the term can be synonomous with 'run of the mill', 'standard', or even 'safe'.

Masala is a mixture of spices, or the liquid portion of the stew a dish is cooked in.

In this context, it would mean spiced up, or exaggerated for entertainment reasons.

Re: A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

#147

Post by xtiansimon »

Neophyte impression--Enjoyed the notion of time-less language and the similarities to other series/state issues in langauge theory such as Synchrony and Diachrony[1]. As a neophyte programmer I find networks and version control are also similarly intresting structural contrasts.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchrony_and_diachrony

Re: A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

#148

Post by mirimir »

I was expecting some discussion of S-W hypothesis and coding. Does learning particular programming languages alter thinking more generally? I've read that it's better to know several distinct sorts of languages. Are some languages dangerous to learn?

Re: A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

#149

Post by jessaustin »

seewhatIsee wrote: post #14

The Himba tribe in Africa have an interesting perception of color which is believed to stem from their language[1]. For example, their language uses the same word for what westerners separately call green and blue. As a result, they cannot seem to distinguish the colors when presented to them. [1] https://vimeo.com/120808489

"Grue" is actually pretty common: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue%E2%80%93green_distinction...

Re: A linguist on Arrival's alien language (2016)

#150

Post by dwarman »

Jare wrote: post #139
jinfiesto wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The movie addresses this. Since the entire point of the heptapods visit is to force humans to learn their language, it makes sense that they would force humanity to "work it out."

Why would it make sense? There's nothing supporting the idea that if we "work it out" we will understand better, faster, or some other kind of -er. It's certainly an easy way out, but I at least find it unsatisfying.

Actually there is, in the (stated in the movie) supposition that what you can think about is bounded by the language you think with. Corr.: learn a different langauge, change how your brain processes your experience. So learning Heptapod changes your sensation of time, because time is a fundamental component of the language. Note how her future experiences become more detailed, less fragmented, and more focussed on "current" context, as she learns more about thinking in Heptapod. Not just revealing it to us, the audience: showing its progressive revelations to her. And then she writes the book on it, for the rest of us. And thus closes the loop.
Post reply on HN