The article in one sentence: saying that Eskimo have fifty words for snow is like saying that Europeans have fifty words for water (water, river, lake, dew, fog, cloud, ice and so on).
This whole article is about disproving the Sapir-Wharf hypothesis. While not entirely convinced, I do believe people tend to overemphasize it. In other words with a little effort it can be escaped.
I Googled it, which was completely uninlightening.
I presume that you meant some kind of a diss on Strunk & White. It may make people insecure about the quality of their writing, but it does so in order to show them how to be better.
As for this essay... you may like it. I want to take away their keyboard until they learn how to stop wasting my time.
I always read Eskimos have 50 words for snow not as a statement about Eskimos, but that if you deal with something a lot, you'll know more about it. Similar: the novice and expert see not the same tree or Melbournians have 50 words for rain.
And not literally "unthinkable" to not have those words, but that it would be silly not to.
This was long and somewhat meandering, but offered a much more thorough explanation of the “50 words for snow” factoid’s saga than I’d ever heard before. For that, I’m happy I read the whole thing.
24 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 64.3 ms ] threadTitanic: boat sinks
The New Testament: man killed
Crime and Punishment: Russians
Come on now, the joke practically writes itself.
Those who read “White Words” in full will understand why its author would oppose “article in one sentence” summaries.
This writer could spend some time with Strunk and White.
Google it. I'll wait.
The essay is thoughtful, nuanced, and not easily summarized. Poison for modern readers, savory for patient readers.
I presume that you meant some kind of a diss on Strunk & White. It may make people insecure about the quality of their writing, but it does so in order to show them how to be better.
As for this essay... you may like it. I want to take away their keyboard until they learn how to stop wasting my time.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
I always read Eskimos have 50 words for snow not as a statement about Eskimos, but that if you deal with something a lot, you'll know more about it. Similar: the novice and expert see not the same tree or Melbournians have 50 words for rain.
And not literally "unthinkable" to not have those words, but that it would be silly not to.