>>
No.388578
>>388443This idea is nothing new, it goes back to at least Herder but probably further back.
Radlib's word policing is the opposite of this idea, it's like America's world policing.
However the idea taken in isolation still has a tendency towards idealism and nationalism.
>>
No.388595
>>388578isn't it idealist because language is superstructural? and therefore it would be superstructure influencing itself rather than base influencing superstructure?
>>
No.390119
In my view, this theory serves as an adequate explanation, for why Burger and Angloposters are so stupid. English is a brainlet language.
>>
No.390138
>>388595>language is superstructural? Language isn't something the base/superstructure dichotomy deals with. Your question makes as much sense as "where does the lung belong? base or superstructure?" or "what''s the chemical element of class consciousness?"
in short, you are an idiot
>>
No.390146
>>388578This. Word policing is just a brainlet take on the lingustic turn.
>>
No.390167
Languages have different requirements in certain distinctions you have to make when crapping out sentences and in that way nudge you more or less to think in this or that direction. For example in French and German you have different ways of saying you, so you don't glide as smoothly into being more personal with somebody as you can in English, you instead have to explicitly make a switch. Nobody believes in a strong version of Sapir–Whorf. If it were a really strong thing, anybody speaking more than one language would be basically a different person in each, falling in love with one person while thinking in one language and loathing them while thinking in another and so on.
The arrogance of Brits and Burgers comes from history and education/media, not the grammatical structure of the language.
>>
No.390177
>controlling people's thoughts by language policing
unironically that's literally 1984 (or at least a component of the setting)
>>
No.392899
>>388443Radlibbery is just a subset of Angloism.
>>
No.392908
>>390177you must be underage or something, lmao.
>>
No.392947
>>392908dont blame him, orwell is required reading in alot of high school