Skip to main content

Guy Deutscher – Four Way Interview

Guy Deutscher read Mathematics at Cambridge and went on to do a doctorate in Linguistics.
Formerly a Fellow of St John’s College, Cambridge, and of the Department of Ancient Near Eastern Languages in the University of Leiden in the Netherlands, he is an honorary Research Fellow at the School of Languages, Linguistics and Cultures in the University of Manchester. His books include The Unfolding of Language: An Evolutionary Tour of Mankind’s Greatest Invention and Through the Language Glass.
Why Linguistics?
For scientists, the two biggest questions are how the world works and how it came to be the way it is now. For me, language has always been the particular aspect of the world that cried out for explanation. Language is mankind’s greatest invention – except, of course, that it was never invented. And it is exactly this paradox that has been at the core of my fascination with language ever since I started thinking about it as a child. Language is an incredibly refined instrument. With the most meagre tools – a few dozen morsels of sound – it allows us to convey unlimitedly sophisticated thoughts, and I always wanted to know: how does it manage this? And how could such a clever system ever come into being if it wasn’t designed on an architect’s table?
Why this book?
No matter what aspect of language you are trying to look into, there is one fundamental question that you can hardly avoid: the question of innateness. How much of language is the bequest of nature and how much is influenced by culture? How much is hardwired and determined directly by the genes, and how much is cultural convention? In my previous book on the evolution of language (The Unfolding of Language), I tried very hard not to be sucked into this controversy too directly, although my approach clearly suggested that culture has much more to offer than what it is generally given credit for today. In Through the Language Glass, which is a kind of sequel, I decided to make the case for culture more explicit, and show how cultural conventions have the power to shape some of the most fundamental aspects of language, even those that common sense would have sworn must simply be natural and universal. This debate has as a natural corollary another great controversy, the question of the mother-tongue’s influence on the way we think and perceive the world. So this time, I decided to attack these two bitter controversies head on.
What’s next?
I’m toying with different ideas. One question I find particularly interesting, but couldn’t incorporate into this book, is how politeness and other conventions of social interaction are both mirrored in language, and how they may be affected by language. Another area of interest goes beyond language, to explore ideas about heredity in the past and their relation to ideology. But these are early days for that.
What’s exciting you at the moment?
The other great invention of mankind – music. I’m learning eighteenth century harmony together with my daughter.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Nanotechnology - Rahul Rao ****

There was a time when nanotechnology was both going to transform the world and wipe us out - a similar position to our view of AI today. On the positive transformation side there was K. Eric Drexler's visions in the 1986 Engines of Creation. Arguably as much science fiction as engineering possibilities, it predicted the ability to use vast armies of assemblers to put objects together from individual atoms.  On the negative side was the vision of grey goo, out of control nanotechnology consuming all in its path as it made more and more copies of itself. In 2003, for instance, the then Prince Charles made the headlines  when newspapers reported ‘The prince has raised the spectre of the “grey goo” catastrophe in which sub-microscopic machines designed to share intelligence and replicate themselves take over and devour the planet.’ These days the expectations have been eased down a notch or two. Where nanotechnology has succeeded, it has been with the likes of atom-thick mat...
Post a Comment
Read more