From a linguistics perspective, Arrival's groan inducing. (Off-Topic)

by Kahzgul, Sunday, April 02, 2017, 05:45 (2581 days ago) @ Funkmon

It completely misrepresents not only the nigh debunked Sapir-Whorf hypothesis as correct, but what linguists actually do, using writing as a substitute for the language in the movie, when they are very different things (among some milder facepalms).

Imagine a sci-fi movie that has a plot hinging on someone linking the electroweak force to the strong force, and he solves this problem by studying planetary motion and ballistics based on the principles of the classical elements.

As for GITS, probably won't be able to see it until Monday.

Interesting. So the Sapir-Whorf is debunked? Was it the tail wagging the dog, then, and language comes from culture rather than shapes it? That would make sense. Something else? I know precious little about the subject, but have always found it intriguing.

With regards to the actual movie: Remember when a fisherman in Africa caught a Coelacanth? A fish people had previously believed to have been extinct for millions of years? Given the other suppositions in the film (gravity control, ships disappearing in mist, time-memory-travel), could the linguistic elements be akin to catching a Coelacanth or is it something that just could not ever be considered plausible no matter what? I ask because I didn't understand your physics example. Please pardon my plebeian mind.