White Words

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).

Excessively literal. But it's one way to direct research, like James Burke's Connections https://www.scientificamerican.com/department/connections/

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.

I really like how this article sounds like it's been written by Lemony Snicket.

"If in this I have been tedious, it may be some excuse, I had not time to make it shorter."

This writer could spend some time with Strunk and White.

Is the author getting paid by the word? It is trying to be conversational or something but it just needs to get to the point.

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.

Wow! What a long and pointless article.

Stopped reading after being informed that my thinking the word "Eskimo", which the author zerself used, is offensive.

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.