'The Wake' Is an Unlikely Hit in an Imaginary Language (2015) | Hacker News Reader

'The Wake' Is an Unlikely Hit in an Imaginary Language (2015)

npr.org

70 pointssmacktoward29 comments

>> Kingsnorth said this is because the words we use to describe our world shape our perception of it.

That's the concept of Linguistic relativity, also known as the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity

    The strong version says that language determines thought and that linguistic categories limit and determine cognitive categories.
    The weak version says that linguistic categories and usage only influence thought and decisions.

My understanding is that this idea is controversial and in any case, difficult to demonstrate, because it's mostly impossible to know one's thoughts without asking them to put them into words, and also because language understanding is subjective and it's impossible to understand what someone is saying without placing it in the context of our knowledge and understanding of the world in the first place.

My subjective experience of flow states[1] makes me believe this is true. In these states thinking feels much less discrete (which is something language seems to impose) and more continuous. Any programmer knows what this feels like when you get into a serious coding session. You get to the point where all the principles of programming fade from your attention and focus more on how information is being shaped by your program (learning Haskell brought this to a new level for me). There have been times where I couldn't even explain what I had done in words, which gives me further evidence that flow is related to breaking down this linguistic imposition.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flow_(psychology)

Our team has started using types-code to communicate, works well. We have unified basic interfaces and concepts, that helps.

The strong version is hilariously easy to destroy: if you're cognitively limited to your language, then you cannot create new words, let alone new concepts. Since it is patently false that no new words or new concepts are created, by Modus Tollens, it is also false that you are cognitively limited to your language.

The weak version seems true to me. I think it is absolutely the case that your language colors your thought.

I'm not sure that argument is a complete route of the strong (or at least, stronger) hypothesis. The conscious creation of new words is often done using fusions or appropriations of existing words, per Lakoff's Metaphors. Over time, the meanings shift and expand, but it's not a raw, instantaneous act of creation, that, to your point, would seem to be impossible under Strong Sapir-Whorf.

Now, we can, here and now, 'invent' a 'new' word from what we believe to be whole cloth. But it's hard to prove that that there's not some unconscious process similar to the above going on! That really all we're doing is finding the intersections of existing semantic distributions.

Incidentally, my favorite SIGBOVIK paper: https://www.cs.cmu.edu/~tom7/papers/sigbovik2011tom7whatword...

I'm not sure that even the weak case is true: while it could be that language colors thought, it could as easily be the reverse. We may pick our languages to reflect the thoughts we have.

Those thoughts are heavily influenced by culture, and language is a strong tool for communicating culture, but it's not the only one. Apes communicate culture by watching rather than speaking, and my cat learns that she's not supposed to go on the table even though she doesn't understand when I tell her.

So while language and thought patterns may be correlated, the arrow of causation isn't necessarily one way. Experiments that show people thinking in certain grooves divided by language, but concluding that the latter causes the former may be putting the cart before the horse.

> The strong version is hilariously easy to destroy: if you're cognitively limited to your language, then you cannot create new words, let alone new concepts.

It depends on what's the thing you define a language. It might be that dictionary and grammar are only a kind of projection of a more blurry, hidden structure - a language "core". Think of how children sometimes invent new words and how these words immediately "click" with fluent speakers even if they mean shit.

IANAL(inguist) so take it with a grain of salt.

Oh, and another thing. Knowing a word is not a 0 or 1 kind of situation. More often than not if you're not sure about some word you're able to successfully guess some of its meaning or at least a sentiment associated with it.

I think this is a limited interpretation of the hypothesis. The version of your brain that doesn’t have an idea is unable to think of it. You can then synthesize a new idea from your existing ideas, and no longer have that version of your brain (you have a minor, or in some cases major, version bump). Then once you have the new version of your brain with the new idea, you can use it to further synthesize new ideas. This process of reflection and intellectual growth is the only way to break out of your SW prison is to synthesize new ideas - until you do, you are exactly as the hypothesis says, limited to the ideas you currently have. Sometimes this process is involuntary, so it doesn’t feel like you just booted up a new version of yourself.

I actually just picked up 'The Wake' a couple of weeks ago. There is definitely a learning curve to Kingsnorth's "shadow tongue," but once you get the hang of it, it is very immersive and rewarding to read. It really gives you a sense of foreign place and time, as a story set in 1066 should. What surprised me is how effective it is at establishing a perspective from which you can really feel the relationship that these characters have with the world around them. I picked it up because the premise sounded interesting, and was totally blown away with how fun it is to read—I would definitely recommend checking it out.

Thanks for the recommendation, I just might do that. I was relieved to see it has a glossary[0] so you're not completely at sea. I remember getting all the way through Trainspotting without realizing that there was a glossary in the back of the book, which was a facepalm moment.

[0]: https://unbound.com/books/the-wake/updates/glossary

Oh yes—I should have mentioned the glossary. Thanks for calling that out—it is absolutely necessary in making it an enjoyable read. Once you get a grasp on it though, it's pretty easy to infer meaning of new words as you go.

"Cloud Atlas" is another book that uses different writing styles for different eras -- 6 of them, I think. Every new chapter, it takes a little while to figure out the language.

If you like The Wake, you might also enjoy Riddley Walker (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riddley_Walker), which uses an imaginary psuedo-iron-age dialect transcribed phonetically:

"On my naming day when I come 12 I gone front spear and kilt a wyld boar he parbly ben the las wyld pig on the Bundel Downs any how there hadnt ben none for a long time befor him nor I aint looking to see none agen."

> psuedo-iron-age

It's not, it's just phonetic transcription of modern urban English with some SMS-style typing errors thrown in.

Really disappointed with the crappy low-effort linguistics in that book.

Couldn't disagree more, many of the words are halfway between two other words or are deconstructions of existing words fragmenting and refracting their meaning though Ridley's understanding of the world. To give the most obvious example; Eusa is a confusion of St Eustace, the USA and Jesus with a rich web of meaning and myth springing from that conflation. The spelling speaks to how the transition from oral to written tradition can crystallise the meaning of myths, fixing their meaning.

Except iron age english looks like this:

cwæð þæt se Ælmihtiga eorðan worhte, wlitebeorhtne wang, swa wæter bebugeð, gesette sigehreþig sunnan ond monan leoman to leohte landbuendum, ond gefrætwade foldan sceatas leomum ond leafum, lif eac gesceop rynna gehwylcum þara ðe cwice hwyrfaþ.--- Swa þa drihtguman dreamum lifdon, eadiglice, oð ðæt an ongan fyrene fremman feond on helle; wæs se grimma gæst Grendel haten, mære mearcstapa, se þe moras heold, fen ond fæsten; fifelcynnes eard wonsæli wer weardode hwile, siþðan him Scyppend forscrifen hæfde in Caines cynne--- þone cwealm gewræc ece Drihten, þæs þe he Abel slog; ne gefeah he þære fæhðe, ac hehine feor forwræc, Metod for þy mane mancynne fram. Þanon untydras ealle on wocon, eotenas ond ylfe ond orcneas, swylce gigantas, þa wið Gode wunnon

Which is nothing like phonetic modern english, and thus his point.

I don't get your beef.

Riddley WaIker is set in an unspecified, post-apocalyptic era in the future.

Aleksander Gołubiew wrote historic novels in Polish "archaized" in similar manner. I especially like his "Bolesław Chrobry" series, also set in 10th-11th century, but in Poland. Sadly it wasn't translated to English, it's a very interesting book. Kinda like Game of Thrones but higher percentage of real history and no fantasy elements (other than people believing in folklore).

It's very funny experience to read it, at first you struggle, then you stop noticing it. Reading the third book you catch yourself using the more useful words when you think.

I feel like you always have to bend the language to match the context. I think it was Sapkowski on his Narrenturm series (which happens to be set in the late Middle Ages) who said that even though he didn't want to specifically archaize the language he couldn't use a modern version of it either. Some new words/concepts like "computer" or "holocaust" would feel out of place and be immediately spotted by the reader.

Not mentioned in this NPR article, but Kingsnorth is also one of the main people behind the Dark Mountain Project, an attempt to formulate a cultural response to our ongoing ecological collapse: https://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/20/magazine/its-the-end-of-t...

When I read "A Clockwork Orange" by Anthony Burgess, I found myself using many words from the slang language he invented, an amalgamation of Russian and English. (The slang language got minimal treatment in the film, you'll have to read the book). I'll have to read The Wake to see if it happens again. I still remember "horrorshow", it means good or cool, comes from the Russian "khorosho".

Also "otchkies" meaning "glasses". Means the same in Russian. I'll say it in English every once and a while.

I've not heard of this particular novel before, but presume it is about Hereward the Wake[1], which is indeed listed on the Wikipedia page. His story is fascinating and a couple of years ago I read a number of different books about him[2], with half an idea to write something myself. I'm really pleased someone else has written a new work about Hereward.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereward_the_Wake

[2] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hereward_the_Wake_(novel)

From the Wikipedia article you linked: "Man Booker Prize long-listed The Wake (2014) by Paul Kingsnorth is a historical novel written in a shadow version of old English telling the story of another resistance fighter in the fens whose actions are regularly compared to Hereward."

Yes, I mentioned that in my comment. I just hadn't come across this one before. My reading around Hereward was prior to its publication (maybe I should have said a few, rather than a couple of years ago. Time flies).

I’ve read The Wake, and it’s really not accurate to say it’s “about” Hereward. Hereward doesn’t really figure into its story at all, except as an offstage personage we hear about occasionally when his actions are compared to those of the protagonist, Buccmaster of Holland.

The Wake isn’t a lightly fictionalized biography of an historical figure. It’s something much richer and more imaginative than that. If you’re interested in the period, I would definitely recommend it.

Plain text version:

https://text.npr.org/s.php?sId=434970724

This book is really pleasant and would definitely recommend. It is emotionally taxing at times but packed with wild imagery/poetry.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com