Here is a good example of semantic colonialism, UM Linguist Studies the Anumeric Language of an Amazonian Tribe. Not obvious from the title is it?
Two studies of the Piraha people of the Amazon, who lack words for numbers, produced different results when they were tested with simple numeric problems with more than three items. One set of results said they could perform them, the other, not.
The explanation for the difference?
The study provides a simple explanation for the controversy. Unbeknown to other researchers, the villagers that participated in one of the previous studies had received basic numerical training by Keren Madora, an American missionary that has worked with the indigenous people of the Amazon for 33 years, and co-author of this study. “Her knowledge of what had happened in that village was crucial. I understood then why they got the results that they did,” Everett says.
Madora used the Piraha language to create number words. For instance she used the words “all the sons of the hand,” to indicate the number four. The introduction of number words into the village provides a reasonable explanation for the disagreement in the previous studies.
If you think that the Piraha are “better off” having number words, put yourself down as a semantic colonialist.
You will have no reason to complain when terms used by Amazon, Google, Nike, Starbucks, etc., start to displace your native terminology.
Even less reason to complain if some Semantic Web ontology displace yours in the race to become the common ontology for some subject area.
After all, one semantic colonialist is much like any other. (Ask any former/current colony if you don’t believe me.)