Crash Blossoms

While going through the language log, I came across the phrase "crash blossoms." Apparently these are phrases, often headlines, that almost encourage alternate readings. Websites like the language log as well as www.crashblossoms.com collect headlines from newspapers across the world and nation for entertainment, analysis, or mockery.

For example, one of the most ambiguous recent headlines came from BBC. "Missing women police find remains." Now, if someone was not familiar with the ongoing story of a man who has been killing women with a crossbow and cutting up their bodies (sorry, gruesome), the title can be quite ambiguous. Geoffrey K. Pullum mentions many various problems with the headline. First is that "missing women" can be interpreted as a modifier for "police". In that case, remains were found by female police offers that were previously missing. Or, if you look at "find" as a noun, then some missing female police officers still remain to be found. In reality, what the headline should read is "Police find missing women's remains." There...no extra words, short and sweet, just an addition of an apostrophe and an unscrambling of the words. Was that so hard, BBC editors?

It's understandable that news sources want to keep their headlines concise, yet somewhat informative. Nevertheless, as is told by the language log and other websites, all too often these headlines come out ambiguous and make the editors look foolish. Is there some other motive behind creating such grammar lacking headlines? It's possible that the ambiguity draws more people in. Since you're unsure of what they're talking about, but there are interesting "catch" words in the headline, you'd like to go figure this one out. But even a proper headline still leaves details out, so that itself can draw readers in. Or are these ambiguous headlines a result of quick typing, and a necessity to produce information quickly without having time to edit?

However, these types of crash blossoms can be present anywhere, most frighteningly on warning or prescription labels (http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2171). In those cases, a misreading doesn't lead to a simple misunderstanding, but potentially life-threatening actions. If anyone thought grammar wasn't important in language (ehem, language classes that focus only on vocabulary), now you know.

References:

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2359

http://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=2171

http://crashblossoms.com

More info:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/magazine/31FOB-onlanguage-t.html

Number of Russian Speakers Increasing?

I started off with an article paraphrasing a statement made by the Counselor of the Russian Embassy in Ukraine, Vsevolod Loskutov. The claim was that the "use of the Russian language in Ukraine will boost the country's competitiveness in light of Russia's growing influence worldwide." This, to me, is quite a bold claim. I wondered if this claim implied that the Russian language was gaining influence throughout the world. I set out to try to find out how many Russian speakers there are today compared to the time of the USSR, but couldn't find this information.

However, what facts did come up is that there are about 150 million native speakers of Russian, and between 220-300 million total Russian speakers. Depending on the ranking system you look at, Russia falls between 4-7 as one of the most widely spoken languages in the world. So there is some substance to Loskutov's claim. Russian is also seen as a unifying commonality amongst all countries once under the rule of the Soviet Union, as well as Russian speakers who are abroad. An excerpt from a Russian Public Chamber member Alexei Chadayev, speaking about the need to provide information in Russian:

"A language cannot evolve without promptly tagging new phenomena and embracing new knowledge about the world. It quickly goes stale unless it is also used for writing news reports, novels, poems, research papers and business and personal letters. As for Russian help to foreign-based Russian-language media, the focus must be on the most agile and popular ones and also on those with particular interest in Kremlin-defined modernization avenues including energy, telecommunications, IT, biotechnology and aerospace. "

To further support of Russian's continuing strong existence, 62% of Belarussians, 43% of Kazakhstanians, and 38% of Ukrainians claim Russian as the primary language spoken at home (even more speak both Russian and the state's official language at home) according to a study done in 2007 by V.A. Tishkov. This could be attributed to the large amount of Russian media available in these countries, and the once mandatory teaching of Russian under the Soviet Union.

I find it interesting that such a strong emphasis is placed on doing research and providing information in Russian in order to increase its international economic stance. If we do choose to look at language as a influential force in the economic and residential sphere, we are left also to ponder about whether it is worth it, economically, to revive old languages. If the more popular languages are what gives a country economic competitiveness, reviving old languages would remain as a personal pleasure. In essence, knowing a dying language may not be valuable in economics.

Reference:

http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/05/22/8300689.html

http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/05/23/8330556.html

http://www.springerlink.com/content/8mk9305667621w66/fulltext.pdf

http://www.languagehelpers.com/languagefacts/russian.html

Arizona law and the language of debate

The new Arizona law allowing police officer to question a persons legal status upon "reasonable suspicion" has caused quite a stir across the nation. Cities across the nation have even taken to boycotting business with Arizona, for fear that their new law will cause an increase of unreasonable racial profiling. The deeper issue, however, are the problems with illegal/legal immigration. Citizens across the country cry foul at the supposed wrongs that illegal immigrants bring to citizens, such as "stealing jobs" by accepting low wages.

An article by Kevin Drum from the journalism site Mother Jones comments that the upset actually is more cultural and language angst rather than economic worries. But what was also interesting was reading the comments on the article, and looking at the language choices of the readers when discussing this issue of cultural, linguistic, and economic worries.

Some often used words and phrases:

illegal immigrants

aliens

accepting low wages

consuming tax money

we are all immigrants

legal and illegal

average citizen

foreign languages

assimilation

racism

Overall, despite any research an article might mention or if it is sided pro or con illegal immigration, there is a general economic and cultural worry. Often the cons are defending themselves against racism, and categories such as citizen, legal, and illegal classify people in groups ranging from superior to alien (respectively). Historically, there was always argument against immigration in the United States for fear of some cultural overhaul. The difference between now and then is that racism used to be "acceptable." Now, many people are arguing the same battles but with politically correct language in an effort to (at least what some say) mask their underlying racism. The question I am now considering is whether or not such politically correct language truly marks racist and stereotypical ideas we claimed to have eliminated? Is it simply a resurface of old ideas in new language?

Reference:

http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/05/immigration-and-economy

Necessity of Language in the Medical Field

I read an article from a surgeon speaking about the current need for Spanish-speaking doctors. There are 34 million foreign people, and in big cities such as New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco, English for many patients is a second language. Doctors now worry that even though they have no part in the new laws in Arizona, that patients wont come in for fear of being questioned. Their ailments can then worsen.

As of now, many hospitals rely on telephone lines that connect them to translators when they are unable to speak with a patient, Spanish or other (and apparently family members are not always trustworthy translators). Patients do feel a sense of relief when they are finally able to be understood.

"So I picked up the phone and dialed into the language line. I put it on speaker so she and her daughter could hear. "Brotha," the patient responded with an instant smile. (Ibo and English must overlap.) The medical translator was on the phone from South Carolina. By the end, my patient had all her questions answered and seemed much more at ease with the prospect of surgery. I also know how to greet my next Ibo patient."

However, with the exception of languages rarer in the US, I think there is a valid need for more doctors who speak multiple languages, such as Spanish and Chinese. In my Spanish for medical students class fall quarter, I was tearing down not only the language barrier that may exist between me and my future patients, but also cultural barriers. It simply is not enough to know a language, because with it come cultural traditions. For example, many Spanish patients may be treating themselves with "zumos," or home remedies. With American doctors, they may fear talking about it for fear of ridicule. It also has to be understood why some Spanish patients may say that they haven't been taking their medicine (they may believe it should only be taken when they are feeling worse). Other Spanish patients suffer from depression because of problems at home (family is very important, traditionally), and may not go to appointments at all because they wish to stay at home. By simply knowing Spanish vocabulary, all of these warning signs may be missed. With language must come a cultural understanding so the patient, especially immigrants, will feel comfortable and safe.

Reference:

http://www.philly.com/inquirer/health_science/weekly/20100510_Scrubbing_In__It_s_critical_to_speak_patient_s_language.html

More on how brains learn language

In the article about brain aphasia (couple posts down), we saw the possibility of languages being learned in seperate areas of the brain. Studies also showed that languages learned later in life did not use Broca's area, unlike first languages, suggesting a critical period for the plasticity of Broca's area. However, a study done at the University of Rochester showed that much of our use of language lies in the adaptability of different parts of our brain, not necessarily special areas that differentiate us from other species.

Researchers found that we use different parts of our brain to interpret different types of grammar. Two types of grammer studies was "word-order" sentences, and inflectional sentences. Word-order sentences are what we use in English, subject - verb - object. Ex: Sally greets Bob. We are able to tell by the word order who is the subject performing the action. Languages such as Spanish use reflexive verbs to convey subject-object relationships. Researchers created a study using american sign language, which uses both types of grammar. The results showed that we used parts of brain designed to accomplish other cognitive tasks to determine the subject-object relationships when they showed videos to sign language users.

"In fact, Newman said, in trying to understand different types of grammar, humans draw on regions of the brain that are designed to accomplish primitive tasks that relate to the type of sentence they are trying to interpret. For instance, a word order sentence draws on parts of the frontal cortex that give humans the ability to put information into sequences, while an inflectional sentence draws on parts of the temporal lobe that specialize in dividing information into its constituent parts, the study demonstrated."

We are left with several questions based on this study. 1) What differentiates our brain from other animals that allows us to develop sophisticated spoken language? 2) How does this explain brain aphasia, and the 13-year old's inability to speak Croation after a coma? and 3) Will this change how we teach language to stroke victims? If they have a stroke in their frontal cortex, should we try to teach them an inflectional language?

Reference:

http://www.dnaindia.com/scitech/report_how-the-human-brain-learns-language_1377227

http://www.rochester.edu/news/show.php?id=3610

Polish Translation vs. English Translation

(1) In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. (2) Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters. (3) And God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. (4) God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. (5) God called the light "day," and the darkness he called "night." And there was evening, and there was morning-the first day.

1) Na początku Bóg stworzył niebo i ziemię. (2) Teraz Ziemia zaś była bezładem i pustkowiem: ciemność była nad powierzchnią bezmiaru wód, a Duch Boży unosił się nad wodami. (3) Wtedy Bóg powiedział: "Niechaj się stanie światłość", i stała się światłość. (4) Widział Bóg, że światłość jest dobra, i on oddzielił światło od ciemności. (5) I nazwał Bóg światłość dniem, a ciemność nazwał nocą. " I tak upłynął wieczór i poranek, dzień pierwszy.

Some difficulties in translating from English to Polish is that there are no articles such as "the", "a", or "an". Instead of "let there be light", the more proper Polish translation says "let there happen light", to signify that it was created, and not just brought in. The major difference is that Polish verbs show the gender of the person who is performing the action. "Called", as in named, is "nazwał" in Polish. To say he named, you can simply say "nazwał"; however, if a female is performing the action, the word would be "nazwała." Thus, this automatically gives a masculine gender to God in the Polish translation.

Another interesting difference is that even though Polish doesn't have gender specific articles for nouns like in Spanish, such as la or el, the translation for "that" in Polish does correspond to gender ("ten" and "tamta").

Bilingual Aphasia

This is an amazing story that to my bewilderment, apparently happens somewhat often amongst coma patients. A 13-year old Croatian girl woke up from a 24 hours coma speaking not her native Croatian, but German. She has just started studying German in school, and has been watching TV shows and reading books in order to improve, according to various sources. However, according to her parents, she was "by no means fluent." Doctors believe that a swelling of the injured part of her brain has disrupted neural connections, causing her to lack access to the part of her brain where her Croatian language skills are. A positive explanation is still unclear.

Nevertheless, this case provides support for the theory that second language acquisition occurs in separate areas of the brain. A study conducted in 1997 showed the following findings relating to this theory:

"In 1997, Kim et al used the fMRI method to examine cortical activation among a range of bilinguals who were proficient in various languages. The participant pool was divided into two groups, early (L2 acquisition before the age of five) and late (after the age of twelve) bilinguals. The results suggested anatomical variation between early and late bilinguals such that although early bilinguals showed similar activation in both Broca's and Wernicke's areas during a silent sentence generation task while late bilinguals displayed common activation in Wernicke's but not in Broca's area. These results indicate a role for late language acquisition, suggesting that the "critical period" concept cannot be discarded and that to some extent language learning after a certain age is differentially represented in the brain. "

We talked about the debunking of the "critical period" of language acquisition, but there may be some truth to it. It's possible that after a certain age, we don't lose the capability of learning languages, but instead lose an anatomical availability to acquiring a language. Meaning that the increasing difficulty of learning a language is somehow due to the degeneration of brain plasticity.

If indeed it is the case that we harbor language skills in different areas of the brain, it simply serves as further support for learning new languages. A brain injury may inhibit the use of one language, but at the same time increase the fluency of another, as in the case of this 13 year old girl. Indeed, there is much more to study within the realm of neuroscience and language acquisition and maintenance.

References:

Story:

http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474978194066

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/croatia/7583971/Croatian-teenager-wakes-from-coma-speaking-fluent-German.html

Study:

http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/exchange/node/1902

The new language of...texting?

I always thought that we are butchering our languages by the use of texting - a shorthand that changes "you're" into "ur" and "talk to you later" into "ttyl." Then came along words such as sexting, where two people would use texting to send graphic notes to each other. However, never before have I heard of words such as chexting or drexing (cheating via text or texting while drunk, respectively) being used around texting. I then realized the article is on a Canadian website, so maybe those words are more popular there.

Nevertheless, 35.3 billion texts were sent in Canada last year. That is certainly enough to swing pop culture in a certain direction, and increase of a staggering 70% from the previous year. This quick change in culture has also had a relatively quick impact on our language vocabulary.

Erin McKeon, CEO of Wordnik, an online dictionary that tracks real-time language shifts, says:

"We know that language changes all the time, but it's usually like the movement of tectonic plates — slow and not necessarily affecting our day to day lives...Then something erupts and it's like, 'WOW!'

McKeon goes on to say that althought there is a massive input of new words being used in association with texting, most of it will be phased out as texting becomes a normal thing, and not a novelty. However, this article has sparked some extra questions in my mind that maybe we can discuss in class. Are new forms of communication affecting our language skills/vocabulary? Is it always negative?

References:

http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/Hugely+popular+text+messaging+spawns+language+change/2930387/story.html

Elementary Schools & Languages

We have all heard it before. It is easier to learn a language earlier in life, as a child, than it is as an adult. Then why are elementary schools across the country cutting their language classes?

"There's a window of opportunity for language acquisition, says professor Charles Grove of West Chester University, who specializes in teaching foreign language teachers.....Professor Grove says that while you can get the basics of another language later in life, it's starting young that gives the best chance for high level, native-speaker proficiency."

For some reason, Charles Grove says, foreign language classes are being viewed as special commodities. The money that could pay for those classes instead goes towards traditional subjects like mathematics and language arts. However, there is an increasing need for multi-lingual speakers in today's world. And whether it's for pure pleasure, or for career purposes, adults in the US and across the world are scrambling to learn a second, third, or fourth language.

A study led by Rachel Mayberry of McGill University, along with Elizabeth Lock of the University of Ottawa and Hena Kazmi of the University of Western Ontario in 2002 concluded that new language learning is very much linked to early language experience. They collected data that showed that people who were born deaf had a more difficult time learning sign language than people who became deaf later in life had higher results in ASL performance. Thus it could be concluded that some kind of language experience early in life allowed for better learning in the future. This of course explains why we are able to start learning a language at any point in life. But it might also imply that those of us who hit plateaus simply didn't have enough exposure to different languages. Overall, however, childhood seems to be the most conducive time to learn languages, as the brain is at an optimal stage to form new neural connections.

So with all this reasoning supporting language-learning early on in life, why are schools cutting foreign language classes? The answer may lie in how we learn languages. A study published in 2007 in the journal Psychological Science, states that we face another language barrier called first-language attrition, in which we momentarily forget words in our native language after spending time being immersed in a foreign one. It is quite a peculiar mechanism. Our brains actually inhibit, not forget, our native languages in order to help learn new ones:

"In the study, native English speakers who had completed at least one year of college level Spanish were asked to repeatedly name objects in Spanish. The more the students were asked to repeat the Spanish words, the more difficulty they had generating the corresponding English labels for the objects. In other words, naming objects in another language inhibits the corresponding labels in the native language, making them more difficult to retrieve later."

However, the article continues to say that as we achieve fluency in both languages, the necessity for native-language inhibition becomes superfluous. My hypothesis, based on this study, is that elementary schools are facing problems with English-inhibition in the early stages of learning a foreign language. Though if we allow the children to continue studying the language until they become bilingual, we would see that this inhibition would cease to exist. Schools should maintain a strong support for foreign language classes, as these will only become more useful in years to come, as diversity in the US increases.

Articles:

Schools:

http://www.kyw1060.com/In-Elementary-Schools--Fewer-Foreign-Language-Cour/6810706

Language Experience Study:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2002/05/020502072204.htm

Language Inhibition:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/01/070118094015.htm

Languages & Plane Crashes

In the last class, we mentioned the plane crash stories that were analyzed by Malcolm Gladwell in his book, Outliers. I came across an article that speculated a possible cause of the Polish plane crash might have been a language barrier between the pilots and the Russians at Smolensk Airport.

"The Russian air traffic controller Pavel Plusnin – who was the last person to talk to the crew of President Lech Kaczynski's Tupolev 154 before it crashed – said he had difficulties understanding the crew who he said spoke poor Russian.

"Numbers were hard for them so I could not determine their altitude," he told a Russian news portal"

It is staggering to imagine that over half of airplane crashes are due to human error. Could many of these be due to language barriers? That, of course, is one very valid assumption. Gladwell also offers the argument that culture's influence on languages can affect communication between pilots and air traffic controllers. For instance, Flight 052, a Columbian jet that crashed in January 1990. The first officer not only failed to express the gravity of the situation to the ATC (did not repeat "emergency" as the captain said it), but it is believed that his calm speaking tone was due to the nature of his language and culture. In other words, his language and culture didn't permit him to speak to his superiors in any other tone of voice.

If the recent plane crash in Smolensk was due to a language barrier, and if Columbian culture and Spanish language teach one to speak in a formal voice to one's superiors, is there a cause to use a universal language amongst plane carriers? Is English best fit for the job? With hundreds of international flights every day, we can imagine that many pilots are at least somewhat familiar with the language of their destination. But is there a culture beyond language that has to be taught as well?

"investigators had "concluded there were no conditions for landing". The plane tried to land despite being advised by air traffic control "not to do so" he said."

In the above, we also see another possible problem. "Advised." The ATC simply advising the pilots to divert to another airport doesn't sound as grave if one gave a command. A simple choice of words, even if translated correctly, can lead to massive problems.

Gladwell, Malcolm. "Outliers"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/apr/12/language-president-theories-polish-air-disaster

A monopoly in languages?

I came across an article in the New York Times that described the efforts of universities such as SUNY Stony Brook to revive lost languages of native American Indian tribes. Of 300 languages that were indigenous to the United States, only 175 remain. Current scholars and ordinary families are attempting to revive their dead languages by use of documents, remembered prayers and greetings, and whatever other resources they can come across that will enlighten them with not only the vocabulary, but also the structure and grammar of these languages.

However, even if you gather a complete dictionary of the language and a book of grammar rules, you still need a group of people, even whole societies, to learn the language and become fluent. You have to speak it everyday, said Stefanie Fielding, and adviser of the Stony Brook project. And here we come across a problem. Many people are reluctant to disturb their lives with learning a "dead" language and having to work to incorporate it into their daily lives. It seems easier to just use what we already know.

You can learn a lot about a culture from the language. Referring to Stephanie Fielding and her studies of Mohegan:

"She notes, for example, that in an English conversation, a statement is typically built with the first person — “I” — coming first. In the same statement in Mohegan, however, “you” always comes first, even when the speaker is the subject.

“This suggests a more communally minded culture,” she said."

This seems to suggest that not only are we losing languages, but also certain cultural values and knowledge of the societies that used these languages. But is it important for us to preserve these languages? Will suffer negative consequences if we lead the world to speak one language? Or will we simply lose a taste of cultural intelligence and worldly sophistication?

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/books/06language.html

Map

Hey, my name is Kathy and I'm also a freshman at Stanford. I am undeclared, but considering majoring in biology or human biology. I am on a pre-med track, with a possible intention of becoming a doctor.

I wanted to take this class because it seems like it will be able to string together many questions I have had about the influence of language amongst people and creation of society. Languages are our main choice of communication, and it is important to study them in order to make the best of our communication skills. I mean, not only studying languages, but how they impact our growth, thinking, and perspective.

As an immigrant from Poland, I was exposed to many languages at a young age. I am fluent in Polish, which is the sole language I speak at home. Sometimes English words trickle in, and we watch some English tv, but I generally speak to my family in Polish. Thus, my reading, writing, and speaking skills have developed on their own in this language. I recall during my first year of American school bringing home cassettes and books that would help me learn English. My mom and I listened to and read these together. Like I said before, I initially believed that when you speak a different language, the other person hears you in Polish. Wasn't I a patriotic little girl? Hahaha...

I hope that with this class, along with continuing my studies in Spanish and maybe other languages, I can gain a new perspective on culture and society. It's always interesting to note the influence of culture in a person's belief and speech (such as much of the less developed world believes in home remedies as opposed to western medicine - important to note as a doctor when speaking with patients). However, it's time to establish a further understanding by analyzing the impact of language on cognitive thinking, beliefs, and structure of society in order to understand others beyond a comprehension of words.