Recently, I have been very interested in language, especially how there came to be so many vastly different languages today. My theory before researching this topic was that there must have been one original language from which all other languages were derived, and regional accents that developed eventually become so different until they became their own distinct language. This cycle has been perpetuating for ages, and is still continuing today.
While researching I inevitably came upon the biblical story of the Tower of Babel. For those of you who are unfamiliar with the story (I had heard that the Tower of Babel was the cause of different languages, but new none of the specifics before reading about it), the Tower of Babel was built by humans who all spoke the same language. The purpose of the Tower was to bridge the gap between heaven and earth. God knew about the man’s goals and believing that it would only cause people to leave Him, He made it so that no one could understand each other and spread them across the earth. Since I am not a very religious person, I was unsatisfied with this answer and continued to search.
I next came upon an answer that I believed was much more practical and had evidence to support its claims. Most of us have probably heard of the Romance languages (Spanish, French, Italian, Portuguese, and Romanian) that were derived from Latin. We know that these languages are related to one another because we are able to analyze their texts and can see that they all share similar roots. From further analysis it was determined that there was an even more ancient ancestor that was shared not only by these 5 languages, but also by Germanic and Slavic languages. However Germanic and Slavic languages have no ancestral languages that had written texts and the similarity was determined by phonetics. These unknown ancestral languages are called Proto-Germanic and Proto-Slavic. And it was determined that there was an even older ancestor that includes most Indo-European languages. There is then an even older language that is more encompassing called Eurasiatic languages that includes the Indo-European languages, as well as Altaic (Turkish, Japanese, Korean, ect…), Uralic (Hungarian, Finnish, ect…), Eskimo-Aluet, and Chukchi-Kamchatkan languages. It is believed that this continues back even further to when modern man evolved fifty-thousand years ago, and there is DNA evidence gathered from bones of this species of man that has been used to draw correlations between when the genes began to rapidly change and the development of language. For a more detailed explanation and interesting examples visit this site.
After researching this topic, I am even more intrigued by language and would like to explore in a future blog post how we determined what a rock was and how we associate a definition with a mix of sounds.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Freudian Slips
Most of us have probably at least heard the name Sigmund Freud. You may only know of him as the psychologist guy from a long time ago, and I’ll admit that my knowledge of his is very rudimentary. You may not know what he theorized in the field of the subconscious, but you have probably heard the term derived from his namesake, a Freudian slip.
For those of you who haven’t, a Freudian slip, or parapraxis, are commonly thought of as ‘slips of the tongue’ or unconsciously saying something that you didn’t otherwise mean to say, but in terms of psychoanalysis, things such as misplacing objects, mishearing or reading, and forgetfulness are also included within the Freudian slip theory. As entertaining as some of the examples might be, like calling a girlfriend by the name of your ex, it is believed that these ‘slips’ reveal what you are actually thinking about or what is repressed.
Here is a brief video of some examples if you are still unclear about what exactly they are (for some reason many of these slips lead to sexual references).
If in fact these ‘slips’ are caused by repressed thoughts on certain topics, then can’t these subtle, and often times, missed bits of communication function as a window into the beliefs of a society or someone’s past that they have tried to block out? By delving into the source of the ‘slip’ we would consequently be uniting the conscious with the unconscious. This raises another question: do we truly want to have only one consciousness or would we be better off with having conscious and unconscious thought?
Freudian slips are not restricted to speech but can also pop up in writing. It is these intricacies that can help investigate the psyche of the characters. I am planning on looking specifically for these Freudian slips as my class finishes reading Hamlet by William Shakespeare. I believe that it will be the specific words he says, or unconsciously says, that will reveal whether or not Hamlet is actually insane, an issue that has already be broached in class.
For those of you who haven’t, a Freudian slip, or parapraxis, are commonly thought of as ‘slips of the tongue’ or unconsciously saying something that you didn’t otherwise mean to say, but in terms of psychoanalysis, things such as misplacing objects, mishearing or reading, and forgetfulness are also included within the Freudian slip theory. As entertaining as some of the examples might be, like calling a girlfriend by the name of your ex, it is believed that these ‘slips’ reveal what you are actually thinking about or what is repressed.
Here is a brief video of some examples if you are still unclear about what exactly they are (for some reason many of these slips lead to sexual references).
If in fact these ‘slips’ are caused by repressed thoughts on certain topics, then can’t these subtle, and often times, missed bits of communication function as a window into the beliefs of a society or someone’s past that they have tried to block out? By delving into the source of the ‘slip’ we would consequently be uniting the conscious with the unconscious. This raises another question: do we truly want to have only one consciousness or would we be better off with having conscious and unconscious thought?
Freudian slips are not restricted to speech but can also pop up in writing. It is these intricacies that can help investigate the psyche of the characters. I am planning on looking specifically for these Freudian slips as my class finishes reading Hamlet by William Shakespeare. I believe that it will be the specific words he says, or unconsciously says, that will reveal whether or not Hamlet is actually insane, an issue that has already be broached in class.
Monday, February 13, 2012
Sounds have Meaning?
In class we have been talking a lot about how the sound of words can add meaning to a passage, line, poem, or any other work of literature. To be honest, I don’t really think that I buy it. The best example I have to demonstrate this skepticism that I have was when I was reading in poem in my English class a few years ago, and my teacher was convinced that the repetition of the “p” sound was intentionally put there to mimic the sound of gunfire.
I think that often we are subject of over analyzing whatever we are reading, and in the end we make something out of nothing. The following graphic is a depiction of this stance that one of my friends had posted up on Facebook (pardon the language).
I find that over analyzing just beats any piece of writing to death and makes me end up disliking many of the books that I read in school simply because I believe that we over analyzed them and attempted to synthesize meaning that simply wasn’t there. And for me, this idea of the sound of words having meaning seems too far-fetched. When I tried to get people to help me understand this apparently logical idea, I’ve gotten clear explanations like, “It makes sense to me.” or my personal favorite, “I play music so that’s why I understand it.” Well, I play music too and have been for longer than most people I know, and it still isn’t clear.
So I guess that I asking if there is anyone who can give a clear explanation of this concept because if I am missing something that is really cool from a literary stance, than I want to understand. I also don’t want an answer like, “Some people get and some people don’t.” It’s like understanding this concept is having membership to an exclusive club where the only way to become a member is to know the secret, but members aren’t allowed to tell the secret to anyone. There is nothing more frustrating.
I think that often we are subject of over analyzing whatever we are reading, and in the end we make something out of nothing. The following graphic is a depiction of this stance that one of my friends had posted up on Facebook (pardon the language).
I find that over analyzing just beats any piece of writing to death and makes me end up disliking many of the books that I read in school simply because I believe that we over analyzed them and attempted to synthesize meaning that simply wasn’t there. And for me, this idea of the sound of words having meaning seems too far-fetched. When I tried to get people to help me understand this apparently logical idea, I’ve gotten clear explanations like, “It makes sense to me.” or my personal favorite, “I play music so that’s why I understand it.” Well, I play music too and have been for longer than most people I know, and it still isn’t clear.
So I guess that I asking if there is anyone who can give a clear explanation of this concept because if I am missing something that is really cool from a literary stance, than I want to understand. I also don’t want an answer like, “Some people get and some people don’t.” It’s like understanding this concept is having membership to an exclusive club where the only way to become a member is to know the secret, but members aren’t allowed to tell the secret to anyone. There is nothing more frustrating.
Sunday, February 5, 2012
Translations: Good or Bad?
Recently in class, we have been talking about the importance of translations of texts. What is lost in translation? Do the benefits of reading a translation outweigh imperfect translation and not being able to completely understand the work completely because of the language barrier? There are words and phrases that just don’t translate that may have cultural importance. If those cannot be effectively translated, then there may not be a point in reading a translated work because ignorance is better than an incomplete truth.
In languages such as Spanish there are three forms of “you.” The first is used when talking to someone older than you or in a polite atmosphere, whereas the second form is used in a much more casual sense, like that between friends, and the third is used when talking to many people that you are referring to as “you”. In English, there is no such distinction. “You” stands for all of those things. When translating into English from Spanish, this poses a problem because in Spanish because the different forms give a sense of a social hierarchy which could lead to completely different understandings in English and Spanish versions.
Do challenges like this mean that translations are useless and should not be read? Well, this is a topic that my class debated for a while without coming to a clear resolution. Translations can windows into the cultures of other peoples and can offer a perspective of that culture that cannot be understood by simply studying their history. There is a reason that people say you cannot be fluent in another language until you have immersed yourself within that culture because there are too many linguistic nuances that are impossible to learn in a classroom. At the same time, while translations can lead to alternative meanings in different languages, the same story can cause people to reach different conclusions within its original language. For example, Islamic terrorism has risen out of an interpretation of the Quran in Arabic. I doubt that authors would oppose these differing conclusions because they would only lead to dialogue about issues broached in their works.
You could argue that translations cause more harm and misunderstanding that they do good, but I would argue the opposite. They provide a new perspective of alternative cultures that is unattainable otherwise, and they create a dialogue from different understandings that can only lead to more complete understanding of a topic from an intellectual level.
In languages such as Spanish there are three forms of “you.” The first is used when talking to someone older than you or in a polite atmosphere, whereas the second form is used in a much more casual sense, like that between friends, and the third is used when talking to many people that you are referring to as “you”. In English, there is no such distinction. “You” stands for all of those things. When translating into English from Spanish, this poses a problem because in Spanish because the different forms give a sense of a social hierarchy which could lead to completely different understandings in English and Spanish versions.
Do challenges like this mean that translations are useless and should not be read? Well, this is a topic that my class debated for a while without coming to a clear resolution. Translations can windows into the cultures of other peoples and can offer a perspective of that culture that cannot be understood by simply studying their history. There is a reason that people say you cannot be fluent in another language until you have immersed yourself within that culture because there are too many linguistic nuances that are impossible to learn in a classroom. At the same time, while translations can lead to alternative meanings in different languages, the same story can cause people to reach different conclusions within its original language. For example, Islamic terrorism has risen out of an interpretation of the Quran in Arabic. I doubt that authors would oppose these differing conclusions because they would only lead to dialogue about issues broached in their works.
You could argue that translations cause more harm and misunderstanding that they do good, but I would argue the opposite. They provide a new perspective of alternative cultures that is unattainable otherwise, and they create a dialogue from different understandings that can only lead to more complete understanding of a topic from an intellectual level.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Wordless
I would like to share with you one of my favorite picture books: Why? by Nikolai Papov. 
What is so unique about this book is that there are no words throughout; the entire book is pictures. Here you can actually see all of the pages of the book, but due to concerns on the legality of having the pages directly on this blog I have chosen to provide the link.
You may thing think that there can’t be much complexity to picture books, especially one with no words, but some are far from simple. A misconception that has always bothered me is that picture books are meant only for children. Picture book authors are faced with the challenge of having to take a complicated topic and make it understandable at a basic level so that all ages can gain something from it. Why? accomplishes this extremely well. The main theme of this picture book is war, and he navigates this topic exquisitely, and even with a little bit of humor, a necessity in this instance, to lighten up the density and heaviness of a topic like war. He took this topic and artfully demonstrates the idea that in war all sides lose, and that once a war starts both sides lose sight of the reason they’re fighting and get wrapped up in retaliation and revenge.
His decision to create this picture book without words is an intelligent one that is done with a purpose. When words and pictures are on a page, I, and many other people, tend to gloss over the pictures and not give the graphics that attention and analysis that they deserve. The misconception is that you don’t have to pay attention to the graphics or pictures because the words will tell the story. But there are often vital details in the pictures. By choosing only pictures as his method of communication, Papov, is forcing people to focus only on the pictures and search out the details in the illustrations that would go unnoticed otherwise. For example, and my favorite detail in the entire book, on the last Papov refers back to the beginning of the book by having the frog hold what the rat held and having the rat hold what the frog held.
In addition to referring to earlier portions of the story to create meaning, Papov also frequently uses foreshadowing. That just goes to show that Papov has kept the picture book at a high level literarily buy using literary techniques. The use of foreshadowing in the books really helps to keep the audience actively engaged in the book and continuing to search for the tiny details.
I would highly recommend this book to everyone because of its high quality and unique nature. Once you finish the book, you can’t help but stop and think about what you have read and go back and examine all of the pictures again, and hopefully after reading this, you will have a greater appreciation for all of the additional information that a simple picture can articulate.
What is so unique about this book is that there are no words throughout; the entire book is pictures. Here you can actually see all of the pages of the book, but due to concerns on the legality of having the pages directly on this blog I have chosen to provide the link.You may thing think that there can’t be much complexity to picture books, especially one with no words, but some are far from simple. A misconception that has always bothered me is that picture books are meant only for children. Picture book authors are faced with the challenge of having to take a complicated topic and make it understandable at a basic level so that all ages can gain something from it. Why? accomplishes this extremely well. The main theme of this picture book is war, and he navigates this topic exquisitely, and even with a little bit of humor, a necessity in this instance, to lighten up the density and heaviness of a topic like war. He took this topic and artfully demonstrates the idea that in war all sides lose, and that once a war starts both sides lose sight of the reason they’re fighting and get wrapped up in retaliation and revenge.
His decision to create this picture book without words is an intelligent one that is done with a purpose. When words and pictures are on a page, I, and many other people, tend to gloss over the pictures and not give the graphics that attention and analysis that they deserve. The misconception is that you don’t have to pay attention to the graphics or pictures because the words will tell the story. But there are often vital details in the pictures. By choosing only pictures as his method of communication, Papov, is forcing people to focus only on the pictures and search out the details in the illustrations that would go unnoticed otherwise. For example, and my favorite detail in the entire book, on the last Papov refers back to the beginning of the book by having the frog hold what the rat held and having the rat hold what the frog held.
In addition to referring to earlier portions of the story to create meaning, Papov also frequently uses foreshadowing. That just goes to show that Papov has kept the picture book at a high level literarily buy using literary techniques. The use of foreshadowing in the books really helps to keep the audience actively engaged in the book and continuing to search for the tiny details.
I would highly recommend this book to everyone because of its high quality and unique nature. Once you finish the book, you can’t help but stop and think about what you have read and go back and examine all of the pictures again, and hopefully after reading this, you will have a greater appreciation for all of the additional information that a simple picture can articulate.
Friday, December 16, 2011
Translations
Essentially a language is only a set of sounds to which the speaker of that language applies meaning. Over the course of time how did certain sounds accumulate meaning over others and develop into a language? It is fascinating. How can two sounds that are so different mean the same thing? When translating, what is lost?
I won’t try and pretend that I have the qualifications of a linguist to talk about how at some point in time this happened or that happened that caused some language to be born. What I do think is interesting that I can at least call attention to is that the number of synonyms and idiomatic phrases can be indicative of what the people of a specific language think as important. For example, the Inuit people in Alaska have over thirty different words for snow. That would make sense. They live in a place where they are surrounded by snow all the time. The snow is a part of their life. Also in the United States, I think that it would be fair to say that people are extremely motivated to be successful in their career. That can be reflected in the number of words that exist in English for money (cash, moolah, dough, bucks, buckaroos, ect…).
This is a big reason as to why it is so challenging to translate from one language to another. Sometimes there just isn’t a word to accurately translate. If it occurs only a couple of times then it might not severely impact the meaning, but the more words that don’t have an accurately translation, the more the original meaning becomes convoluted. Often times in order to garner meaning for a foreign work, you don’t need a translation but instead just need to listen to the words and the tone in which they are spoken, but that’s a post for another time. Therefore, in the spirit of the holiday season, I would like to leave two videos for you in hopes that they can say what I was unable to. They are both the song Silent Night, but the first one is in English while the second one is in its original language, German, and known as Stiller Nacht.
I won’t try and pretend that I have the qualifications of a linguist to talk about how at some point in time this happened or that happened that caused some language to be born. What I do think is interesting that I can at least call attention to is that the number of synonyms and idiomatic phrases can be indicative of what the people of a specific language think as important. For example, the Inuit people in Alaska have over thirty different words for snow. That would make sense. They live in a place where they are surrounded by snow all the time. The snow is a part of their life. Also in the United States, I think that it would be fair to say that people are extremely motivated to be successful in their career. That can be reflected in the number of words that exist in English for money (cash, moolah, dough, bucks, buckaroos, ect…).
This is a big reason as to why it is so challenging to translate from one language to another. Sometimes there just isn’t a word to accurately translate. If it occurs only a couple of times then it might not severely impact the meaning, but the more words that don’t have an accurately translation, the more the original meaning becomes convoluted. Often times in order to garner meaning for a foreign work, you don’t need a translation but instead just need to listen to the words and the tone in which they are spoken, but that’s a post for another time. Therefore, in the spirit of the holiday season, I would like to leave two videos for you in hopes that they can say what I was unable to. They are both the song Silent Night, but the first one is in English while the second one is in its original language, German, and known as Stiller Nacht.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Bacterial Communication
Have you every wondered why we get sick? Maybe not, but the answer is incredible. With so many bacteria within our bodies, it doesn’t seem possible that we would ever get sick because our immune system would go into action. Well, bacteria while small are great communicators.
Bacteria talk to each other. I don’t mean that literally, but they can recognize how many cells around them are the same bacteria and how many cells around them are different bacteria, and all of this is done on the microscopic level. Bacteria accomplish this with a very simple system of two receptors and two molecules.
Every bacterium makes two molecules, one that is specific to that bacteria and one that is a generic molecule produced by all bacteria. These molecules fit into receptors that are embedded within the bacterial membrane, and again, one is specific and another is generic. Now the really cool part happens. Based just upon these two molecules, the bacterium can identify how many bacteria like it are in the same area and how many bacteria that are different are in the same area. Once there are enough bacteria present, then they all act at once (keep in mind though that most bacteria do not cause us to get sick). The pathogenic bacteria know that by themselves they won’t be effective therefore, they accumulate and multiply, almost like preparing for war, and attack simultaneously. If you would like to learn more specifics about cell communication or see graphics to help with your understanding of the process then watch this TED video, and even if you don’t I would still recommend watching the video because it is fascinating.
This concept could be central to the next wave of antibiotics and anti-bacterial drugs. Now many bacteria are becoming resistant to modern drugs because they are commonly designed to cause the bacterium to explode, or interfere with its replication process, but as a result we are causing natural selection to occur and making the bacteria even harder to fight. Therefore, if drugs can be developed to prevent the attacking bacteria from recognizing that there are enough of them to attack by creating molecule that would attack to the specific or generic receptor, then the bacteria won’t be able to count the other bacteria around them and they will stop their attack. The next wave of medicine will be the result of bacterial communication.
Bacteria talk to each other. I don’t mean that literally, but they can recognize how many cells around them are the same bacteria and how many cells around them are different bacteria, and all of this is done on the microscopic level. Bacteria accomplish this with a very simple system of two receptors and two molecules.
Every bacterium makes two molecules, one that is specific to that bacteria and one that is a generic molecule produced by all bacteria. These molecules fit into receptors that are embedded within the bacterial membrane, and again, one is specific and another is generic. Now the really cool part happens. Based just upon these two molecules, the bacterium can identify how many bacteria like it are in the same area and how many bacteria that are different are in the same area. Once there are enough bacteria present, then they all act at once (keep in mind though that most bacteria do not cause us to get sick). The pathogenic bacteria know that by themselves they won’t be effective therefore, they accumulate and multiply, almost like preparing for war, and attack simultaneously. If you would like to learn more specifics about cell communication or see graphics to help with your understanding of the process then watch this TED video, and even if you don’t I would still recommend watching the video because it is fascinating.
This concept could be central to the next wave of antibiotics and anti-bacterial drugs. Now many bacteria are becoming resistant to modern drugs because they are commonly designed to cause the bacterium to explode, or interfere with its replication process, but as a result we are causing natural selection to occur and making the bacteria even harder to fight. Therefore, if drugs can be developed to prevent the attacking bacteria from recognizing that there are enough of them to attack by creating molecule that would attack to the specific or generic receptor, then the bacteria won’t be able to count the other bacteria around them and they will stop their attack. The next wave of medicine will be the result of bacterial communication.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)