What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

What does English sound like?

Clint

Stay chooned in for more!
I was reading about the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis because I've got far too much free time on my hands, and I was thinking. Before you say 'Uh oh, there was his first mistake" answer me. What does English sound like to someone who can't speak it?

When I hear German or French or Spanish or an Asian language (can't differentiate between them at this point!) I can clearly say "Well that sounds like French/German/Spanish/Whatever" because it's got a "musical" quality since I don't attach meanings to the sound. For example if you hear a song in Spanish without knowing Spanish, it sounds one way, but once you know Spanish it's different. Is anyone following me? It's like the foreign words are being produced from an instrument rather than a person, and are music not lyrics. So, being only fluent in English, is it pretty or ugly or fast or slow or deep or high or what? Is it beautiful or silly or technical? For example, when I hear Spanish, I think it's sexy and fast. French is romantic but not sexy, Italian is "warm" and rich and German, to me at least, sounds angry (sorry!)


Wikipedia's words are better than my own, and it says "Put simply, the hypothesis argues that the nature of a particular language influences the habitual thought of its speakers. Different patterns of language yield different patterns of thought. This idea challenges the possibility of representing the world perfectly with language, because it acknowledges that the mechanisms of any language condition the thoughts of its community of speakers. The hypothesis emerged in many formulations, some weak and some strong. " What do you guys think? Does speaking a language make you think a certain way? If so, how would you say English speakers (not just Americans) or French or Germans or the Japanese behave? Any correlation to their language?

While we're at it, what does English text LOOK like? What do words look like? I'm looking at Arabic right now for example, and to me it looks more like.... I don't know what. A single image.

I guess what I'm asking is you know how people who don't know a language will make something up? Like fake-french or fake-chinese. What would say, a chinese-person (or any one who doesn't speak English) say in fake-English? Just so I'm clear I don't mean things in the context of accents, say southern or northern or Minnesota. I also mean generally, since all language differs from person to person. What does American english sound like compared to Australian or British or New Zealand or even Singaporean English?
 
I've thought about similar things. I always wonder if different countries have stereotype english words/sounds that they say to imitate the english language that they don't know.
 
I'm guessing Clint had too many tabs open when he created this thread and posted in the wrong forum. I'm moving this to the general discussion forum unless there is something I'm missing.

Anyways, I think that everything affects a person and the way they behave; including language. If anything, English (at least American English) influences the way people behave and communicate via alternate forms of word based communication (i.e. text messaging, "IM-speak," etc.). Of course, I've never participated in Japanese text messaging so that could be universal!

Maybe if everyone had continued to speak the legendary Babel language it would be universal.

xvart.
 
I know what you mean by musical quality of some languages, I think of that often because I work with 98% non-white americans, asians, africans, russians. I read at break time while they all talk in their languages and it becomes a blurr of up and down sound.

However, when my Somali pal Ali at work is on his cell phone, music is the last thing I think of. I always ask him who won the argument when he hangs up! :)
He always laughs and just says he was excited to be speaking to his friend/wife/etc.

I can ask at work how english sounds to their ears. My own guess is to them it sounds slow, dry and unemotional.
 
OOps! Thanks for moving it!

I was reading last night (apparently lots of other people have asked this!) and the general consensus is that it sounds like we are always going rurr rurr rurr/rarr rarr rarr and that we hiss likes snakes because we use to many S's (in fact, look at how many S's I used in this post alone!) Someone said it was a glamorous language, one person said it was like geese at a cocktail party and someone said it was like barking dogs. Other people said it sounded like we sing the language. I also wonder if people's opinions of the sound of English are influenced by the media they see.

It was said somewhere that only a native born speaker can ever truly master it, and that it's very difficult to learn.
 
Accents Americans hear all the time that are not truly representative of how most English people actually speak:

1.) The queen or the royal family
2.) Bad cockney accents (see **** Van Dyck)
3.) Bad northern accents (see Daphne from Frasier)
4) Any English or Scottish accent in The Simpsons
 
A girl I work with used to live in France, and she asked them to speak French with an American accent (ze flip of vhen ve talk like zees). They imitated a thick southern drawl.
 
Anthropology talk yea. :boogie:

JLAP: Sapir-Whorf is some interesting reading. As for what English would "sound like" you have to take into consideration what the native language of the listener is. For instance when you hear German you say it sounds angry (I agree), but you have to take into consideration the fact that you are structuring your interpitation through your own thoughts. You must also consider the fact that all language is arbitrary, as it has no intrisic meaning until you are taught to assign meaning to a sound or sounds. That said, you hear "angry" sounds because your mind does not like to let things just float in space with no meaning so you assign one to it. Its the same thing as when you hear someone speaking gibberish using English phonemes you try to make sense of it. Therefore English will sound differnt to people of differnt language groups.

As for influnce of the media although it will skew the picture of how a language sounds it will also contribute to it since language is dynamic(ie loan words, pronunciation, etc). For instance I know several English people who understand everything I say including most of my slang as I am from the Midwest and this is the accent they use or try to use on most american TV. However if they start talking in English slang I am confused as to why the still use torches and not flash lights and why this girl lorrie can move so much furniture.

As for differnt scripts they are arbitrary also just like language hence the reason you dont see anything when you look at Arabic writing since you were never taught to recongnize the differnt symbols. Someone who learned arabic but never learned english would have similar thoughts though the connected letters in arabic does make it look like one long picture.

Now if you really want to mess with your mind sit down and think about this. Sapir-Whorf says that all thought is structured by your language and all thinking is done "in language". All language is arbitrary as it has no instrinsic meaning. This doesnt seem to messed up until you actully sit down and think about what it means for all thought, which tends to make your head hurt so like a good anthropologist you go and get a beer cause its all arbitrary and meaningless anyways so you might as well have a good time. :beer:
 
Deep thinking in all fields is best done in the presence of beer.

I agreed with Sapir-Whorf when I first learned about that kind of thing and probably agree even more strongly now. Even though that's the opposite of my usual opinion of deterministic things.

As for how a language sounds to those unfamiliar with it, would a non-Anglophone necessarily realize somebody from Nigeria and another from North Dakota are speaking the same language?
 
  • #10
If we learn to think without language, do we free ourselves from some mental constraint? How do you "think without language" or is it impossible? Unless you think in numbers, but can you think without any symbols or words at all? "Pure though" I guess. If there was saw a feral human with NO language, what would he think in? Would his thought be full of grunts or would his head be empty?

You're an anthropologist, do you think the actual language a person uses influences their thought? If so, do you have any examples?
 
  • #11
Good questions, Clint. It all comes down to one of the basic philosophical questions about thinking and perception: if you had no senses would you know you existed? If you have no method of describing anything or have no senses to react to you would have no method of expressing the image of yourself. Thinking without words I imagine would be just like pictures. I know when I think I am basically just talking to myself in my head.

xvart.
 
  • #12
If we learn to think without language, do we free ourselves from some mental constraint? How do you "think without language" or is it impossible? Unless you think in numbers, but can you think without any symbols or words at all? "Pure though" I guess. If there was saw a feral human with NO language, what would he think in? Would his thought be full of grunts or would his head be empty?

You're an anthropologist, do you think the actual language a person uses influences their thought? If so, do you have any examples?

In order to think with out culture you would have to nullify all culture as even culture is just a system of arbitrary symbols and actions you are taught to interpret a certain way. Thinking without language would be some kind of tranidental state much like a state of nirvana as in thought on a differnt plane than normal human thought, though completely differnt. (This is a very bad analogy but its the best I can come up with.) Or this person would be so lost they would act on instinct alone and probably not survive very long as people need culture.

I do believe language does control how you think. Think about when you think you do it in your own language or languages you speak. Even when you work with numbers you think three plus four equals seven in your head you dont just magically add the numbers with out thinking about them. As an example of how someones world is shaped by their language take the Inuit. Inuktitut has several words that describe the different forms of what we call snow as this is an integral part of their world. English speakers can never gain a view of the world similar to the Inuit unless we learn Inuktitut as English will never suffice to descirbe the world as the Inuit see it. Another example I can give you from my own experinces is using the Arabic word Jihad. I know we all think it means "holy war" but that is not correct. There are many different translation all of them wrong because they are translations. I met a man while I was in Jordan who was a native speaker of both Arabic and English as his father was English and his mother was Jordainian. He grew up with both languages spoken in the home and did not realize for quite some time that everyone didnt speak both. We some how got on the misunderstandings between the West and the Arabic world and the word Jihad came up. When I asked for an explaination of the word he told me that there was nothing in English that would suffice to translate the word and that he would have to teach me Arabic to get me to understand the true meaning. I know this is only a single word but it serves as an example of how language can shape your world. Without understanding the word you can not understand the thought pattern behind it. If you cant understand the thought pattern behind it unless you speak the language then your thoughts are structured by the language.

Does this all make sense? Did I articulate myself clearly. I am by no means a linguist I am sure a linguist could give you a better explaination and much better examples. If you want me to explain anything I said further I can give it a shot if you want.

Now I think in good anthropological tradition its time for a beer. LOL
 
  • #13
That was a good explanation! Your explanation of thinking without language reminds me of a dissociative state, actually. I always thought Jihad meant struggle, guess it's more complicated.

I do have a hard time comprehending how a language can have a word without a translation. Look at the word schadenfreude; it supposedly has no direct English translation but doesn't it just mean pleasure in someone else's pain?

It's nice to have intelligent conversation. I get tired of people asking if their VFT traps will grow back.
 
  • #14
I am not familar with schadenfreude well other than I just looked it up on the web. It is slightly differnt than Jihad though since there is no way to adequetly express its true meaning in english where as schadenfreude just takes a small sentance to explain. I would guess it would be related to the fact that German and English are in the same language family, Germanic, and are likely to have a closer aproximation of each others words. Where as if you are going from English to Arabic you are moving from the Germanic to Semetic family and therefore are less likely to have direct or close correlations of words.

And I agree an intellectual conversation is nice.

Though I have been meaning to ask I have a venus fly trap that I have been watering with tap water and fertalizing once a week and now it doesnt have any traps does it need more fertalizer or maybe more tap water to get the traps to grow back? LOL
 
  • #15
I think all it needs it some bacon bits and maybe even a little meat loaf once every three days.

Feeding it it's own dead relatives is always a good idea, apparently
 
  • #16
I'm not so sure one has to learn Arabic to understand the meaning of jihad as much as one has to have a feel for Arabic culture/society/etc. Possibly, one has to be immersed in that society because words can be loaded with all kinds of social meaning. When I hear "states rights", I can give a bland definition of the separate roles of federal and state governments in the US. But I also picture apologists for people with white hoods and burning crosses and also picture people fighting against a corrupted central government. And that's only the beginning. How would I ever translate that phrase into another language or even give it its due in English?
 
  • #17
I wondered a long time how English sounds to non-speakers as well. I finally found a few videos on YouTube a while back:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yAA_qbiOQ5k
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abn1Ffd9CEY (just the beginning)

I haven't come across any others since. You'd think there'd be more of them. I guess sending out a request to a community of people that can't understand your request is somewhat doomed from the start.

I don't buy the strong Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, but I agree wholeheartedly with the weak. I've been intent on becoming bilingual just to find out what it's like to experience the world with a different linguistic layer resting beneath it. The language I picked (Latin) isn't very alien though, so I may not see much of a difference. I could see it bringing a sense of greater precision to abstract concepts that English can't give me. Latin was the language of academia for so many centuries with good reason.

It would be better to pick a non-Indo-European language, especially a "primitive" one. Like Hawaiian or Hopi (one of Whorf's favorites) or Quetchua.

Or Piraha. This is a fascinating article about a linguistically unique tribe in the Amazon: http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/04/16/070416fa_fact_colapinto

Their inability to handle numbers has Sapir-Whorf written all over it (I think the article even points this out).

Trying to imagine a life without language is definitely much harder. I personally think it's a life of experience that remains very firmly rooted in the present moment. There would be so little reflection and analysis that daily life would just be a chain of spontaneous emotional reactions. You'd be a puppet to your impulses, as animals so often seem to be. I think to gain the level of self-control and self-understanding that humans have (well, are capable of having anyway) requires the orderly mental structuring that language installs in us. Every day I'm more sure that it's the primary source of humanity's cognitive superiority.
 
Back
Top