A Very Short Reading Group discussion

A couple of chapters in - plenty of interesting points. " For many linguists, their proper study is the structure of language as it now is, and it is presumptuous to suppose that we can understand how it evolved. But to think about the problem is at least a good way to appreciate what has made our species so remarkable." From chapter two it seems like the jury is still out on how language evolved.

I would love to read this book. I am interested in language as a window into the metaphysical studies.

The first few chapters are very interesting, particularity in the difference between human language and the "sounds" other animals use to communicate. How these sounds became human language is a fascinating subject.

So linguistics isn't the study of long thin pasta, but the origin of 'linguine' is from the Italian for little tongues. (Tongue = lingua in Italian). I find this subject endlessly fascinating and this book was once again a good introduction to the surprising breadth of linguistics.

The sections on phonetic evidence of common word roots in different languages and also the physics/biology of sound production took quite a bit of following, and I was in danger of being locked up, sitting reading and making all sorts of funny noises and faces!

Often in the VSIs, very detailed arguments are presented about a small example, to give a taste of what going through a given type of analysis feels like. You do have a decision to make on how deeply you follow the arguments, particularly in mathematics. You can either get a piece of paper and follow each proof in detail, or say “ yes, I've got the gist of that” and move on to the next section. This book allowed you to take either route without losing the story being told.

As is so often the case, I found this VSI linking into a lot of the other topics that I'm reading or thinking about at the same time. I've just finished reading the VSI on The Book of Common Prayer. That wasn't a great VSI, but the Book of Common Prayer came about because of different views on what the saying of words in the liturgy is supposed to achieve. Is it part of a reinforcement ritual, and so the laity do not need to understand what is being said in Latin, but simply to experience the atmosphere and environment of the worship process, or do they need to be thinking about the meaning of the actual text, and speaking and hearing it in English.

In a related thread, Gyles Brandreth has launched a campaign with the BBC, to try to persuade the public to learn a poem by heart.

In the associated radio programme, a girl has memorised Sir Gawain and the Green Knight in the original Middle English. An excerpt of her reciting it is included in the programme. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0bl...
Although I found the words hard to understand there was a beautiful rhythm in the poem, largely lost in translations. I found this not only enchanting, but strangely familiar.

Inspired by this I've embarked on learning a poem from circa 1310 AD, in Middle English. As you can imagine, this has led to a fair amount of effort trying to research pronunciation, and why we think we can know the pronunciation when all we have is a written record.

The difference between the process and sensation of writing, and speaking is another topic I find interesting. I feel that I have a very different experience in writing these comments, to what I imagine the library group has discussing them face to face. I spend a fair bit of time re-arranging arguments and editing, whereas in a conversation you are very much shooting from the hip. Sometimes, you have the perfect point to make, when someone else is speaking, but the relevance and context has gone when it comes around to your turn.

There is even a difference writing long hand with a pen, compared with a word processor, where chunks of text can be moved around at will with little effort.

Another topic that has sprung to my attention recently was the effect your accent has on how people perceive you. Nick Robinson's Political Thinking podcast recently had an episode entitled “Could the PM have a Brummie Accent” discussing this idea.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p06f...

I was amused by the trouble that linguists go to to try to shoehorn languages into a logical system. Language is so dynamic. Just when you think you've nailed speaking English, along comes the next generation with its' “too be fair” “sick” “I'm not gonna lie” and of course the ubiquitous “like.....”

In fact, It seems to me that a lot of the alterations made to language made by each new generation now, are not to aid communication, but to exclude adults from the conversation. I need help with translation from my children whenever I am trying to order in MacDonalds or Subway!

Interesting what you say about Latin and the worship process in terms of how the brain interprets meaning and uses language. I remember hearing someone talk about comedy and how the linguistic rhythm of joke telling can often get a laugh just through the structure that the audience expects, rather than a joke being particularly funny for its actual content. I'll have to give Comedy: A Very Short Introduction a read next...

Stockton wrote: "I'll have to give Comedy: A Very Short Introduction a read next..." Can we have Comedy as the one for Dec? I'm having a hard time getting into this Linguistics one and after reading about WWI, comedy may be needed to close the year!

Comedy sounds like a good one.
I've just finished the VSI on Complexity, Yet another cross-reference to Linguistics as it examines the evolution of languages as examples of Complex Adaptive Systems. What a rich tapestry.

A bit of light relief for December is fine by me - Comedy it is. The "real life" group is meeting up this evening so we'll see what they made of linguistics.

Another interesting group discussion with many a tangent explored. While the subject had definite appeal it was a general thumbs down for the execution. The consensus was that the minutiae that the author explored bogged down the the bigger picture that most people were more interested in - how language affects brain and behaviour (and vice versa), more on the origins of language and it's development across cultures. While these areas were touched on the phonetic intricacies explored did turn people off the book.

Nevertheless we did head down some interesting avenues. A diversion into the teaching of children with dyslexia, and how different languages present different challenges. How meditation can empty the mind of language and pause the almost constant flow of words. And if this flow is paused what then is the self? Can it exist without language to create it? Also the global reach of English and its dominance via computers, phones and tablets surely presents a new and unique set of circumstances for human language. How does the malleableness of language alter when huge numbers of people are now writing on machines with all the rules programmed in. Then again, my computer doesn't like "malleableness" and I'm going to use it anyway...