Home
Forums
New posts
Contact Us
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Search All
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Contact Us
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Forums
Really good
Food and Drinks
Food innovations changed our mouths, which in turn changed our languages
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="cheryl" data-source="post: 932" data-attributes="member: 1"><p><a href="https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/03/food-innovations-changed-our-mouths-which-in-turn-changed-our-languages/" target="_blank"><strong>Food innovations changed our mouths, which in turn changed our languages - Arstechnica</strong></a></p><p></p><p><em>The overbite that comes from eating soft food may make "ffff" sounds more common.</em></p><p></p><p>Something deep in the history of the German language pulled speech sounds toward hisses rather than pops. Words like <em>that</em> and <em>ship</em> end with a small popping sound in English, Dutch, and other Germanic languages—but in German, they end in softer <em>s</em> and <em>f</em> sounds—<em>dass</em>, <em>Schiff</em>. Centuries ago, before German was even German, this change was already underway, an example of one of the many small shifts that ends up separating a language from its close cousins and sending it off as its own distinct tongue.</p><p></p><p>How does change like this happen? One of the major reasons is speech efficiency. Speakers are constantly walking a tightrope between being understood and making speech as easy as possible—over time, this tension pulls languages in new directions. But if efficiency pushed German speakers in this direction, why not Dutch speakers, too? That is, if two languages share a given feature, why does that feature sometimes change in one language <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-handbook-of-historical-syntax/actuation-problem/811E8530ED6EEF6690EACD10C61AF1E5/core-reader" target="_blank">but not the other</a>?</p><p></p><p>A paper published in <em>Science</em> today lays out an intriguing answer: technology might accidentally trigger a change. Changes like agriculture and food-preparation technology changed the arrangement of our teeth—and in turn, the authors suggest, this made certain speech sounds more likely. It's a daring suggestion, flying in the face of <a href="http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199202720.001.0001/acref-9780199202720-e-3537" target="_blank">well-established linguistic thought</a>. But the authors draw on multiple strands of evidence to support their proposal, which is part of a growing raft of ideas about how culture and <a href="https://academic.oup.com/jole/article/1/1/30/2281887" target="_blank">environment</a> could play a role in shaping language.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="cheryl, post: 932, member: 1"] [URL='https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/03/food-innovations-changed-our-mouths-which-in-turn-changed-our-languages/'][B]Food innovations changed our mouths, which in turn changed our languages - Arstechnica[/B][/URL] [I]The overbite that comes from eating soft food may make "ffff" sounds more common.[/I] Something deep in the history of the German language pulled speech sounds toward hisses rather than pops. Words like [I]that[/I] and [I]ship[/I] end with a small popping sound in English, Dutch, and other Germanic languages—but in German, they end in softer [I]s[/I] and [I]f[/I] sounds—[I]dass[/I], [I]Schiff[/I]. Centuries ago, before German was even German, this change was already underway, an example of one of the many small shifts that ends up separating a language from its close cousins and sending it off as its own distinct tongue. How does change like this happen? One of the major reasons is speech efficiency. Speakers are constantly walking a tightrope between being understood and making speech as easy as possible—over time, this tension pulls languages in new directions. But if efficiency pushed German speakers in this direction, why not Dutch speakers, too? That is, if two languages share a given feature, why does that feature sometimes change in one language [URL='https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-handbook-of-historical-syntax/actuation-problem/811E8530ED6EEF6690EACD10C61AF1E5/core-reader']but not the other[/URL]? A paper published in [I]Science[/I] today lays out an intriguing answer: technology might accidentally trigger a change. Changes like agriculture and food-preparation technology changed the arrangement of our teeth—and in turn, the authors suggest, this made certain speech sounds more likely. It's a daring suggestion, flying in the face of [URL='http://www.oxfordreference.com/view/10.1093/acref/9780199202720.001.0001/acref-9780199202720-e-3537']well-established linguistic thought[/URL]. But the authors draw on multiple strands of evidence to support their proposal, which is part of a growing raft of ideas about how culture and [URL='https://academic.oup.com/jole/article/1/1/30/2281887']environment[/URL] could play a role in shaping language. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Really good
Food and Drinks
Food innovations changed our mouths, which in turn changed our languages
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top