As a linguist I find this utterly fascinating: the idea that which language you speak [or rather; habitually use in face-to-face conversation] could perhaps alter your liklihood of catching a cold, 'flu or other airborne virus. It's all in the aspiration of plosives, affricates and the like. Chinese and English tend to be quite heavy on "puffs of air following" and so increase the amount and range of airborne viruses expelled by speakers. Who said"'...names will never hurt me."?
Of course it's theoretical but it could just be a factor.
Next question, could awareness of disease-spreading capabilities become an engine for linguistic change? Well maybe it's unlikely but ... you never know.
Nous like scouse or French -oui? We wee whee all the way ... to mind us a bunch of thunks. Too much information? How could that be?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Christian England? Maybe not...
I've just read an interesting blog article from Paul Kingsnorth . I've responded to it elsewhere with regard to its consideration of...
-
I've been watching the TV series 'Foundation'. I read the books about 50 years ago (I know!) but scarcely now remember anything...
-
from: http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/online/2012/5/22/1337672561216/Annular-solar-eclipse--008.jpg
-
I've just had an article published on emergingchurch.info. It's an adaptation of some of my book, but I thought I'd share it and...
No comments:
Post a Comment