What People Say to Their Pets

I had a friend who used to say that it's not important what you say, it's important what the other person hears. So true. What about our pets? Do our dogs and cats understand us when we talk to them? Here's what I think it's like when we talk to our pets.

WHAT WE SAY TO OUR DOG SPOT

Good boy, Spot. That's a very good boy, Spot. Go fetch the ball, Spot. Good boy. Here's a treat for you, Spot. You're a good dog, Spot.

WHAT SPOT HEARS

blah blah Spot blah blah blah blah blah Spot blah blah blah blah Spot blah blah blah blah blah blah blah Spot blah blah blah blah Spot.

Words, Words, Words

I am a language teacher (Spanish and English) and I am also a translator and interpreter of the same languages. Translators deal with words. Some people say that there are only three things you need to know about a word; its meaning(s), pronunciation, and how it is used in a sentence (noun, verb, adjective, adverb, etc.) But it's not that simple.

Words have many different aspects that need to be taken into account when learning a language or translating the words into another language. I will use the English word lovely as an example. Aside from the word's basic meaning (beautiful), pronunciation (lovely is made up of five separate sounds, two syllables, with the stress on the first syllable), and how it is used in sentences (as an adjective), all of which can be found in a good dictionary, there are other aspects of the word lovely that we need to be aware of. Following is a discussion of some of these aspects.

Connotations. Most words have connotations, which means that they can imply subtle emotions, feelings, and relationships to other words. Some connotations of lovely, are that it is usually used to described beauty in women ("She's a lovely woman" but not "He's a lovely man")and situations and cultural things(It's a lovely sunset.") Lovely has the feeling of softness. You might say that a painting or work of art is lovely, but you would probably not say that a car was lovely, no matter how beautiful the car was.

Differences of degree. Lovely is often described as a synonym for pretty or good looking or gorgeous. But for most people, these words would represent different points on a beauty "scale." A woman described as lovely would rank higher on the beauty "scale" than one described as pretty or good looking, but lower on the scale than one described as gorgeous. There are probably no true synonyms because of these small differences in meaning and usage.

Level of formality or register. Some words have a more formal, quaint, or "old fashioned" feel when you use them. Lovely is one of those words. Most teenagers and young people probably don't use the word lovely very much for this reason. They might prefer to use a more "modern" word like hot when describing a lovely woman.

Usage. Most words in English can be used equally by men or women. But there are certain words, like lovely, that are more commonly used by females than males. Men usually don't say lovely. Some other words that are used more often by women than men are divine, adorable, delightful, and sweetie.

Intonation reflecting attitude. Most words' meanings can be changed by the intonation used to pronounce them. If you say, "Well, that's just lovely !" stressing the word lovely and saying the sentence with a sarcastic tone of voice, you don't mean lovely at all. What you mean is that something is a mess, or a problem.

Most words are not as simple as they first appear. So we need to be careful with the way we use and translate them.

Living Abroad

Sometimes my students ask me what the best way is to learn Spanish. I tell them to go live in a Spanish-speaking country for as long as they can and avoid associating with Americans and speaking English while they are there. There is no substitute for this total immersion approach that I know of.

I have lived in Mexico for five years, one year after graduate school on a Fulbright Scholarship and I later taught at a university in northern Mexico for four years. When I lived in Mexico, I associated with very few English speakers and would sometimes go weeks and months at a time without speaking English. This was a very valuable experience for me and helped me really become fluent in Spanish and familiar with Mexican culture. As a result of these experiences, I look at the world in a different way, and can appreciate how Mexicans have a different worldview than Americans.

For this reason, I would recommend a living-abroad experience for every young person. It will help you learn a different language, culture, worldview, and at the same time, make you appreciate some of the things that we have in the U.S. that you might take for granted. So go volunteer for the Peace Corps or volunteer to work in Africa helping the people there. You will never be the same.

Good Writers, Good Movies

What makes a good writer? I think one of the most important things is to be a good story teller. Everyone likes a good story. If you can tell an interesting and creative story that keeps the readers' attention, that is maybe the most important key to good writing. Many books become movies. In most (not all) cases, it is because the author tells a good story that captures the imagination of the readers. So it is not surprising that books that are interesting to read go on to become movies. I like John Grisham's books about lawyers. Grisham is a good story teller. He has published many books, and I think that almost every one has been made into a movie. The books are usually better than the movies. Why is that? When we read, we engage our imaginations and create rich images in our minds of the characters, the situations, the places, and so on. When the book is turned into a movie, there is only one story, the one we see on the screen, and there is really not much left to the imagination. Some other well known authors whose books have become movies are Ernest Hemingway, John Steinbeck, and Pat Conroy, to name a few. Their writing styles are different, but they have one thing in common--they can tell a good story.

The Soccer Flop

Watching the World Cup soccer games, I have noticed that many of the players try to fool the official, falling down after minimal or no contact with the other player, and rolling around on the ground as if they were mortally wounded. In fact, almost every time a player falls down after contact, it appears that he is so injured that he won't be able to continue in the game, and then he jumps right up and keeps on playing. The flop is fairly common in the NBA; several basketball players have a reputation for flopping a lot trying to draw fouls. The acting involved is sometimes almost funny to watch. It is easy to see a flop on instant replay. Sometimes the acting is so good that you think the player should receive not a penalty but an Academy Award. This year the NBA came up with a new rule to stop the flopping, so if an official thinks a player has flopped, the player can receive a technical foul. It seems that there is even more flopping in soccer than in basketball. In a game I watched earlier this week, a player from Brazil grabbed his head and fell down, twisting and turning on the ground while he held his leg in pain. He had not even been touched by the player from the other team, but he thought he might fool the official and draw a yellow card for the opposing player. The official wasn't fooled and neither were the people watching instant replay. It wasn't even very good acting. Maybe soccer and basketball players need to go to acting school to really perfect the flop and sell it to officials and spectators. Or maybe acting shouldn't be a part of sports. What do you think?

Heat and Humidity

It is really starting to heat up in Indiana this summer, with temperatures in the 80s and 90s, and relative humidity at similar levels. I am from the Southwestern U.S. (Arizona and New Mexico), so I grew up with hot summers (often above 100 degrees), and with low humidity. In other words, a dry heat. I can be comfortable in very high temperatures with low humidity, but the combination of heat and humidity as we have in the Midwest in the summer just about kills me. When the humidity is low, the body can sweat and cool itself off through evaporation. But when the humidity is high, you sweat but the sweat doesn't evaporate and cool you down. For this reason, I dread the Indiana summers and probably will as long as I live here. That's also why I would never go to Florida in the summer, where the humidity is even higher. Give me that good old dry heat any day.

Getting Back to Language

Most of my recent blogs have been about soccer because I am so interested in the World Cup games. In today's blog I will return to language, English specifically. One of the most commonly used words in spoken English is "get." It is very common, especially in informal speech, and it seems that it has many meanings, but really all the different meanings of "get" can be classified in three groups.

(1) "Get" is used instead of "be" in passive sentences. So we can say, "My wallet was stolen" or "My wallet got stolen" and both sentences mean the same thing.
(2) "Get" means this: 0 <------. Something or someone goes towards something or someone or is received by something or someone. "I got a present from my friend" means the same as "I received a present from my friend."
(3) "Get" means "become." "I got tired" means the same as "I became tired." Or "She got pregnant" means "She became pregnant."

If you are learning English as a Second Language and having trouble understanding all the different uses and meanings of "get," this explanation might help you to understand and use "get" better.

Playing to Win or Playing Not to Lose?

It seems that soccer is one of the few sports where a game can end in a tie. I wonder if that is a good thing. I think when you play a sport you should always try to win. That is the main mission. In the World Cup, teams get a point for a tied game, which can help them pass on to the second round of play. I see the teams sometimes playing conservatively for a tied game, instead of playing more aggressively to win the game, and maybe risk losing the game. Maybe it would be a good idea to change the system and not give points for a tie, only for a win. Another idea would be that every game tied at the end of regulation time would have to go to penalty kicks to decide the winner, as they do in the championship game where one of the teams has to win. What do you think?

World Soccer Parity?

There have been several major upsets in the World Cup, which makes it more interesting to watch the games. Team USA ties England. Mexico beats France. Spain loses to Switzerland. Paraguay ties Italy. And this is only after a week of play. In past World Cups, it seems a hand-full of powerhouse teams (Brazil, Spain, Italy, France, Germany, Argentina) could always be counted on to win. Maybe this means that the level of soccer has become stronger around the world, giving more countries a chance to win. And that would be a good thing.

Mexico Beats France in World Cup!

Mexico's 2-0 victory over France in the World Cup today was very impressive. I don't think many people thought Mexico could beat France. Just like people didn't give Switzerland a chance to win over Spain yesterday, but they did. This is what makes the World Cup so exciting. Maybe there is even hope for the USA team!

The Vuvuzela

I have always wondered what that droning sound like a giant hive of bees at international soccer games was. I've been hearing it again at the World Cup games. So I decided to ask my international students what caused the sound. They explained that the sound comes from a three-foot long plastic horn called a vuvuzela that many of the fans use to cheer on their teams. Apparently the horn came from South Africa originally and then spread to Mexico and then around the world. I imagine the word comes from an African language. It is also called a lepatata. Apparently, some people don't like the sound of the horn and want to ban its use. I think that would be a shame. That crazy, constant noise has become a part of soccer.

Young Readers

I am very proud of my daughter Maria for many reasons. Maria is 17 years old and will be a senior in high school next year. She does very well in school and is involved in a lot of extra-curricular activities in school, volunteer work, and sports. She loves to play on the rugby team. But one of the things I am most proud of is that she loves to read. She signed up to be in the Book Club at school next year and has already read two books this summer that she plans to recommend to the Book Club members as books for the group to read and discuss. I notice that many young people don't read much. They spend a lot of time watching TV, using the cell phone, on the computer checking their Facebook account, and "hanging out" with their friends, but much time at the library looking for new books to read. Since I believe that reading is one of the best ways to learn and become a lifelong learner, I am very pleased to see that Maria is developing a love for reading at a young age.

USA Ties England at the World Cup: A Moral Victory?

Yesterday, the USA surprised everyone (except maybe the USA team players) by tying England 1-1 in the World Cup. The USA team was definitely the underdog. England scored in the first few minutes, a very nice goal. It didn't look good for the the American boys. In the second half, team USA got lucky and scored a goal that should have easily been stopped by the England goal keeper. So the game was tied. I think that goal gave the US team a little more confidence, and they had several good shots on goal in the rest of the game. With only a few minutes remaining, they had a break away play and a shot on goal which the England goalkeeper deflected and it hit the post and bounced out. If the ball had hit the post about an inch more to the right, it would have gone into the net and the USA team might have come away with a 2-1 victory. But it didn't, and game end tied. To me, it was a promising start to the World Cup for team USA, and a disappointing start for England.

The World Cup: USA vs. England

This might be the most important day in USA soccer history. Can the USA beat England? I don't think the USA team has ever beaten England. England is favored, as they should be, but the USA team is getting better, so they have a chance to knock off England. I understand that most knowledgeable soccer fans don't give the USA much of a chance, and certainly in England everyone assumes England will win. I wouldn't bet on the USA, but I do hope they win. Soccer in the USA is improving. In past World Cups, many of the players on the USA team were from other countries. Now I notice that all the players on the team seem to be from the USA. They say that Donovan is very good. So that is an indication that soccer in the US is getting better. We'll see if the USA team can make history today.

Soccer

I was watching Mexico play South Africa this morning in the first game of the World Cup. I realized what a great game soccer is. It's a simple and elegant sport. There are no complicated rules like in American football or baseball, only one way to score, and the players are great athletes in excellent condition. I doubt most baseball or football players could run up and down the field without resting between plays for two 45-minute halves. I hope that soccer continues to become more popular in the US, so the US teams will play at the same level as the best teams in the world. That will take a few years, but it will be worth the wait. Maybe the US will be able to win the World Cup someday.

Language Learning: Input > Processing/Thinking > Output

I believe that with language learning it is important to talk about input, processing/thinking, and output. Input is listening and reading and output is speaking and writing. Processing/thinking is that complex process that occurs between taking in input (listening or reading) and preparing output (speaking and writing). I believe that in language learning input precedes and is more important than output.

Think about how a baby learns its native language. The baby spends about two years listening to what will be its native language being spoken by its parents, other adults and children, and programs on the television and radio. The baby is surrounded by this constant barrage of language pretty much all the time except when it is asleep. Then after two years the baby starts speaking its first words, and then its language begins to develop very rapidly for the next few years. By age five or six the child understands and is very fluent in its native language.

It's not that different with adults learning a language. They need to listen to the target language and read a lot in the language (input) before they are ready to start speaking and writing fluently (output). This has implications for language teaching. I tell my Spanish students to listen to as much Spanish as they can (Spanish TV channels and movies, Spanish radio stations, free Internet podcasts in Spanish) and read as much Spanish as they can (free Spanish newspapers at Mexican restaurants, books in Spanish for children and young adults, and reading Spanish sites on the Internet). I tell them not to worry if they don't understand everything they listen to and read. Just like babies, it takes a while for the input to all soak in, and then the output kicks into high gear.

Learning a Second Language

I'm teaching Spanish and English as a Second Language courses this summer at a community college. My students often ask me what I think is the best and fastest way to learn another language as an adult. My advice to them is usually along these lines: go and live in a country where they speak the language you want to learn and do not hang around with other people who speak your native language while you are there. Live as much as possible as the the people who live in that country do. Try to communicate in that language 24/7 as long as you are in the country. This is the fastest and most efficient way to learn a second language as an adult, and also learn about the culture, which is an important part of the language. This can be a frustrating and painful experience, but the best way to learn a language. It's called total immersion. I also advise students to stay away from anyone selling language programs or software packages that claim to teach you to speak a language fluently "in 48 hours" or some such short period of time. These programs are usually very expensive and don't deliver the results they promise. Anyone who has learned a second or foreign language knows that's not the way language learning works. Aside from total immersion, there are no miracle methods or shortcuts.

A Farewell to Arms

I think I'm becoming a Hemingway fan. I read some of his books years ago, but they didn't seem that interesting at the time for some reason. A few months ago, I decided to read some of the books again, and see what I thought. I started with The Sun Also Rises, and really enjoyed it. I just finished A Farewell to Arms. I'm not a literary critic, so the best I can say is that I know what I like and for me these novels are very interesting and well written. I like Hemingway's spare, unadorned writing style. He writes almost as a journalist does, with few adjectives and adverbs. I have always heard the Hemingway's style is short, simple sentences made up of short, simple words. That's partly true. But I noticed he also sometimes used very long sentences. In A Farewell to Arms I found several long, long sentences. There were a few paragraphs made up of one long sentence. That's supposed to be a no-no for writers. But it worked, for me anyway. I noticed that he would sometimes stick a long sentence in between two short sentences, or follow a long sentence with a short one. The chapters in his books also varied greatly in length, from 2-3 pages to more than 20 pages. This provides relief and variety for the reader. Some writers think all chapters should be about the same length.

Like his life, Hemingway's writing style is enigmatic and defies easy analysis. He was a good writer. For me, a good book or author is one I enjoy reading and re-reading. In this way, Hemingway has passed my good-author test and I'll be reading more of his books.

Language, Thought, and Reality

One of my favorite courses when I was studied Linguistics in graduate school was a seminar called "Language, Thought, and Reality." In that seminar, we examined the so-called "Whorf-Sapir Linguistic Relativity Hypothesis." Edward Sapir was one of the best-known linguists of the 20th century and published several major studies of Native American languages. Benjamin Whorf was an interesting character. He had a degree in engineering and studied linguistics as an avocation under Sapir at Yale. Like Sapir, Whorf was interested in Native American languages and studied Hopi, Nahuatl, and Mayan hieroglyphics. In the 1930s, Sapir and Whorf advanced their hypothesis on linguistic relativity, suggesting that our thoughts and perception of reality are influenced, or even determined, by our native language.

At first blush, this hypothesis sounds reasonable to most people, until you start thinking about its implications for thought, perception, and reality. Whorf wrote that "reality is a kaleidoscopic flux that is organized by one's language." Pretty strong statement. I would like to think that reality has a substance that is independent of our perception of it. To illustrate the hypothesis, Whorf said things such as an Eskimo does not see the same thing when he watches snow falling as an English speaker does because the Eskimo language has fifty different words for snow, and English only has one. It is pretty easy to poke holes in the hypothesis by asking a few basic questions. Do we think in language (words), or thoughts? What is the connection between thinking (cognition) and language? Do we perceive the world around us through our senses or through our language? If our language determines or limits our thoughts, why is it that we often have thoughts that we can't put into words? How is it that a baby is able to think, perceive the world and interact with its parents and others before it has learned its native language?

At the end of the seminar, after posing these kinds of questions and listening to several linguist guest speakers talk about the Whorf-Sapir hypothesis, most of the students in the class came to the conclusion that, while interesting, the hypothesis really doesn't hold up to scrutiny because although language, thought and reality certainly interact with each other, they are very different things. Complicating things further, language and reality are pretty well understood by science, but thought and perception appear to lie in that area just beyond the reach of science. Even though Sapir and Whorf might not have gotten it quite right, these are still interesting things to think about.