Learning Thai: Does it Rewire Your Brain?

[Fookhaht]

I just finished watching the movie "Arrived" which is essentially a movie about language in a sci-fi setting.  The "Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis" was brought up in the movie which contends that when one immerses themselves in a language, it can actually result in rewiring out brains so that it affects our perceptions of reality and even behavior.   It essentially says that language affects mental perception (and ultimately behavior).   The theory gave a nice background to the movie, because the main character's immersive efforts to learn the alien's language did cause a "rewiring" of her brain which was viewed suspiciously by the government but proved to be a key for a significant breakthrough in humanity's development.

Well, all that was science fiction.   But I wonder, as Thai learners, most of whom are immersed in the language, do you think this theory has any credibility?   Do you think it's possible that we unwittingly "rewire" our brains in ways unsuspected because of immersing ourselves in a language that ends up changing the way we think and act?    It's a fascinating concept.  I believe it's a fact that other cultures (and especially the Thais, which I know the best aside from my native culture), really do perceive reality differently than we do, and it's often expressed in language.  I always thought of language as the result, and now I'm wondering if it's part of the cause?  

 

I do know for a fact (from studying 9 languages in my lifetime) that language can significantly expand or limit our thoughts and perceptions of the world around us.  Studying the Greek words for "love" blew my mind to see the fine breakdown of this concept.  The Thai expression for "generous"  (naam jai) means much more than generous, and cannot be easily boiled down to a short English expression.  The Inuits of far North America have something like 14 words for snow (or is it "ice?") which reveals that they have a much more expanded mental perception of the simple concept we think of as "snow."  The examples are too numerous to mention here. 

I'm now starting to think about and analyze the way(s) I may actually think differently or perceive reality differently because of a 15-year immersion in the Thai language in particular.  I'm going back over the words/vocabulary/expressions that were initially a surprise, but which now I accept without much thought.  (I'm starting to work on my mental list, not ready for sharing yet).   Of course, it's hard to separate perceiving reality in new ways from the daily influence of culture, too.  But I'm wondering how much of a mix of language vs, culture really work at "rewiring" our brains.  

Wikipedia's article on the topic can be found here:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity

 

If you've got the movie, the subject comes up at:  1:02:05

Hope you've got some feedback and ideas to add to this.

Cheers, 
Fookhaht

 

 

 

 

Edited February 18, 2017 by Fookhaht
Corrected gramma, and expanded one concept.

[Fookhaht]

Correction:  The movie is "Arrival."

[DavidHouston]

Quote

 

Just watched the movie last night. I was not smart enough to figure out the flow; perhaps I have a language problem.

 

In any event, it's not  often that a movie is made around an abstract, academic linguistic theory.  The result is not bad. 

[katana]

Probably something in it.
I think it was Charlemagne who once said:
To possess another language is to possess another soul.
- Charles V (Charlemagne).

[futsukayoi]

The "Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis" has been demonstrated as false.  The guy was completely wrong about the language he based it on.  Turned out the Indian language he said had no words for time had just as many as most other languages he just didn't know them.  Later studies show that language may have a small influence on how we think (e.g.languages which assign gender to nouns have some impact on how speakers view that noun) but that is about it.

[CaptHaddock]

3 hours ago, futsukayoi said:

The "Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis" has been demonstrated as false.  The guy was completely wrong about the language he based it on.  Turned out the Indian language he said had no words for time had just as many as most other languages he just didn't know them.  Later studies show that language may have a small influence on how we think (e.g.languages which assign gender to nouns have some impact on how speakers view that noun) but that is about it.

A completely correct summary of the current state of knowledge vis-a-vis the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis.  The opposing view is represented by theorists such as Noam Chomsky and Steven Pinker who posit that humans think in a higher level abstraction of language which they call "mentalese" or "meta-language" and which is much the same for all humans.  For Pinker/Chomsky thought is therefore more or less independent of language.  An example would be why we often cannot remember the exact words uttered and can only produce a paraphrase when asked to repeat them.  What we store is some representation of the meaning, not the actual language used.

 

That said, I enjoyed the movie very much.  The writer presented an imaginative interpretation of what the consequences of a discredited theory would be if it were indeed true. 

[rak sa_ngop]

I am not sure about " rewiring" of the brain but my experience of learning (trying to learn) Thai, Vietnamese Burmese and Laos proved to me how the brain can reprocess what it hears and makes you hear a different sound to the real sound.

 

When you start learning for example Vietnamese, you soon start to find yourself arguing with the teacher that the sound you are hearing is different to the sound the teacher hears. The brain will not recognise some of the Vietnamese word sounds and will reprocess them to sound like English word sounds. As your learning progresses you will start to recognise these VN word sounds and wonder why you had such trouble recognising them before.

 

This reprocessing of sounds I think is why you can have a telephone conversation over a very bad line with maybe 50pc of the conversation missing. The brain can reprocess and fill in the gaps if it is familiar with the language. For a poorly understood language you have no hope of doing this.

 

 

[Fookhaht]

12 hours ago, futsukayoi said:

The "Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis" has been demonstrated as false.  The guy was completely wrong about the language he based it on.  Turned out the Indian language he said had no words for time had just as many as most other languages he just didn't know them.  Later studies show that language may have a small influence on how we think (e.g.languages which assign gender to nouns have some impact on how speakers view that noun) but that is about it.

From my own experience, I disagree with your last statement. I believe language has a MAJOR influence on how we think.  It especially is highlighted in cross-cultural exchanges, which is has been my life-long ambition.  

 

My first studied language (French) opened up a whole new world of concepts and innuendo for me that I didn't know existed.  As a high-schooler, this fueled my thirst to study languages.  And this was a language closely related to English.  The real excitement began when I got further "afield" from English (in geographic distance and time) such as ancient Hebrew (1000+ B.C.), Koine Greek (2nd century B.C.), Cantonese, and of course, Thai.  

My  examples in my OP (Greek delineations of the concept of love, Inuits words for snow, the Thai expression "naam jai") are all simple examples of how language can expand or alter the understanding or connotations of the observable world.  

I consider myself much enriched and mentally stimulated just by my exposure to the nine languages I have studied.  Sometimes I feel frustrated when I can't easily express a thought or concept in my native language (English) which is easily "spot-on" described by a foreign word. Often the foreigner who speaks that language has a much better handle on the concept.   The reverse is true, of course (foreign language --> English), too.  

Edited February 19, 2017 by Fookhaht

[Fookhaht]

22 hours ago, DavidHouston said:

Just watched the movie last night. I was not smart enough to figure out the flow; perhaps I have a language problem.

 

In any event, it's not  often that a movie is made around an abstract, academic linguistic theory.  The result is not bad. 

You don't have a language problem.  The movie is a bit convoluted with forward flashes that confusingly appear as flashbacks.   The following video and article explain in much more understandable detail.  I was lucky enough the have read/seen this just before watching the movie:     http://screenrant.com/arrival-movie-2016-ending-time-explained/

[robblok]

11 hours ago, Fookhaht said:

From my own experience, I disagree with your last statement. I believe language has a MAJOR influence on how we think.  It especially is highlighted in cross-cultural exchanges, which is has been my life-long ambition.  

 

My first studied language (French) opened up a whole new world of concepts and innuendo for me that I didn't know existed.  As a high-schooler, this fueled my thirst to study languages.  And this was a language closely related to English.  The real excitement began when I got further "afield" from English (in geographic distance and time) such as ancient Hebrew (1000+ B.C.), Koine Greek (2nd century B.C.), Cantonese, and of course, Thai.  

My  examples in my OP (Greek delineations of the concept of love, Inuits words for snow, the Thai expression "naam jai") are all simple examples of how language can expand or alter the understanding or connotations of the observable world.  

I consider myself much enriched and mentally stimulated just by my exposure to the nine languages I have studied.  Sometimes I feel frustrated when I can't easily express a thought or concept in my native language (English) which is easily "spot-on" described by a foreign word. Often the foreigner who speaks that language has a much better handle on the concept.   The reverse is true, of course (foreign language --> English), too.  

I don't really agree with you and as a Dutch person we usually learn more then a few languages. Can't say it changed me in any way. I speak and write English as you see.. Dutch German and i know enough Thai to get by. Did study French but hated it. But i guess we all have differences of opinion. 

 

Languages are useful, that is for sure but they don't change you.. getting exposed to other idea's and lving life that is what changes you. 

[Fookhaht]

I don't really agree with you and as a Dutch person we usually learn more then a few languages. Can't say it changed me in any way. I speak and write English as you see.. Dutch German and i know enough Thai to get by. Did study French but hated it. But i guess we all have differences of opinion. 
 
Languages are useful, that is for sure but they don't change you.. getting exposed to other idea's and lving life that is what changes you. 

I submit that your linguistic breadth is limited in the context of my previous posts. Dutch, German, English (all closely related), and a smattering of Thai.

Not enough to "think outside the box."


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[robblok]

3 minutes ago, Fookhaht said:

I submit that your linguistic breadth is limited in the context of my previous posts. Dutch, German, English (all closely related), and a smattering of Thai.

Not enough to "think outside the box."


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Just don't agree with you.. you might think that my linguistic breadth is limited.. (and your right the languages are related) but just don't agree with your statement. Other posters have brought up studies.. and you are only thinking about yourself while studies were done and did not support your statement.  just look at futsukayoi his posts and those of others following.. I agree with them and they have studies to back it up... what studies do you have that were not invalidated ?

 

Anyway just opinions I can't look in your head what has changed in you.. but in general it does not seem to be that case. 

[Fookhaht]

Just don't agree with you.. you might think that my linguistic breadth is limited.. (and your right the languages are related) but just don't agree with your statement. Other posters have brought up studies.. and you are only thinking about yourself while studies were done and did not support your statement.  just look at futsukayoi his posts and those of others following.. I agree with them and they have studies to back it up... what studies do you have that were not invalidated ?

 

Anyway just opinions I can't look in your head what has changed in you.. but in general it does not seem to be that case. 

Did you miss my "from my own experience..." intro. a good while back? That's all I'm offering. It does have some validity, but of course not the weight of "studies."

My argument is one from logic, not the empirical data. Empirical data can be skewed, and of course logic can too. Interestingly, no one has adequately rebutted my logic and supporting examples thus far.

Frankly, at this point, I'm not entirely convinced that we're not talking apples and oranges in the semantics between my posts and your studies.

Meanwhile, you're not surprising nor dismaying anyone in your clamor for studies.

Can now climb down off the high-horse. 555

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Naam]

14 hours ago, Fookhaht said:

I consider myself much enriched and mentally stimulated just by my exposure to the nine languages I have studied.  Sometimes I feel frustrated when I can't easily express a thought or concept in my native language (English) which is easily "spot-on" described by a foreign word.

having studied four languages besides my two mother tongues i feel the opposite, e.g. frustrated when i speak my "number one" native language and realise certain expressions in another language (that my conversational partner does not master) describes more clearly and with much greater accuracy what i am trying to say.   

[robblok]

12 minutes ago, Fookhaht said:

 

Did you miss my "from my own experience..." intro. a good while back? That's all I'm offering. It does have some validity, but of course not the weight of "studies."

My argument is one from logic, not the empirical data. Empirical data can be skewed, and of course logic can too. Interestingly, no one has adequately rebutted my logic and supporting examples thus far.

Frankly, at this point, I'm not entirely convinced that we're not talking apples and oranges in the semantics between my posts and your studies.

Meanwhile, you're not surprising nor dismaying anyone in your clamor for studies.

Can now climb down off the high-horse. 555

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

I like studies, because you dismissed my languages as not broad enough.. so with studies i can dismiss your own observations as not broad enough.

 

Anyway IMHO you don't change from learning a language but from interacting with people (who speak that language or an other). just studying a language just opens up more  ways to get to information. Without English I would have missed out on loads of information and experiences. Languages just enable things IMHO. 

[Fookhaht]

I like studies, because you dismissed my languages as not broad enough.. so with studies i can dismiss your own observations as not broad enough.

 

Anyway IMHO you don't change from learning a language but from interacting with people (who speak that language or an other).

False assumption in trying to make a point. All of the Asian languages I have studied (Thai, Vietnamese, Cantonese, etc.) have been with native speakers. Considerably broader experience than just "book-learning."

Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[robblok]

1 minute ago, Fookhaht said:

False assumption. All of the Asian languages I have studied have been with native speakers. Considerably broader experience than just "book-learning."


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Then the discussion is did you change because of learning or interacting.. I think you get what I mean but are just nit picking.. maybe I am doing the same. 

[Fookhaht]

having studied four languages besides my two mother tongues i feel the opposite, e.g. frustrated when i speak my "number one" native language and realise certain expressions in another language (that my conversational partner does not master) describes more clearly and with much greater accuracy what i am trying to say.   

Your experience and my experience: two sides of the same coin?


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Fookhaht]

Then the discussion is did you change because of learning or interacting.. I think you get what I mean but are just nit picking.. maybe I am doing the same. 

Or did I change because the object of the learning was language or culture? Time for more empirical data!


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

[Naam]

languages extend horizons but (i think) they do not necessarily change people's minds or perceptions. their value lies, like beauty, in the eyes of the beholder. since several years i am studying a language, not related at all to my native languages, script not latin, in order to read ancient poetry in its original version. my only advantage is that i master the script because it's nearly identical with the script of a language i learned (and studied later) several decades ago. the few friends i have consider me crazy. the only one who understands is my wife.

[katana]

5 hours ago, Naam said:

19 hours ago, Fookhaht said:

I consider myself much enriched and mentally stimulated just by my exposure to the nine languages I have studied.  Sometimes I feel frustrated when I can't easily express a thought or concept in my native language (English) which is easily "spot-on" described by a foreign word.

having studied four languages besides my two mother tongues i feel the opposite, e.g. frustrated when i speak my "number one" native language and realise certain expressions in another language (that my conversational partner does not master) describes more clearly and with much greater accuracy what i am trying to say.  

Aren't you agreeing with him though? ie the 2nd language has the more apt word than your native language?

[Naam]

1 minute ago, katana said:

Aren't you agreeing with him though? ie the 2nd language has the more apt word than your native language?

i don't agree with his comment

Quote

I consider myself much enriched and mentally stimulated just by my exposure to the nine languages I have studied.

 

[futsukayoi]

On 2/19/2017 at 9:32 PM, Fookhaht said:

From my own experience, I disagree with your last statement. I believe language has a MAJOR influence on how we think.  It especially is highlighted in cross-cultural exchanges, which is has been my life-long ambition.  

 

My first studied language (French) opened up a whole new world of concepts and innuendo for me that I didn't know existed.  As a high-schooler, this fueled my thirst to study languages.  And this was a language closely related to English.  The real excitement began when I got further "afield" from English (in geographic distance and time) such as ancient Hebrew (1000+ B.C.), Koine Greek (2nd century B.C.), Cantonese, and of course, Thai.  

My  examples in my OP (Greek delineations of the concept of love, Inuits words for snow, the Thai expression "naam jai") are all simple examples of how language can expand or alter the understanding or connotations of the observable world.  

I consider myself much enriched and mentally stimulated just by my exposure to the nine languages I have studied.  Sometimes I feel frustrated when I can't easily express a thought or concept in my native language (English) which is easily "spot-on" described by a foreign word. Often the foreigner who speaks that language has a much better handle on the concept.   The reverse is true, of course (foreign language --> English), too.  

 

Totally agree that learning languages is extremely enriching and probably the only way to appreciate and understand other cultures and concepts.  However that is not the same thing at all as saying that the language caused the concepts, culture or way of thinking.  Check any Linguistic textbook as many scholars have studied this in vast detail. Lectures in a couple of courses from The Teaching Company explain the work around this especially well.  The consensus is pretty clearly that the strong Shapir-Wharf hypothesis is wrong a language does not dictate or change how we think.  There is some split over people who accept a weak hypothesis (the language affects thinking in a limited way) and those who think it has no effect.