Radio Lab

I’m sure everyone had the same reaction upon hearing Susan Schaller’s story in 'Words that Changed the World' about the man she met in her signing class, but I just have to say – wow. Wow, wow, wow…I was completely blown away by this. I’ve heard stories about language deprivation experiments and the cases of “feral children” (that horrific, heartbreaking story about Genie, though there are many more) - but I never thought about the fact that there really could be individuals living in "mainstream" society who just never learned to communicate, for various reasons.

Some of my earliest memories center around events, and though I never specifically considered it in this way, I suppose it is because I could attach words to them. Growing up in rural Australia, my earliest memories actually center on fear-based situations; the first was seeing my father tend to my mother after she was bitten by a fire ant on the thumb, and the second was learning not to walk in the cotton fields that surrounded us because there were snakes. 

I think the former sticks with me because it was an emotional connection - my mother was injured, and I could recognize her facial expressions. That has less to do with a language and more to do with what I consider to be a very basic human reaction of viewing another person in pain. The latter memory I think does stick with me because of language. I have a very clear memory of my grandmother telling me that snakes could bite and kill you (a bit intense for a young child to be hearing!). She told me they lived in the fields, and after that I kept a wide berth of the area!

So, I spent over an hour writing the second half of that entry, and for some reason Blogger didn't save it. I'm starting over and feeling incredibly frustrated, but actually it lead me to reflect on this question: do words mean more than experience? Being able to tell someone, or tell myself, “darn, that’s very frustrating!” does not begin to go through the thought process and experience as you realize all your work is lost, you begin to lose your cool, you consider throwing your computer against the wall and then eat half a packet of chips as you drown your anger against technology. “Techno-rage” is what I call it (a regular occurrence for me) but really it’s more than that.

In ‘Words that Changed the World’, Charles Fernyhough states that he thinks young children don’t think in the way we do – that is, that thinking is a series of internal dialogues or stream of words, and that children haven’t developed that capacity and therefore do not think. In the same episode, Elizabeth Spelke says she disagrees with that, and that when she reflects on thinking, so much of it is an experience beyond words. Though I think both have elements that could be correct, I’m more likely to agree with Spelke (as my techno-rage showed me).

In ‘Voices in Your Head’, it was interesting to see Fernyhough reach the conclusions he did via Vygotsky. I do agree with elements of Fernyhough’s theories, but again I just can’t believe that children do not “think” because they don’t yet have words. There are so many elements there that are beyond our current ability to research and understand, that making a statement like that can elicit interesting discussion – but no solid conclusions are going to be made? Or am I wrong on that? I’d love to hear other peoples’ thoughts here…in the comments section, though, rather than in my head!

I thought my favorite episode was probably ‘New Words, New Worlds’ – it was such a great insight into the organic nature of language. The complexity of language is shown in the development of this signing language. I loved the insight into ‘My Fair Lady’ – I’d never really thought about it in any depth and I thought this was a great discussion!