another reinux inspired thought;
it occured to me today that multi-lingual people (and i say this in observance of the contemporary trend of having tri or even tetralinguals around as formal acquaintances) seem to perceive pain differently as they switch through different languages.
let’s take english as an example.
the most oft ellicted response of a native english speaker to pain, or at least the stereotypical one, is “ouch” or “ow”. no one really knows why this unisyllabic mimetic is uttered when the pain receptors in our bodies are overloaded with electric impulses or why it is phonetically translated to “ow” or “ouch” when those impulses are then relayed into our mouths. one way to see it is that this type of response is innate and comes standard with every human being capable of feeling pain and expressing it–kinda like how a baby cries when its hungry, or when it makes a boo boo down under.
a tangent i want to add here is regarding the japanese response to pain; when a person of japanese neural configuration perceives pain he or she will usually exclaim 痛い! or some variation of it, which curiously is assigned an actual semantic value within the language, whereas the english “ow” is just considered an onomatopoeia. (i.e., 痛い in japanese is actually classified as an adjective in some senses and an interjection in another, whereas “ow” is simply just an interjection) given the history and the composition of the japanese language, however, it may not be too far away from the truth to say that the orthographic spelling of 痛い! was actually derived from the mimetic and onomatopoeic expression; the usage of the expression was so widespread that it was eventually granted official codification as a bona fide semantic token, as opposed to an utterance of pain. a second piece of fact that supports this claim lies within the character itself; the character, which was borrowed from the era of the Wu dynasty is pronounced teng in modern mandarin, and its adaptation into the Sino-Japanese lexicon is actually tsuu, which is much closer to the mandarin than the yamato japanese expression “itai”.
going back to the main point, the idea of these painful expressions being innate also finds camaraderie through examples found in the more primative “languages” spoken on earth: those of the members of the animal kingdom. animals too seem to have a distinct way of expressing pain; dogs “woof”, cats “meow” and cows “moo”. the key point to take from this is that animals don’t communicate through producing sound unless to signal some sort of duress or to alert others from danger: dogs bark only when something auspicious is going on or when it senses trouble; cats meow when their tails have been stepped on or when they encounter something surprising or strange.
and like every rule, this one is also one with an exception; dolphins are known to communicate to each other even when they’re not distressed and monkeys also tend to make some sort of a distinguishable noise when signallling to their potential mates. but the fact remains that they all produced a disctinctive sound, different from one that they usually make when they perceive pain or s sense of dangerl and the fact that this seems to run so universally would suggest that this is an innate trait of most animals living on earth, human beings included.
so how does this relate to the bigger theme of different expressions per different languages? it probably has alot to do with the fact that language acquisition is an innate process, and the mother language usually stays engrained within the framework of a person’s linguistic composition; and no matter how proficient or fluent a person may be in a foreign language, it will always feel natural and right to express pain in the language already programmed and stored from the early periods of one’s linguistic profile rather than the newly acquiesced alternative.
or at least thats why i think i say “fuck!” when my brain is tune to speaking english and i end up reverting to “痛っ!” when i’m by myself…
2 responses so far ↓
rei // August 10, 2008 at 9:34 am |
wait, if it’s always natural to use your mother tongue to express pain, why do multilinguals like us switch back and forth?
by the way another point i might add is that sometimes when you suspect being burned, you say “hot” or “atsui” instead of “shit” or “ow” or “itai”, but often you’ll just say “ow”, “shit” or “itee”; this seems to be true more often in english than in japanese. “ow” and “hot” are both states of pain, yet with the very short, almost reflexive exclamations, we have enough time to make the distinction. oh, and maybe even “tsumetee”, though you seldom see anyone exclaiming “cold!”. heck, cold states might not even be considered pain states in some languages. strange, though i guess this would be more of a philosophical matter than a linguistic one.
also, i wonder if there are phonetic rules to the exclamations? for instance, the onyomi 痛 (tsuu) is suspiciously close to peter griffin’s “tsssssss aughhhhhhhh tssssss aughhhhh”. everything else, atsui, itee, achii, ouch, seems to start with a vowel — even “fuck” or “shit” would usually start with an utterance like “ahh” or “augh”, as in “ah fuck” or “ahh shit”.
then again, i can’t remember the name of the group of phonemes that comprise “ts” “f” “sh” “k” (like the japanese クッ that you see in manga a lot), but they all seem to be attempts to stop a vowel — maybe because letting out a vowel would be loud and potentially panic-inducing to the rest of the people around you, and the buildup of pressure in your mouth is a good way to manifest the pain physically.
the rule (vowel or strong consonant) seems to be true for a lot of profanity too, especially the ones that also double as exclamations of pain — “kuso”, “chikusho”, “fuck”, “shit”, and arguably even “piss”, “ass”, “bob saget” (the “saget” part is probably partly conscious/habitual but the “bob” is probably reflexive), “bitch”, but not “whore”, “idiot”, or — hm, i can’t even think of any.
amanoh // August 10, 2008 at 10:44 pm |
ok so i’ll try to answer this one at a time, to the best of my ability:
1. as far as i know, [ts], [f], [sh], and [k] don’t form or belong to one natural class, although it can be noted that [ts], [f], and [sh] do belong to the [+son] family, whereas [ts], [sh], and [k] are all produced in the alveolar ridge.
2. as for vowel addition to interjections in japanese, i think it’s got something to do with the amount of syllables “permitted” for an interjection or a mimetic expression–especially with mimetic expressions you see words like くんくん where the expression is merely a repetition of one syllable so one would think a single syllable might suffice whgere it doesn’t (or maybe its just a reflection/accurate observation of the actual action itself)
3. what you mentioned as the “vowel” or the “strong consonant” for profanities and what not is actually a part of syllable theory: naturally language prefers sonorous phones over their less sonorous counterparts, and with vowels being the most sonorous of all phones, vowel addition helps stabilize and even amplify the sonority of those less sonorous sounds (i.e. ts, sh) but yeah, your observation is quite accurate in that sense…