Arquivo da tag: Linguística

A mysterious 14-year cycle has been controlling our words for centuries (Science Alert)

Some of your favourite science words are making a comeback.

2 DEC 2016

Researchers analysing several centuries of literature have spotted a strange trend in our language patterns: the words we use tend to fall in and out of favour in a cycle that lasts around 14 years.

Scientists ran computer scripts to track patterns stretching back to the year 1700 through the Google Ngram Viewer database, which monitors language use across more than 4.5 million digitised books. In doing so, they identified a strange oscillation across 5,630 common nouns.

The team says the discovery not only shows how writers and the population at large use words to express themselves – it also affects the topics we choose to discuss.

“It’s very difficult to imagine a random phenomenon that will give you this pattern,” Marcelo Montemurro from the University of Manchester in the UK told Sophia Chen at New Scientist.

“Assuming these patterns reflect some cultural dynamics, I hope this develops into better understanding of why we change the topics we discuss,” he added.“We might learn why writers get tired of the same thing and choose something new.”

The 14-year pattern of words coming into and out of widespread use was surprisingly consistent, although the researchers found that in recent years the cycles have begun to get longer by a year or two. The cycles are also more pronounced when it comes to certain words.

What’s interesting is how related words seem to rise and fall together in usage. For example, royalty-related words like “king”, “queen”, and “prince” appear to be on the crest of a usage wave, which means they could soon fall out of favour.

By contrast, a number of scientific terms, including “astronomer”, “mathematician”, and “eclipse” could soon be on the rebound, having dropped in usage recently.

According to the analysis, the same phenomenon happens with verbs as well, though not to the same extent as with nouns, and the academics found similar 14-year patterns in French, German, Italian, Russian, and Spanish, so this isn’t exclusive to English.

The study suggests that words get a certain momentum, causing more and more people to use them, before reaching a saturation point, where writers start looking for alternatives.

Montemurro and fellow researcher Damián Zanette from the National Council for Scientific and Technical Research in Argentina aren’t sure what’s causing this, although they’re willing to make some guesses.

“We expect that this behaviour is related to changes in the cultural environment that, in turn, stir the thematic focus of the writers represented in the Google database,” the researchers write in their paper.

“It’s fascinating to look for cultural factors that might affect this, but we also expect certain periodicities from random fluctuations,” biological scientist Mark Pagel, from the University of Reading in the UK, who wasn’t involved in the research, told New Scientist.

“Now and then, a word like ‘apple’ is going to be written more, and its popularity will go up,” he added. “But then it’ll fall back to a long-term average.”

It’s clear that language is constantly evolving over time, but a resource like the Google Ngram Viewer gives scientists unprecedented access to word use and language trends across the centuries, at least as far as the written word goes.

You can try it out for yourself, and search for any word’s popularity over time.

But if there are certain nouns you’re fond of, make the most of them, because they might not be in common use for much longer.

The findings have been published in Palgrave Communications.

Most adults know more than 42,000 words (Science Daily)

August 16, 2016
Armed with a new list of words and using the power of social media, a new study has found that by the age of 20, a native English-speaking American knows 42,000 dictionary words.

Dictionary. How many words do you know? Credit: © mizar_21984 / Fotolia

How many words do we know? It turns out that even language experts and researchers have a tough time estimating this.

Armed with a new list of words and using the power of social media, a new study published in Frontiers in Psychology, has found that by the age of twenty, a native English speaking American knows 42 thousand dictionary words.

“Our research got a huge push when a television station in the Netherlands asked us to organize a nation-wide study on vocabulary knowledge,” states Professor Marc Brysbaert of Ghent University in Belgium and leader of this study. “The test we developed was featured on TV and, in the first weekend, over 300 thousand Dutch speakers had done it — it really went viral.”

Realising how interested people are in finding out their vocabulary size, the team then made similar tests in English and Spanish. The English test has now been taken by almost one million people. It takes up to four minutes to complete and has been shared widely on Facebook and Twitter, giving the team access to an unprecedented amount of data.

“At the Centre of Reading Research we are investigating what determines the ease with which words are recognized;” explained Professor Brysbaert. The test includes a list of 62,000 words that he and his team have compiled.

He added: “As we made the list ourselves and have not used a commercially available dictionary list with copyright restrictions, it can be made available to everyone, and all researchers can access it.”

The test is simple. You are asked if the word on the screen is, or is not, an existing word in English. In each test, there are 70 words, and 30 letter sequences that look like words but are not actually existing words.

The test will also ask you for some personal information such as your age, gender, education level and native language. This has enabled the team to discover that the average twenty-year-old native English speaking American knows 42 thousand dictionary words. As we get older, we learn one new word every two days, which means that by the age of 60, we know an additional 6000 words.

“As a researcher, I am most interested in what this data can tell us about word prevalence, i.e. how well each word is known in a language;” added Professor Brysbaert.

“In Dutch, we have seen that this explains a lot about word processing times. People respond much faster to words known by all people than to words known by 95% of the population, even if the words used with the same frequency. We are convinced that word prevalence will become an important variable in word recognition research.”

With data from about 200 thousand people who speak English as a second language, the team can also start to look at how well these people know certain words, which could have implications for language education.

This is the largest study of its kind ever attempted. Professor Brysbaert has plans to improve the accuracy of the test and extend the list to include over 75,000 words.

“This work is part of the big data movement in research, where big datasets are collected to be mined;” he concluded.

“It also gives us a snapshot of English word knowledge at the beginning of the 21st century. I can imagine future language researchers will be interested in this database to see how English has evolved over 100 years, 1000 years and maybe even longer.”

Journal Reference:

  1. Marc Brysbaert, Michaël Stevens, Paweł Mandera, Emmanuel Keuleers. How Many Words Do We Know? Practical Estimates of Vocabulary Size Dependent on Word Definition, the Degree of Language Input and the Participant’s AgeFrontiers in Psychology, 2016; 7 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01116

Presidente de Portugal quer fazer revisão do novo acordo ortográfico (Folha de S.Paulo)

Giuliana Miranda, 15/05/2016

Oficialmente, o último acordo ortográfico está em vigor em Portugal desde 2009, mas ainda enfrenta resistência em vários setores. Na semana passada, o time dos descontentes recebeu um apoio de peso: o novo presidente português se mostrou favorável à revisão das regras.

Em visita a Moçambique —país lusófono que, assim como Angola, não ratificou as mudanças—, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa admitiu que a não adesão dos africanos pode permitir a Portugal também rever sua posição no acordo.

Mauro Vombe – 4.mai.2016/Xinhua
O presidente português, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, (esq.) saúda o colega moçambicano Filipe Nyusi
O presidente português, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, (esq.) saúda o colega moçambicano Filipe Nyusi

Na quarta-feira (11), a Associação Nacional de Professores de Português e vários membros da organização “Cidadãos contra o Acordo Ortográfico” recorreram à Justiça pedindo a anulação da norma que disseminou o uso da nova ortografia no país.

No cargo há dois meses, Rebelo de Sousa nunca escondeu sua contrariedade sobre o tema. Na década de 1990, ele assinou um manifesto que reuniu 400 personalidades portuguesas contrárias ao acordo ortográfico.

Embora as críticas públicas tenham se abrandado, o livro de imagens de sua campanha à Presidência, “Afectos”, não adota as mudanças ortográficas nem no título.

Em “O Acordo Ortográfico Não Está Em Vigor” (ed. Guerra & Paz), o embaixador e professor de direito internacional Carlos Fernandes diz que o acordo fere também princípios jurídicos e, por isso, não deveria ser adotado.

Segundo Fernandes, além de as regras anteriores não terem sido oficialmente revogadas, o governo português tampouco cumpriu trâmites legais obrigatórios para a entrada em vigor dos novos parâmetros da língua.

O debate sobre uma possível revisão do acordo —há quem defenda até um referendo— provocou uma “caça às bruxas” ortográfica. Vários políticos tiveram currículos, biografias e livros vasculhados em busca de indícios de que são contrários às mudanças na escrita.


Embora tenha sido assinado em 1990 pelos Estados de língua oficial portuguesa, o acordo precisa passar por ratificação interna em cada país para entrar em vigor. Brasil, Portugal, São Tome e Príncipe e Cabo Verde já promulgaram a decisão.

Já Angola e Moçambique —que concentram a maioria dos falantes do português depois do Brasil— ainda não têm data para ratificar.

O português é a quinta língua mais falada do mundo, com cerca de 280 milhões de falantes, dos quais 202 milhões estão no Brasil, 24,7 milhões em Angola, 24,6 milhões em Moçambique e 10,8 milhões em Portugal.

Entre os críticos portugueses e africanos, as alterações são encaradas como submissão aos desejos do Brasil. A língua oficial do país é várias vezes pejorativamente chamada de “brasileiro”.

Um dos motivos da discórdia é o fim das consoantes mudas presentes em várias palavras de Portugal. Com o acordo, prevaleceu a versão brasileira. Por exemplo: actor vira ator e óptimo, ótimo.

Segundo o Ministério da Educação brasileiro, as mudanças afetaram cerca de 0,8% dos vocábulos do Brasil e 1,3% dos de Portugal.


O governo de Portugal segue o acordo ortográfico, e vários ministros saíram em defesa das regras.

Considerado o pai do acordo e um dos mais mais influentes linguistas lusitanos, Malaca Casteleiro também tem defendido sua aplicação.

O primeiro-secretário do Brasil em Lisboa, André Pinto Pacheco, afirmou que ” a embaixada acompanha com atenção o assunto, procurando esclarecer o Estado e a opinião pública de Portugal sobre a aplicação do Acordo Ortográfico da Língua Portuguesa no Brasil”.

Diretor do setor de lexicografia e lexicologia da Academia Brasileira de Letras, Evanildo Bechara minimizou as críticas do presidente português e ressaltou o ritmo da implementação do acordo na comunidade lusófona. “É um processo irreversível.”

“Uma alteração ortográfica não é para a geração que a fez, mas para uma geração futura”, afirmou Bechara. O uso da nova ortografia é obrigatório no Brasil desde 1º de janeiro deste ano.

Words for snow revisited: Languages support efficient communication about the environment (Carnegie Mellon University)




The claim that Eskimo languages have many words for different types of snow is well known among the public, but it has been greatly exaggerated and is therefore often dismissed by scholars of language. However, a new study published in PLOS ONE supports the general idea behind the original claim.

The claim that Eskimo languages have many words for different types of snow is well known among the public, but it has been greatly exaggerated and is therefore often dismissed by scholars of language.

However, a new study published in PLOS ONE supports the general idea behind the original claim. Carnegie Mellon University and University of California, Berkeley researchers found that languages that use the same word for snow and ice tend to be spoken in warmer climates, reflecting lower communicative need to talk about snow and ice.

“We wanted to broaden the investigation past Eskimo languages and look at how different languages carve up the world into words and meanings,” said Charles Kemp, associate professor of psychology in CMU’s Dietrich College of Humanities and Social Sciences.

For the study, Kemp, and UC Berkeley’s Terry Regier and Alexandra Carstensen analyzed the connection between local climates, patterns of language use and word(s) for snow and ice across nearly 300 languages. They drew on multiple sources of data including library reference works, Twitter and large digital collections of linguistic and meteorological data.

The results revealed a connection between temperature and snow and ice terminology, suggesting that local environmental needs leave an imprint on languages. For example, English originated in a relatively cool climate and has distinct words for snow and ice. In contrast, the Hawaiian language is spoken in a warmer climate and uses the same word for snow and for ice. These cases support the claim that languages are adapted to the local communicative needs of their speakers — the same idea that lies behind the overstated claim about Eskimo words for snow. The study finds support for this idea across language families and geographic areas.

“These findings don’t resolve the debate about Eskimo words for snow, but we think our question reflects the spirit of the initial snow claims — that languages reflect the needs of their speakers,” said Carstensen, a psychology graduate student at UC Berkeley.

The researchers suggest that in the past, excessive focus on the specific example of Eskimo words for snow may have obscured the more general principle behind it.

Carstensen added, “Here, we deliberately asked a somewhat different question about a broader set of languages.”

The study also connects with previous work that explores how the sounds and structures of language are shaped in part by a need for efficiency in communication.

“We think our study reveals the same basic principle at work, modulated by local communicative need,” said Regier, professor of linguistics and cognitive science at UC Berkeley.


Read the full study at


An Heir to a Tribe’s Culture Ensures Its Language Is Not Forgotten (New York Times)

Mr. Grant estimates that thousands of students have read the books and taken courses on the language, first through informal workshops held in the nation’s capital, Canberra, from the early 1990s. In December 2015, at a branch of Charles Sturt University in Wagga Wagga, New South Wales, students completed the first-ever course in Wiradjuri.

 To a great extent, Mr. Grant is carrying out a promise to his beloved grandfather, who singled him out as a youngster as his heir to Wiradjuri culture.

“My grandfather was a Wiradjuri elder,” he said, and was anxious to pass along the culture. “But he was arrested after he called to me in Wiradjuri to come home from the park. ‘Barray yanha, barray yanha,’ ‘Come quickly,’ he called out.”

Mr. Grant was probably 8 or 9 years old the night a local policeman heard his grandfather, Wilfred Johnson, and locked him up. But he does not recall a sense of alarm.

“He was an elegant man,” he said of Mr. Johnson. “He was beautifully dressed, usually in a coat and hat. But he was black. So it wasn’t the first time he had spent the night in jail.”

After the arrest, Mr. Johnson, who spoke seven languages, refused to speak Wiradjuri in public.

“He was a linguist with enormous respect for his own people and culture,” said Mr. Grant, who speaks three languages himself: Italian, which he picked up while working at the sawmill, as well as English and Wiradjuri. “But he told me, ‘Things are different now.’ He would only speak his language in the bush.”

It was during those expeditions into the backcountry that Mr. Grant learned Wiradjuri, as well as tracking and hunting skills. He knows that a echidna’s back feet turn inward, complicating tracking. He can describe how his grandfather made a lasso out of long grass to catch a stunned goanna, a type of lizard, for dinner, and he says a rope laid around a bush house will stop snakes from passing over the threshold.

Lloyd Dolan, a Wiradjuri lecturer who has worked with Mr. Grant, said elders took risks teaching Wiradjuri to their children. Mr. Dolan also learned Wiradjuri from his grandfather. His mother forbade him to speak it at home.

“There was a real fear that the children would be taken away if authorities heard kids speaking the language,” Mr. Dolan, 49, said from his office at Charles Sturt University. “The drive to assimilate Aboriginals into white society was systemic.”

Aboriginal people had no right to vote in elections before 1962, and they were counted as wildlife until a change to Australia’s Constitution in 1967.

Mr. Grant grew up in poverty, his family drifting from place to place: Redfern, a rough-and-tumble Sydney suburb; Griffith, a village 60 miles northwest of Narrandera, where he lives now, and Wagga Wagga, which is 62 miles southeast of that.

He recalls vividly moving from a “humpy,” a dirt-floored makeshift shack, consisting of just a few rooms, on the fringe of a country town, into a house with electricity. “It was the first time we had electricity at home, but it wasn’t on much because we had no money to pay for it,” he said with a laugh.

As a child, Mr. Grant said, he scorned his grandfather’s ways. He was embarrassed to be black. By the time he was 17, in 1957, his grandfather had died, and he had dropped out of school, left home and found a job on the railways.

Soon, he moved from a small town to Sydney, where he says he drank a lot, got a tattoo of a roughly drawn dagger and eventually found himself in jail.

“I cried and cried when that happened,” he said. “I had been drinking and probably brawling, and I didn’t want to be there.”

It was his wife, Betty, now 73, who helped turn his life around. After marrying in August 1962, they spent several weeks living out of a shell of a car on the Aboriginal Three Ways Mission on the fringe of Griffith, in central New South Wales.

Mr. Grant soon found a job at a sawmill, and although an accident mangled two fingers of his left hand, it was steady work. He and his wife started a family.

Around that time, Aboriginal activists began agitating for civil rights. In 1965, Charles Perkins, the first Aboriginal to attend the University of Sydney, led 35 student protesters on a Freedom Ride bus tour around outback country towns. They were pelted with gravel and harassed as they went from small town to small town, where they called for an end to segregated seating on buses and in theaters. They demanded equal service in shops and hotels, and they wanted Aboriginal children admitted to municipal swimming pools with white children.

Six years later, Neville Bonner, a leader from an Aboriginal rights organization, became the first Aboriginal to gain a seat in Australia’s Parliament, filling a Senate vacancy left by a Queenslander who had resigned.

With the help of these small civic changes, Mr. Grant, whose formal education ended at age 15, managed to navigate a way forward for himself and his family. He first found work in Canberra helping Aboriginal children who had skipped school.

Around the same time, there was a push to document Aboriginal culture and language, which was rarely written down. As one of the few who knew Wiradjuri language, he was approached about writing it down. That eventually led him to teaching his language and writing “A New Wiradjuri Dictionary,” published in 2005.

“I was told when you revive a lost language, you give it back to all mankind,” he said, sitting in his kitchen, not far from where the kingfishers darted across the Murrumbidgee.

“We were a nothing people for a long time. And it is a big movement now, learning Wiradjuri. I’ve done all that work. I’ve done all I can.”

Study suggests different written languages are equally efficient at conveying meaning (Eureka/University of Southampton)





A study led by the University of Southampton has found there is no difference in the time it takes people from different countries to read and process different languages.

The research, published in the journal Cognition, finds the same amount of time is needed for a person, from for example China, to read and understand a text in Mandarin, as it takes a person from Britain to read and understand a text in English – assuming both are reading their native language.

Professor of Experimental Psychology at Southampton, Simon Liversedge, says: “It has long been argued by some linguists that all languages have common or universal underlying principles, but it has been hard to find robust experimental evidence to support this claim. Our study goes at least part way to addressing this – by showing there is universality in the way we process language during the act of reading. It suggests no one form of written language is more efficient in conveying meaning than another.”

The study, carried out by the University of Southampton (UK), Tianjin Normal University (China) and the University of Turku (Finland), compared the way three groups of people in the UK, China and Finland read their own languages.

The 25 participants in each group – one group for each country – were given eight short texts to read which had been carefully translated into the three different languages. A rigorous translation process was used to make the texts as closely comparable across languages as possible. English, Finnish and Mandarin were chosen because of the stark differences they display in their written form – with great variation in visual presentation of words, for example alphabetic vs. logographic(1), spaced vs. unspaced, agglutinative(2) vs. non-agglutinative.

The researchers used sophisticated eye-tracking equipment to assess the cognitive processes of the participants in each group as they read. The equipment was set up identically in each country to measure eye movement patterns of the individual readers – recording how long they spent looking at each word, sentence or paragraph.

The results of the study showed significant and substantial differences between the three language groups in relation to the nature of eye movements of the readers and how long participants spent reading each individual word or phrase. For example, the Finnish participants spent longer concentrating on some words compared to the English readers. However, most importantly and despite these differences, the time it took for the readers of each language to read each complete sentence or paragraph was the same.

Professor Liversedge says: “This finding suggests that despite very substantial differences in the written form of different languages, at a basic propositional level, it takes humans the same amount of time to process the same information regardless of the language it is written in.

“We have shown it doesn’t matter whether a native Chinese reader is processing Chinese, or a Finnish native reader is reading Finnish, or an English native reader is processing English, in terms of comprehending the basic propositional content of the language, one language is as good as another.”

The study authors believe more research would be needed to fully understand if true universality of language exists, but that their study represents a good first step towards demonstrating that there is universality in the process of reading.


Notes for editors:

1) Logographic language systems use signs or characters to represent words or phrases.

2) Agglutinative language tends to express concepts in complex words consisting of many sub-units that are strung together.

3) The paper Universality in eye movements and reading: A trilingual investigation, (Simon P. Liversedge, Denis Drieghe, Xin Li, Guoli Yan, Xuejun Bai, Jukka Hyönä) is published in the journal Cognition and can also be found at:,%20Drieghe,%20Li,%20Yan,%20Bai,%20%26%20Hyona%20(in%20press)%20copy.pdf


Semantically speaking: Does meaning structure unite languages? (Eureka/Santa Fe Institute)


Humans’ common cognitive abilities and language dependance may provide an underlying semantic order to the world’s languages


We create words to label people, places, actions, thoughts, and more so we can express ourselves meaningfully to others. Do humans’ shared cognitive abilities and dependence on languages naturally provide a universal means of organizing certain concepts? Or do environment and culture influence each language uniquely?

Using a new methodology that measures how closely words’ meanings are related within and between languages, an international team of researchers has revealed that for many universal concepts, the world’s languages feature a common structure of semantic relatedness.

“Before this work, little was known about how to measure [a culture’s sense of] the semantic nearness between concepts,” says co-author and Santa Fe Institute Professor Tanmoy Bhattacharya. “For example, are the concepts of sun and moon close to each other, as they are both bright blobs in the sky? How about sand and sea, as they occur close by? Which of these pairs is the closer? How do we know?”

Translation, the mapping of relative word meanings across languages, would provide clues. But examining the problem with scientific rigor called for an empirical means to denote the degree of semantic relatedness between concepts.

To get reliable answers, Bhattacharya needed to fully quantify a comparative method that is commonly used to infer linguistic history qualitatively. (He and collaborators had previously developed this quantitative method to study changes in sounds of words as languages evolve.)

“Translation uncovers a disagreement between two languages on how concepts are grouped under a single word,” says co-author and Santa Fe Institute and Oxford researcher Hyejin Youn. “Spanish, for example, groups ‘fire’ and ‘passion’ under ‘incendio,’ whereas Swahili groups ‘fire’ with ‘anger’ (but not ‘passion’).”

To quantify the problem, the researchers chose a few basic concepts that we see in nature (sun, moon, mountain, fire, and so on). Each concept was translated from English into 81 diverse languages, then back into English. Based on these translations, a weighted network was created. The structure of the network was used to compare languages’ ways of partitioning concepts.

The team found that the translated concepts consistently formed three theme clusters in a network, densely connected within themselves and weakly to one another: water, solid natural materials, and earth and sky.

“For the first time, we now have a method to quantify how universal these relations are,” says Bhattacharya. “What is universal – and what is not – about how we group clusters of meanings teaches us a lot about psycholinguistics, the conceptual structures that underlie language use.”

The researchers hope to expand this study’s domain, adding more concepts, then investigating how the universal structure they reveal underlies meaning shift.

Their research was published today in PNAS.

Indígena de 81 anos aprende a usar computador e cria dicionário para salvar seu idioma da extinção (QGA)

Marie Wilcox é a última pessoa no mundo fluente no idioma Wukchumi

Conheça Marie Wilcox, uma bisavó de 81 anos e a última pessoa no mundo fluente no idioma Wukchumi. O povo Wukchumi costumava ter uma população de 50.000 pessoas antes de terem contato com os colonizadores, mas agora são somente 200 pessoas vivendo no Vale de São Joaquim, na Califórnia. Sua linguagem foi morrendo aos poucos a cada nova geração, mas Marie se comprometeu com a tarefa de revivê-la, aprendendo a usar um computador para que conseguisse começar a escrever o primeiro dicionário Wukchumni. O processo levou sete anos, e agora que terminou ela não pretende parar seu trabalho de imortalizar sua língua nativa.

O documentário “Marie’s Dictionary”, disponível no Youtube, nos mostra a motivação de Marie e seu trabalho árduo para trazer de volta e registrar um idioma que foi quase totalmente apagado pela colonização, racismo institucionalizado e opressão.

No vídeo, Marie admite ter dúvidas sobre a gigantesca tarefa que ela se comprometeu: “Eu tenho dúvidas sobre minha língua, e sobre quem quer mantê-la viva. Ninguém parece querer aprender. É estranho que eu seja a última… Tudo vai estar perdido algum dia desses, não sei”.

Mas com sorte, esse dia ainda vai demorar. Marie e sua filha Jennifer agora dão aulas para membros da tribo, e trabalham num dicionário em áudio para acompanhar o dicionário escrito que ela já criou.

Veja o vídeo (em inglês).


Ora pois, uma língua bem brasileira (Pesquisa Fapesp)

Análise de textos antigos e de entrevistas expõe as marcas próprias do idioma no país, o alcance do R caipira e os lugares que preservam modos antigos de falar


Estudo para Partida da monção, 1897, de Almeida Júnior (Acervo Pinacoteca do Estado de SP). Os bandeirantes saíam de Porto Feliz rumo ao Centro-Oeste

Estudo para Partida da monção, 1897, de Almeida Júnior (Acervo Pinacoteca do Estado de SP). Os bandeirantes saíam de Porto Feliz rumo ao Centro-Oeste

A possibilidade de ser simples, dispensar elementos gramaticais teoricamente essenciais e responder “sim, comprei”, quando alguém pergunta “você comprou o carro?”, é uma das características que conferem flexibilidade e identidade ao português brasileiro. A análise de documentos antigos e de entrevistas de campo ao longo dos últimos 30 anos está mostrando que o português brasileiro já pode ser considerado único, diferente do português europeu, do mesmo modo que o inglês americano é distinto do inglês britânico. O português brasileiro ainda não é, porém, uma língua autônoma: talvez seja – na previsão de especialistas, em cerca de 200 anos – quando acumular peculiaridades que nos impeçam de entender inteiramente o que um nativo de Portugal diz.

A expansão do português no Brasil, as variações regionais com suas possíveis explicações, que fazem o urubu de São Paulo ser chamado de corvo no Sul do país, e as raízes das inovações da linguagem estão emergindo por meio do trabalho de cerca de 200 linguistas. De acordo com estudos da Universidade de São Paulo (USP), uma inovação do português brasileiro, por enquanto sem equivalente em Portugal, é o Rcaipira, às vezes tão intenso que parece valer por dois ou três, como em porrrta ou carrrne.

Associar o R caipira apenas ao interior paulista, porém, é uma imprecisão geográfica e histórica, embora o R desavergonhado tenha sido uma das marcas do estilo matuto do ator Amácio Mazzaropi em seus 32 filmes, produzidos de 1952 a 1980. Seguindo as rotas dos bandeirantes paulistas em busca de ouro, os linguistas encontraram o Rsupostamente típico de São Paulo em cidades de Minas Gerais, Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Paraná e oeste de Santa Catarina e do Rio Grande do Sul, formando um modo de falar similar ao português do século XVIII. Quem tiver paciência e ouvido apurado poderá encontrar também na região central do Brasil – e em cidades do litoral – o S chiado, uma característica hoje típica do falar carioca que veio com os portugueses em 1808 e era um sinal de prestígio por representar o falar da Corte. Mesmo os portugueses não eram originais: os especialistas argumentam que o Schiado, que faz da esquina uma shquina, veio dos nobres franceses, que os portugueses admiravam.

A história da língua portuguesa no Brasil está trazendo à tona as características preservadas do português, como a troca do L pelo R, resultando em pranta em vez deplanta. Camões registrou essa troca em Os lusíadas – lá está um frautas no lugar de flautas – e o cantor e compositor paulista Adoniran Barbosa a deixou registrada em diversas composições, em frases como “frechada do teu olhar”, do samba Tiro ao Álvaro. Em levantamentos de campo, pesquisadores da USP observaram que moradores do interior tanto do Brasil quanto de Portugal, principalmente os menos escolarizados, ainda falam desse modo. Outro sinal de preservação da língua identificado por especialistas do Rio de Janeiro e de São Paulo, dessa vez em documentos antigos, foi a gente ou as gentes como sinônimo de “nós” e hoje uma das marcas próprias do português brasileiro.

Célia Lopes, da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), encontrou registros de a gente em documentos do século XVI e, com mais frequência, a partir do século XIX. Era uma forma de indicar a primeira pessoa do plural, no sentido de todo mundo com a inclusão necessária do eu. Segundo ela, o emprego de a gente pode passar descompromisso e indefinição: quem diz a gente em geral não deixa claro se pretende se comprometer com o que está falando ou se se vê como parte do grupo, como em “a gente precisa fazer”. Já o pronome nós, como em “nós precisamos fazer”, expressa responsabilidade e compromisso. Nos últimos 30 anos, ela notou, a gente instalou-se nos espaços antes ocupados pelo nós e se tornou um recurso bastante usado por todas as idades e classes sociais no país inteiro, embora nos livros de gramática permaneça na marginalidade.

Linguistas de vários estados do país estão desenterrando as raízes do português brasileiro ao examinar cartas pessoais e administrativas, testamentos, relatos de viagens, processos judiciais, cartas de leitores e anúncios de jornais desde o século XVI, coletados em instituições como a Biblioteca Nacional e o Arquivo Público do Estado de São Paulo. A equipe de Célia Lopes tem encontrado também na feira de antiguidades do sábado da Praça XV de Novembro, no centro do Rio, cartas antigas e outros tesouros linguísticos, nem sempre valorizados. “Um estudante me trouxe cartas maravilhosas encontradas no lixo”, ela contou.

Sem título da série Estudo para bandeirantes, sem data, de Henrique Bernardelli, (Acervo Pinacoteca do Estado de SP) paulistas expandiram a língua portuguesa conquistando  outras regiões

De vossa mercê para 
Os documentos antigos evidenciam que o português falado no Brasil começou a se diferenciar do europeu há pelo menos quatro séculos. Uma indicação dessa separação é o Memórias para a história da capitania de São Vicente, de 1793, escrito por frei Gaspar da Madre de Deus, nascido em São Vicente, e depois reescrito pelo português Marcelino Pereira Cleto, que foi juiz em Santos. Comparando as duas versões, José Simões, da USP, encontrou 30 diferenças entre o português brasileiro e o europeu. Uma delas é encontrada ainda hoje: como usuários do português brasileiro, preferimos explicitar os sujeitos das frases, como em “o rapaz me vendeu o carro, depois ele saiu correndo e ao atravessar a rua ele foi atropelado”. Em português europeu, seria mais natural omitir o sujeito, já definido pelo tempo verbal – “o rapaz vendeu-me o carro, depois saiu a correr…” –, resultando em uma construção gramaticalmente impecável, embora nos soe um pouco estranha.

Um morador de Portugal, se lhe perguntarem se comprou um carro, responderá com naturalidade “sim, comprei-o”, explicitando o complemento do verbo, “mesmo entre falantes pouco escolarizados”, observa Simões. Ele nota que os portugueses usam mesóclise – “dar-lhe-ei um carro, com certeza!” –, que soaria pernóstica no Brasil. Outra diferença é a distância entre a língua falada e a escrita no Brasil. Ninguém fala muito, mas muinto. O pronome você, que já é uma redução de vossa mercê e de vosmecê, encolheu ainda mais, para , e grudou no verbo: cevai?

“A língua que falamos não é a que escrevemos”, diz Simões, com base em exemplos como esses. “O português escrito e o falado em Portugal são mais próximos, embora também existam diferenças regionais.” Simões complementa as análises textuais com suas andanças por Portugal. “Há 10 anos meus parentes de Portugal diziam que não entendiam o que eu dizia”, ele observa. “Hoje, provavelmente por causa da influência das novelas brasileiras na televisão, dizem que já estou falando um português mais correto.”

“Conservamos o ritmo da fala, enquanto os europeus começaram a falar mais rápido a partir do século XVIII”, observa Ataliba Castilho, professor emérito da USP, que, nos últimos 40 anos, planejou e coordenou vários projetos de pesquisa sobre o português falado e a história do português do Brasil. “Até o século XVI”, diz ele, “o português brasileiro e o europeu eram como o espanhol, com um corte silábico duro. A palavra falada era muito próxima da escrita”. Célia Lopes acrescenta outra diferença: o português brasileiro conserva a maioria das vogais, enquanto os europeus em geral as omitem, ressaltando as consoantes, e diriam tulfón para se referir ao telefone.

Há também muitas palavras com sentidos diferentes de um lado e de outro do Atlântico. Os estudantes das universidades privadas não pagam mensalidade, mas propina. Bolsista é bolseiro. Como os europeus não adotaram algumas palavras usadas no Brasil, a exemplo de bunda, de origem africana, podem surgir situações embaraçosas. Vanderci Aguilera, professora sênior da Universidade Estadual de Londrina (Uel) e uma das linguistas empenhadas no resgate da história do português brasileiro, levou uma amiga portuguesa a uma loja. Para ver se um vestido que acabava de experimentar caía bem às costas, a amiga lhe perguntou: “O que achas do meu rabo?”.

016-023_CAPA_Portugues_230O soldado e a filha do fazendeiro
No acervo de documentos sobre a evolução do português paulista, está uma carta de 1807, escrita pelo soldado Manoel Coelho, que teria seduzido a filha de um fazendeiro. Quando soube, o pai da moça, enfurecido, forçou o rapaz a se casar com ela. O soldado, porém, bateu o pé: não se casaria, como ele escreveu, “nem por bem nem por mar”. Simões estranhou a citação ao mar, já que o quiproquó se passava na então vila de São Paulo, mas depois percebeu: “Olha o Rcaipira! Ele quis dizer ‘nem por bem nem por mal!’”. O soldado escrevia como falava, não se sabe se casou com a filha do fazendeiro, mas deixou uma prova valiosa de como se falava no início do século XIX.

“O R caipira era uma das características da língua falada na vila de São Paulo, que aos poucos, com a crescente urbanização e a chegada de imigrantes europeus, foi expulsa para a periferia ou para outras cidades”, diz Simões. “Era a língua dos bandeirantes.” Os especialistas acreditam que os primeiros moradores da vila de São Paulo, além de porrta, pulavam consoantes no meio das palavras, falando muié em vez de mulher, por exemplo. Para aprisionar índios e, mais tarde, para encontrar ouro, os bandeirantes conquistaram inicialmente o interior paulista, levando seu vocabulário e seu modo de falar. O R exagerado ainda pode ser ouvido nas cidades do chamado Médio Tietê como Santana de Parnaíba, Pirapora do Bom Jesus, Sorocaba, Itu, Tietê, Porto Feliz e Piracicaba, cujos moradores, principalmente os do campo, o pintor ituano José Ferraz de Almeida Júnior retratou, até ser assassinado pelo marido de sua amante em Piracicaba. Os bandeirantes seguiram depois para outras matas da imensa Capitania de São Paulo, constituída em 1709 com os territórios dos atuais estados de São Paulo, Mato Grosso do Sul, Mato Grosso, Rondônia, Tocantins, Minas Gerais, Paraná e Santa Catarina (ver mapa).

Manoel Mourivaldo Almeida, também da USP, encontrou sinais do português paulista antigo em Cuiabá, a capital de Mato Grosso, que permaneceu com relativamente pouca interação linguística e cultural com outras cidades depois do fim do auge da mineração de ouro, há dois séculos. “O português culto dos séculos XVI ao XVII tinha um Schiado”, conclui Almeida. “Os paulistas, quando foram para o Centro-Oeste, falavam como os cariocas hoje!” O ator e diretor teatral cuiabano Justino Astrevo de Aguiar reconhece a herança paulista e carioca, mas considera um traço mais evidente do falar local o hábito de acrescentar um J ou um T antes ou no meio das palavras, como em djeitocadju ou tchuva, uma característica da pronúncia típica do século XVII, que Almeida identificou também entre moradores de Goiás, Minas Gerais, Maranhão e na região da Galícia, na Espanha.

Almeida apurou o ouvido para as variações do português no Brasil por conta de sua própria história. Filho de portugueses, nasceu em Piritiba, interior da Bahia, saiu de lá aos 7 anos, morou em Jaciara, interior de Mato Grosso, e depois 25 anos em Cuiabá, foi professor da universidade federal e se mudou para São Paulo em 2003. Ele reconhece que fala como paulista nos momentos mais formais – embora prefira falar éxtra em vez de êxtra como os paulistas –, mas quando descontrai assume o ritmo de falar baiano e o vocabulário matogrossense. Ele estuda o modo de falar cuiabano desde 1991, por sugestão de um colega professor, Leônidas Querubim Avelino, especialista em Camões, que havia verificado sinais do português arcaico por lá. Avelino lhe contou que um roceiro cego de Livramento, a 30 quilômetros de Cuiabá, comentou que ele estava “andando pusilo”, no sentido de fraco. Avelino reconheceu uma forma reduzida de pusilânime, que não era mais usada em Portugal.

“Os moradores de Cuiabá e de algumas outras cidades, como Cáceres e Barão de Melgado, em Mato Grosso, e Corumbá, em Mato Grosso do Sul, preservam o português paulista do século XVIII mais do que os próprios paulistas. Paulistas do interior e também da capital hoje falam dia, com um d seco, enquanto na maior parte do Brasil se diz djia”, observou Almeida. “O modo de falar pode mudar dependendo do acesso à cultura, da motivação e da capacidade de perceber e articular sons de modo diferente. Quem procurar nos lugares mais distantes dos grandes centros urbanos vai encontrar sinais de preservação do português antigo.”

Rua 25 de março, 1894, de Antonio Ferrigno (Acervo Pinacoteca do Estado de SP). A cidade de São Paulo tinha um sotaque próprio

Rua 25 de março, 1894, de Antonio Ferrigno (Acervo Pinacoteca do Estado de SP). A cidade de São Paulo tinha um sotaque próprio

De 1998 a 2003, uma equipe coordenada por Heitor Megale, da USP, seguiu a rota das bandeiras do século XVI em busca de traços da língua portuguesa antiga que tenham permanecido ao longo de quatro séculos. As entrevistas com moradores com 60 anos a 90 anos de quase 40 cidades ou povoados de Minas Gerais, Goiás e Mato Grosso trouxeram à tona termos esquecidos como mamparra(fingimento) e mensonha (mentira), uma palavra de um dos poemas de Francisco de Sá de Miranda do século XV, treição, usada no interior de Goiás no sentido de surpresa, e termos da linguagem popular ainda usados em Portugal, como despoispercisão e tristura, comuns no sul de Minas. O que parecia anacronismo ganhou valor. Dizer sancristia em vez de sacristia não era um erro, “mas uma influência preservada do passado, quando a pronúncia era assim”, relatou o Jornal da Manhã, de Paracatu, Minas, em 20 de dezembro de 2001.

Ao norte, a língua portuguesa expandiu-se para o interior a partir da cidade de Salvador, que foi a capital do Brasil Colônia durante três séculos. Salvador era também um centro de fermentação da língua, por receber multidões de escravos africanos, que aprendiam o português como língua estrangeira, mas também ofereciam seu vocabulário, ao qual já haviam se somado as palavras indígenas.

Para impedir que a língua de Camões se desfigurasse ao cruzar com os dialetos nativos, Sebastião José de Carvalho e Melo, o Marquês de Pombal, secretário de Estado do reino, resolveu agir. Em 1757, Pombal expulsou os jesuítas, entre outras razões de ordem política, porque estavam ensinando a doutrina cristã em língua indígena, e, por decreto, fez do português a língua oficial do Brasil. O português se impôs sobre as línguas nativas e ainda hoje é a língua oficial, embora os linguistas alertem que não possa ser chamada de nacional por causa das 180 línguas indígenas faladas no país (eram 1.200, estima-se, quando os portugueses chegaram). A miscigenação linguística, que reflete a mistura de povos formadores do país, explica em boa parte as variações regionais de vocabulário e de ritmos, sintetizadas em um mapa dos falares do Museu da Língua Portuguesa, em São Paulo. É fácil encontrar variações em um mesmo estado: os moradores do norte de Minas falam como os baianos, os da região central mantêm o autêntico mineirês, no sul a influência paulista é intensa e a leste o modo de falar assemelha-se ao sotaque carioca.

A pandorga e o bigato
Há 10 anos um grupo de linguistas estuda um dos resultados da miscigenação linguística: os diferentes nomes com que um mesmo objeto pode ser chamado, registrados por meio de entrevistas com 1.100 pessoas em 250 localidades. Brasil afora, o brinquedo feito de papel e varetas que se empina ao vento por meio de uma linha é chamado de papagaio, pipa, raia ou pandorga – ou ainda coruja em Natal e João Pessoa –, de acordo com o primeiro volume do Atlas linguístico do Brasil, publicado em outubro de 2014 com os resultados das entrevistas nas capitais (Editora UEL). Já o aparelho com luzes vermelha, amarela e verde usado em cruzamentos de ruas para regular o trânsito é chamado apenas de sinal no Rio de Janeiro e em Belo Horizonte e também de semáforo nas capitais do Norte e Nordeste. Goiânia registrou os quatro nomes para o mesmo objeto: sinal, semáforo, sinaleiro e farol.

Começa agora a busca de explicações para essas diferenças. “Onde nasci, em Sertanópolis, a 42 quilômetros de Londrina”, disse Vanderci Aguilera, uma das coordenadoras do Atlas, “chamamos bicho de goiaba de bigato por influência dos colonizadores, que eram imigrantes italianos vindos do interior paulista”. Segundo ela, os moradores dos três estados do Sul chamam urubu de corvo por influência dos europeus, enquanto os do Sudeste mantiveram o nome tupi, urubu.

Cena de família de Adolfo Augusto Pinto, 1891, de Almeida Júnior (Acervo Pinacoteca do Estado de SP).No final do século XIX o pronome você já era mais formal que o tu

Cena de família de Adolfo Augusto Pinto, 1891, de Almeida Júnior (Acervo Pinacoteca do Estado de SP). No final do século XIX o pronome você já era mais formal que o tu

Cada estado – ou região – tem seu próprio patrimônio linguístico, que deve ser respeitado, enfatizam os especialistas. Os professores de português, alerta Vanderci, não deveriam repreender os alunos por chamarem beija-flor de cuitelo, como é comum no interior do Paraná, nem recriminar os que dizem carochurascoou baranco, como é comum entre os descendentes de poloneses e alemães no Sul, mas ensinar outras formas de falar e deixar a meninada se expressar como quiser quando estiver com a família ou com os amigos. “Ninguém fala errado”, ela enfatiza. “Todo mundo fala de acordo com sua história de vida, com o que foi transmitido pelos pais e depois modificado pela escola. Nossa fala é nossa identidade, não temos por que nos envergonhar.”

A diversidade do português brasileiro é tão grande que, apesar do empenho dos locutores de telejornais de alcance nacional em tentar criar uma língua neutra, despida de sotaques locais, “não há um padrão nacional”, assegura Castilho. “Há diferenças de vocabulário, gramática, sintaxe e pronúncia mesmo entre pessoas que adotam a norma culta”, diz ele. Insatisfeito com as teorias importadas, Castilho criou a abordagem multissistêmica da linguagem, segundo a qual qualquer expressão linguística mobiliza simultaneamente quatro planos (léxico, semântica, discurso e gramática), que deveriam ser vistos de modo integrado e não mais separadamente. Ao lado de Verena Kewitz, da USP, ele tem debatido essa abordagem com estudantes de pós-graduação e com outros especialistas do Brasil e no exterior.

Também está claro que o português brasileiro se refaz continuamente. As palavras podem morrer ou ganhar novos sentidos. Almeida contou que Celciane Vasconcelos, uma das estudantes de seu grupo, verificou que somente os moradores mais antigos do litoral paranaense conheciam a palavra sumaca, um tipo de barco antes comum, que hoje não se constrói mais, tirando a antiga serventia da palavra que hoje nomeia uma praia em Paraty (RJ). Os modos antigos de falar podem ressurgir. O R caipira, asseguram os linguistas, está voltando, até mesmo em São Paulo, e readquirindo status, na esteira dos cantores de música sertaneja. “Hoje ser caipira é chique”, assegura Vanderci. Ou ao menos é aceitável e parte do estilo pessoal, como o da apresentadora de TV Sabrina Sato.

Bilhetes de amor
Os linguistas têm notado a expansão do tratamento informal. “Tenho 78 anos e devia ser tratado por senhor, mas meus alunos mais jovens me tratam por você”, diz Castilho, aparentemente sem se incomodar com a informalidade, inconcebível em seus tempos de estudante. O você, porém, não reinará sozinho. Célia Lopes, com sua equipe da UFRJ, verificou que o tu predomina em Porto Alegre e convive com o você no Rio de Janeiro e em Recife, enquanto você é o tratamento predominante em São Paulo, Curitiba, Belo Horizonte e Salvador. O tu já era mais próximo e menos formal que vocênas quase 500 cartas do acervo on-line da UFRJ, quase todas de poetas, políticos e outras personalidades do final do século XIX e início do XX.

Como ainda faltava a expressão do falar das pessoas comuns, Célia e sua equipe exultaram ao encontrar 13 bilhetes escritos em 1908 por Robertina de Souza para seu amante e para seu marido. Esse material era parte de um processo-crime movido contra o marido, que expulsou de sua casa um amigo e a própria mulher ao saber que tinham tido um caso extraconjungal e depois matou o ex-amigo. Em um dos 11 bilhetes para o amante, Álvaro Mattos, Robertina, que assinava como Chininha, escreveu: “Eu te adoro te amo até a morte sou tua só tu é meu só o meu coracao e teu e o teu coracao é meu. Chininha e todinha tua ate a morte”. Já o marido, Arthur Noronha, que recebeu apenas dois bilhetes, ela tratava de modo mais formal: “Eu rezo pedindo a Deus para você me perdoar, mas creio que voce não tem coragem de ver morrer um filho o filha”. E mais adiante: “Não posso me separar de voce e do meu filho a não ser com a morte”. Não se sabe se ela voltou para casa, mas o marido foi absolvido, por alegar que matou o outro homem em defesa da honra.

Outro sinal da evolução do português brasileiro são as construções híbridas, com um verbo que não concorda mais com o pronome, do tipo tu não sabe?, e a mistura dos pronomes de tratamento você e tu, como em “se você precisar, vou te ajudar”. Os portugueses europeus poderiam alegar que se trata de mais uma prova de nossa capacidade de desfigurar a língua lusitana, mas talvez não tenham tanta razão para se queixar. Célia Lopes encontrou a mistura de pronomes de tratamento, que ela e outros linguistas não consideram mais um erro, em cartas do marquês do Lavradio, que foi vice-rei do Brasil de 1769 a 1796, e, mais de dois séculos depois, em uma entrevista do ex-presidente Fernando Henrique Cardoso.

Projeto de história do português paulista (PHPP – Projeto Caipira) (nº 11/51787-5); Modalidade Projeto Temático; Pesquisador responsável Manoel Mourivaldo Santiago Almeida(USP); Investimento R$ 87.372,10 (FAPESP).

Noemi Jaffe: A semântica da seca (Folha de S.Paulo)

26/02/2015  02h00

Emmanuel Levinas disse que a “consciência é a urgência de uma destinação dirigida a outro, e não um eterno retorno sobre si mesmo”. Penso que, embora não pareça, a frase se relaciona intimamente à “crise hídrica” em São Paulo.

Temos sido obrigados a ouvir e a falar em “crise hídrica”, na “maior seca em 84 anos” e expressões afins, que culpam a natureza, e não em catástrofe, colapso, responsabilidade ou palavras de igual gravidade.

O cidadão comum vive, na gestão do governo paulista, sob um regime eufemístico de linguagem, em aparência elegante, mas, na verdade, retoricamente totalitário, com o qual somos obrigados a conviver e, ainda, forçados a mimetizar.

“Crise hídrica”, “plano de contingência”, “obras emergenciais”, “volume morto”, “reservatórios”, tal como vêm sendo usados, não são mais que desvios covardes da linguagem e da política para ocultar o enfrentamento do real.

Não há água, houve grande incompetência, haverá grandes dificuldades, é necessário um plano emergencial de orientação e a criação de redes de contenção e de solidariedade. É preciso construir e distribuir cisternas, caixas d’água para a população carente, ensinar medidas de economia, mobilizar as subprefeituras para ações localizadas e, sobretudo, expor pública e claramente medidas restritivas à grande indústria e à agricultura, que podem ser bem mais perdulárias do que o cidadão.

Mas nada disso se diz ou faz. E por quê? A impressão que tenho é a de que a maioria dos políticos não trabalha sob o regime da responsabilidade –a condição de “destinação ao outro”–, mas sim na forma do “eterno retorno sobre si mesmo”.

Vive-se, em São Paulo, uma situação de absurdo, em que, além das enormes dificuldades cotidianas –deslocamento, saúde, segurança, educação, enchentes, e agora, a de ter água–, ainda é preciso ouvir o presidente da Sabesp dizer que São Pedro “tem errado a pontaria”.

Meu impulso é o de partir para o vocativo: “Ei, presidenta Dilma, deputados federais, governador Alckmin, prefeito Haddad, vereadores! Ouçam! Nós os elegemos para que vocês batalhem por nós, e não por seus mandatos! Nós é que somos aquele, o outro, a quem vocês devem responsabilidade!”.

Ou não tem relação com a “crise hídrica” um deputado federal receber cerca de R$100.000,00 por mês em “verbas de gabinete”? Por que deputados têm direito a um benefício que, entre outros, lhes garante seguro de saúde e carro, se quem ganha muitíssimo menos não tem?

Desafio os deputados, um a um, a abrirem mão publicamente de seus seguros de saúde e a usarem o transporte público para irem ao trabalho –a entrarem no real.

Até quando a população, sobretudo a mais carente, que tem poucos instrumentos para amenizar o que já sofre, vai ser tutelada e oprimida sob o manto eufemístico da “maior seca em 84 anos”?

Queremos o real, a linguagem responsável, que explicita o olhar para o outro e dá sustentação e liberdade para que se possam superar as dificuldades com autonomia.

O eufemismo livra os políticos e aliena a população da chapa maciça do real. Ele representa um estado semelhante à burocracia ineficaz. Como ser responsável se, para cada ação, há infinitas mediações?

O resultado é que as mediações acabam por alimentar muito mais a si mesmas do que ao objetivo final e inicial de governar: ser para o outro –no caso, nós, impotentes diante do que nos obrigam e do que, há meses, nos forçam a presenciar.

NOEMI JAFFE, 52, é doutora em literatura brasileira pela USP e autora de “O que os Cegos Estão Sonhando?” (editora 34)

Indo-European languages emerged roughly 6,500 years ago on Russian steppes, new research suggests (LSA)


Linguists have long agreed that languages from English to Greek to Hindi, known as ‘Indo-European languages‘, are part of a language family which first emerged from a common ancestor spoken thousands of years ago. Now, a new study gives us more information on when and where it was most likely used. Using data from over 150 languages, linguists at the University of California, Berkeley provide evidence that this ancestor language originated 5,500 – 6,500 years ago, on the Pontic-Caspian steppe stretching from Moldova and Ukraine to Russia and western Kazakhstan.

Ancestry-constrained phylogenetic analysis supports the Indo-European steppe hypothesis“, by Will Chang, Chundra Cathcart, David Hall and Andrew Garrett, will appear in the March issue of the academic journal LanguageA pre-print version of the article is available on the LSA website.

Chang et al. abstract

This article provides new support for the “steppe hypothesis” or “Kurgan hypothesis”, which proposes that Indo-European languages first spread with cultural developments in animal husbandry around 4500 – 3500 BCE. (An alternate theory proposes that they spread much earlier, around 7500 – 6000 BCE, in Anatolia in modern-day Turkey.)

Chang et al. examined over 200 sets of words from living and historical Indo-European languages; after determining how quickly these words changed over time through statistical modeling, they concluded that the rate of change indicated that the languages which first used these words began to diverge approximately 6,500 years ago, in accordance with the steppe hypothesis.

This is one of the first quantitatively-based academic papers in support of the steppe hypothesis, and the first to use a model with “ancestry constraints” which more directly incorporate previously discovered relationships between languages. Discussion of prior studies in favor of and against the steppe hypothesis can be found in the paper.

Members of the media who are interested in discussing the article and its findings may contact Brice Russ, LSA Director of Communications, and Andrew Garrett, Professor of Linguistics at the University of California, Berkeley.

Especialistas criticam problemas no acordo ortográfico (Agência Brasil)

Assunto está em debate na Comissão de Educação do Senado

O professor Pasquale Cipro Neto defendeu nesta quarta-feira (22) revisão no Acordo Ortográfico da Língua Portuguesa. “O texto do acordo é tão cheio de problema que foi preciso a Academia [Brasileira de Letras] publicar nota explicativa [sobre pontos do acordo]. Por que foi preciso isso? Porque há problemas”, ressaltou o professor, ao participar do segundo dia de debates sobre o assunto na Comissão de Educação do Senado.

Segundo Pasquale, o Brasil saiu na frente dos demais países signatários na implementação do acordo impedindo uma adoção simultânea da nova regra. Para ele, houve atropelo e falta de organização do país no processo. “Nós não podemos ir adiante com um texto que carece de polimento, soluções concretas”, disse.

As diversas situações do uso do hífen, considerado pelo professor uma das grandes fragilidades da norma, foi um dos pontos mais criticados. Para Pasquale Neto, no texto do acordo, “o hífen foi maltratado, mal resolvido”. A seu ver, a questão precisa ser solucionada. De acordo com ele, é inexplicável o fato da palavra “pé-de-meia” ser escrita com hífen e “pé de moleque”, não.

Para a professora Stella Maris Bortoni de Figueiredo Ricardo, integrante da Associação Brasileira de Linguística (Abralin), qualquer sugestão de mudança deve ser acordada com os países signatários. “A Abralin recomenda que se consolide o Acordo Ortográfico de 1990, sem que haja nenhuma alteração unilateral. Qualquer alteração que se queira fazer no acordo, que seja feito no âmbito da CPLP  [Comunidade dos Países de Língua Portuguesa] e do Iilp [Instituto Internacional da Língua Portuguesa]”, defendeu.

Para debater as sugestões visando a melhorar o acordo, a Comissão de Educação do Senado criou, em 2013, grupo técnico de trabalho formado pelos professores Ernani Pimentel e Pasquale Cipro Neto, que deverão apresentar uma síntese em março de 2015. Por interferência da comissão, a implantação definitiva foi adiada de janeiro de 2013 para janeiro de 2016 por decreto da presidenta Dilma Rousseff.

Na rodada de ontem (21) o presidente do Centro de Estudos Linguísticos da Língua Portuguesa, Ernani Pimentel, polemizou a discussão ao cobrar maior simplificação gramatical. Ele lidera movimento para adoção de critério fonético na ortografia, ou seja, a escrita das palavras orientada pela forma como se fala. Por esse critério, a palavra “chuva”, por exemplo, seria escrita com x (xuva), sem preocupação em considerar a origem. Para o professor, a simplificação evitaria que as novas gerações sejam submetidas a “regras ultrapassadas que exigem decoreba”.

A sugestão foi rechaçada pelo gramático Evanildo Bechara que considera que a simplificação fonética, “aparentemente ideal”, resultaria em mais problemas que soluções, pois extinguiria as palavras homófonas – aquelas que têm o mesmo som, mas com escrita e significados diferentes. Segundo ele, as palavras seção, sessão e cessão, ficariam reduzidas a uma só grafia – sesão –, o que prejudicaria a compreensão da mensagem. “Aparentemente teríamos resolvido um problema ortográfico, mas criaríamos um problema maior na função da língua, que é a comunicação entre as pessoas”, lembrou.

O gramático avalia que o acordo reúne qualidades e representa um avanço para o uso do idioma e para unificar regras entre os países lusófonos. Ele ressaltou que os países que assinaram o acordo poderão, depois da implementação das novas regras, aprovar modificações e ajustes, caso necessário.

Para o presidente da comissão, senador Cyro Miranda (PSDB-GO), a intenção dos debates não é alterar o acordo, uma vez que, segundo ele, o papel cabe ao Executivo, em entendimento com os demais países signatários. “Nossa obrigação é chamar as pessoas envolvidas para dar opinião. Mas quem toma a frente é o Ministério da Educação e o Ministério de Relações Exteriores. Estamos mostrando as dificuldades e se, for possível, vamos contribuir”, disse.

(Karine Melo / Agência Brasil)

Saving Native Languages and Culture in Mexico With Computer Games (Indian Country)



Indigenous children in Mexico can now learn their mother tongues with specialized computer games, helping to prevent the further loss of those languages across the country.

“Three years ago, before we employed these materials, we were on the verge of seeing our children lose our Native languages,” asserted Matilde Hernandez, a teacher in Zitacuaro, Michoacan.

“Now they are speaking and singing in Mazahua as if that had never happened,” Hernandez said, referring to computer software that provides games and lessons in most of the linguistic families of the country including Mazahua, Chinanteco, Nahuatl of Puebla, Tzeltal, Mixteco, Zapateco, Chatino and others.

The new software was created by scientists and educators in two research institutions in Mexico: the Victor Franco Language and Culture Lab (VFLCL) of the Center for Investigations and Higher Studies in Social Anthropology (CIHSSA); and the Computer Center of the National Institute of Astrophysics, Optics and Electronics (NIAOE).

According to reports released this summer, the software was developed as a tool to help counteract the educational lag in indigenous communities and to employ these educational technologies so that the children may learn various subjects in an entertaining manner while reinforcing their Native language and culture.

“This software – divided into three methodologies for three different groups of applications – was made by dedicated researchers who have experience with Indigenous Peoples,” said Dr. Frida Villavicencio, Coordinator of the VLFCL’s Language Lab.

“We must have an impact on the children,” she continued, “offering them better methodologies for learning their mother tongues, as well as for learning Spanish and for supporting their basic education in a fun way.”

Villavicencio pointed out that the games and programs were not translated from the Spanish but were developed in the Native languages with the help of Native speakers. She added that studies from Mexico’s National Institute of Indigenous Languages (NIIL) show that the main reason why indigenous languages disappear, or are in danger of doing so, is because in each generation fewer and fewer of the children speak those languages.

“We need bilingual children only in that way can we preserve their languages,” she added.


How learning to talk is in the genes (Science Daily)

Date: September 16, 2014

Source: University of Bristol

Summary: Researchers have found evidence that genetic factors may contribute to the development of language during infancy. Scientists discovered a significant link between genetic changes near the ROBO2 gene and the number of words spoken by children in the early stages of language development.

Researchers have found evidence that genetic factors may contribute to the development of language during infancy. Credit: © witthaya / Fotolia

Researchers have found evidence that genetic factors may contribute to the development of language during infancy.

Scientists from the Medical Research Council (MRC) Integrative Epidemiology Unit at the University of Bristol worked with colleagues around the world to discover a significant link between genetic changes near the ROBO2 gene and the number of words spoken by children in the early stages of language development.

Children produce words at about 10 to 15 months of age and our range of vocabulary expands as we grow — from around 50 words at 15 to 18 months, 200 words at 18 to 30 months, 14,000 words at six-years-old and then over 50,000 words by the time we leave secondary school.

The researchers found the genetic link during the ages of 15 to 18 months when toddlers typically communicate with single words only before their linguistic skills advance to two-word combinations and more complex grammatical structures.

The results, published in Nature Communications today [16 Sept], shed further light on a specific genetic region on chromosome 3, which has been previously implicated in dyslexia and speech-related disorders.

The ROBO2 gene contains the instructions for making the ROBO2 protein. This protein directs chemicals in brain cells and other neuronal cell formations that may help infants to develop language but also to produce sounds.

The ROBO2 protein also closely interacts with other ROBO proteins that have previously been linked to problems with reading and the storage of speech sounds.

Dr Beate St Pourcain, who jointly led the research with Professor Davey Smith at the MRC Integrative Epidemiology Unit, said: “This research helps us to better understand the genetic factors which may be involved in the early language development in healthy children, particularly at a time when children speak with single words only, and strengthens the link between ROBO proteins and a variety of linguistic skills in humans.”

Dr Claire Haworth, one of the lead authors, based at the University of Warwick, commented: “In this study we found that results using DNA confirm those we get from twin studies about the importance of genetic influences for language development. This is good news as it means that current DNA-based investigations can be used to detect most of the genetic factors that contribute to these early language skills.”

The study was carried out by an international team of scientists from the EArly Genetics and Lifecourse Epidemiology Consortium (EAGLE) and involved data from over 10,000 children.

Journal Reference:
  1. Beate St Pourcain, Rolieke A.M. Cents, Andrew J.O. Whitehouse, Claire M.A. Haworth, Oliver S.P. Davis, Paul F. O’Reilly, Susan Roulstone, Yvonne Wren, Qi W. Ang, Fleur P. Velders, David M. Evans, John P. Kemp, Nicole M. Warrington, Laura Miller, Nicholas J. Timpson, Susan M. Ring, Frank C. Verhulst, Albert Hofman, Fernando Rivadeneira, Emma L. Meaburn, Thomas S. Price, Philip S. Dale, Demetris Pillas, Anneli Yliherva, Alina Rodriguez, Jean Golding, Vincent W.V. Jaddoe, Marjo-Riitta Jarvelin, Robert Plomin, Craig E. Pennell, Henning Tiemeier, George Davey Smith. Common variation near ROBO2 is associated with expressive vocabulary in infancy. Nature Communications, 2014; 5: 4831 DOI:10.1038/ncomms5831

Your Brain on Metaphors (The Chronicle of Higher Education)

September 1, 2014

Neuroscientists test the theory that your body shapes your ideas

Your Brain  on Metaphors 1

Chronicle Review illustration by Scott Seymour

The player kicked the ball.
The patient kicked the habit.
The villain kicked the bucket.

The verbs are the same.
The syntax is identical.
Does the brain notice, or care,
that the first is literal, the second
metaphorical, the third idiomatic?

It sounds like a question that only a linguist could love. But neuroscientists have been trying to answer it using exotic brain-scanning technologies. Their findings have varied wildly, in some cases contradicting one another. If they make progress, the payoff will be big. Their findings will enrich a theory that aims to explain how wet masses of neurons can understand anything at all. And they may drive a stake into the widespread assumption that computers will inevitably become conscious in a humanlike way.

The hypothesis driving their work is that metaphor is central to language. Metaphor used to be thought of as merely poetic ornamentation, aesthetically pretty but otherwise irrelevant. “Love is a rose, but you better not pick it,” sang Neil Young in 1977, riffing on the timeworn comparison between a sexual partner and a pollinating perennial. For centuries, metaphor was just the place where poets went to show off.

But in their 1980 book, Metaphors We Live By,the linguist George Lakoff (at the University of California at Berkeley) and the philosopher Mark Johnson (now at the University of Oregon) revolutionized linguistics by showing that metaphor is actually a fundamental constituent of language. For example, they showed that in the seemingly literal statement “He’s out of sight,” the visual field is metaphorized as a container that holds things. The visual field isn’t really a container, of course; one simply sees objects or not. But the container metaphor is so ubiquitous that it wasn’t even recognized as a metaphor until Lakoff and Johnson pointed it out.

From such examples they argued that ordinary language is saturated with metaphors. Our eyes point to where we’re going, so we tend to speak of future time as being “ahead” of us. When things increase, they tend to go up relative to us, so we tend to speak of stocks “rising” instead of getting more expensive. “Our ordinary conceptual system is fundamentally metaphorical in nature,” they wrote.

What’s emerging from these studies isn’t just a theory of language or of metaphor. It’s a nascent theory of consciousness.

Metaphors do differ across languages, but that doesn’t affect the theory. For example, in Aymara, spoken in Bolivia and Chile, speakers refer to past experiences as being in front of them, on the theory that past events are “visible” and future ones are not. However, the difference between behind and ahead is relatively unimportant compared with the central fact that space is being used as a metaphor for time. Lakoff argues that it isimpossible—not just difficult, but impossible—for humans to talk about time and many other fundamental aspects of life without using metaphors to do it.

Lakoff and Johnson’s program is as anti-Platonic as it’s possible to get. It undermines the argument that human minds can reveal transcendent truths about reality in transparent language. They argue instead that human cognition is embodied—that human concepts are shaped by the physical features of human brains and bodies. “Our physiology provides the concepts for our philosophy,” Lakoff wrote in his introduction to Benjamin Bergen’s 2012 book, Louder Than Words: The New Science of How the Mind Makes Meaning. Marianna Bolognesi, a linguist at the International Center for Intercultural Exchange, in Siena, Italy, puts it this way: “The classical view of cognition is that language is an independent system made with abstract symbols that work independently from our bodies. This view has been challenged by the embodied account of cognition which states that language is tightly connected to our experience. Our bodily experience.”

Modern brain-scanning technologies make it possible to test such claims empirically. “That would make a connection between the biology of our bodies on the one hand, and thinking and meaning on the other hand,” says Gerard Steen, a professor of linguistics at VU University Amsterdam. Neuroscientists have been stuffing volunteers into fMRI scanners and having them read sentences that are literal, metaphorical, and idiomatic.

Neuroscientists agree on what happens with literal sentences like “The player kicked the ball.” The brain reacts as if it were carrying out the described actions. This is called “simulation.” Take the sentence “Harry picked up the glass.” “If you can’t imagine picking up a glass or seeing someone picking up a glass,” Lakoff wrote in a paper with Vittorio Gallese, a professor of human physiology at the University of Parma, in Italy, “then you can’t understand that sentence.” Lakoff argues that the brain understands sentences not just by analyzing syntax and looking up neural dictionaries, but also by igniting its memories of kicking and picking up.

But what about metaphorical sentences like “The patient kicked the habit”? An addiction can’t literally be struck with a foot. Does the brain simulate the action of kicking anyway? Or does it somehow automatically substitute a more literal verb, such as “stopped”? This is where functional MRI can help, because it can watch to see if the brain’s motor cortex lights up in areas related to the leg and foot.

The evidence says it does. “When you read action-related metaphors,” says Valentina Cuccio, a philosophy postdoc at the University of Palermo, in Italy, “you have activation of the motor area of the brain.” In a 2011 paper in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Rutvik Desai, an associate professor of psychology at the University of South Carolina, and his colleagues presented fMRI evidence that brains do in fact simulate metaphorical sentences that use action verbs. When reading both literal and metaphorical sentences, their subjects’ brains activated areas associated with control of action. “The understanding of sensory-motor metaphors is not abstracted away from their sensory-motor origins,” the researchers concluded.

Textural metaphors, too, appear to be simulated. That is, the brain processes “She’s had a rough time” by simulating the sensation of touching something rough. Krish Sathian, a professor of neurology, rehabilitation medicine, and psychology at Emory University, says, “For textural metaphor, you would predict on the Lakoff and Johnson account that it would recruit activity- and texture-selective somatosensory cortex, and that indeed is exactly what we found.”

But idioms are a major sticking point. Idioms are usually thought of as dead metaphors, that is, as metaphors that are so familiar that they have become clichés. What does the brain do with “The villain kicked the bucket” (“The villain died”)? What about “The students toed the line” (“The students conformed to the rules”)? Does the brain simulate the verb phrases, or does it treat them as frozen blocks of abstract language? And if it simulates them, what actions does it imagine? If the brain understands language by simulating it, then it should do so even when sentences are not literal.

The findings so far have been contradictory. Lisa Aziz-Zadeh, of the University of Southern California, and her colleagues reported in 2006 that idioms such as “biting off more than you can chew” did not activate the motor cortex. So did Ana Raposo, then at the University of Cambridge, and her colleagues in 2009. On the other hand, Véronique Boulenger, of the Laboratoire Dynamique du Langage, in Lyon, France, reported in the same year that they did, at least for leg and arm verbs.

In 2013, Desai and his colleagues tried to settle the problem of idioms. They first hypothesized that the inconsistent results come from differences of methodology. “Imaging studies of embodiment in figurative language have not compared idioms and metaphors,” they wrote in a report. “Some have mixed idioms and metaphors together, and in some cases, ‘idiom’ is used to refer to familiar metaphors.” Lera Boroditsky, an associate professor of psychology at the University of California at San Diego, agrees. “The field is new. The methods need to stabilize,” she says. “There are many different kinds of figurative language, and they may be importantly different from one another.”

Not only that, the nitty-gritty differences of procedure may be important. “All of these studies are carried out with different kinds of linguistic stimuli with different procedures,” Cuccio says. “So, for example, sometimes you have an experiment in which the person can read the full sentence on the screen. There are other experiments in which participants read the sentence just word by word, and this makes a difference.”

To try to clear things up, Desai and his colleagues presented subjects inside fMRI machines with an assorted set of metaphors and idioms. They concluded that in a sense, everyone was right. The more idiomatic the metaphor was, the less the motor system got involved: “When metaphors are very highly conventionalized, as is the case for idioms, engagement of sensory-motor systems is minimized or very brief.”

But George Lakoff thinks the problem of idioms can’t be settled so easily. The people who do fMRI studies are fine neuroscientists but not linguists, he says. “They don’t even know what the problem is most of the time. The people doing the experiments don’t know the linguistics.”

That is to say, Lakoff explains, their papers assume that every brain processes a given idiom the same way. Not true. Take “kick the bucket.” Lakoff offers a theory of what it means using a scene from Young Frankenstein. “Mel Brooks is there and they’ve got the patient dying,” he says. “The bucket is a slop bucket at the edge of the bed, and as he dies, his foot goes out in rigor mortis and the slop bucket goes over and they all hold their nose. OK. But what’s interesting about this is that the bucket starts upright and it goes down. It winds up empty. This is a metaphor—that you’re full of life, and life is a fluid. You kick the bucket, and it goes over.”

That’s a useful explanation of a rather obscure idiom. But it turns out that when linguists ask people what they think the metaphor means, they get different answers. “You say, ‘Do you have a mental image? Where is the bucket before it’s kicked?’ ” Lakoff says. “Some people say it’s upright. Some people say upside down. Some people say you’re standing on it. Some people have nothing. You know! There isn’t a systematic connection across people for this. And if you’re averaging across subjects, you’re probably not going to get anything.”

Similarly, Lakoff says, when linguists ask people to write down the idiom “toe the line,” half of them write “tow the line.” That yields a different mental simulation. And different mental simulations will activate different areas of the motor cortex—in this case, scrunching feet up to a line versus using arms to tow something heavy. Therefore, fMRI results could show different parts of different subjects’ motor cortexes lighting up to process “toe the line.” In that case, averaging subjects together would be misleading.

Furthermore, Lakoff questions whether functional MRI can really see what’s going on with language at the neural level. “How many neurons are there in one pixel or one voxel?” he says. “About 125,000. They’re one point in the picture.” MRI lacks the necessary temporal resolution, too. “What is the time course of that fMRI? It could be between one and five seconds. What is the time course of the firing of the neurons? A thousand times faster. So basically, you don’t know what’s going on inside of that voxel.” What it comes down to is that language is a wretchedly complex thing and our tools aren’t yet up to the job.

Nonetheless, the work supports a radically new conception of how a bunch of pulsing cells can understand anything at all. In a 2012 paper, Lakoff offered an account of how metaphors arise out of the physiology of neural firing, based on the work of a student of his, Srini Narayanan, who is now a faculty member at Berkeley. As children grow up, they are repeatedly exposed to basic experiences such as temperature and affection simultaneously when, for example, they are cuddled. The neural structures that record temperature and affection are repeatedly co-activated, leading to an increasingly strong neural linkage between them.

However, since the brain is always computing temperature but not always computing affection, the relationship between those neural structures is asymmetric. When they form a linkage, Lakoff says, “the one that spikes first and most regularly is going to get strengthened in its direction, and the other one is going to get weakened.” Lakoff thinks the asymmetry gives rise to a metaphor: Affection is Warmth. Because of the neural asymmetry, it doesn’t go the other way around: Warmth is not Affection. Feeling warm during a 100-degree day, for example, does not make one feel loved. The metaphor originates from the asymmetry of the neural firing. Lakoff is now working on a book on the neural theory of metaphor.

If cognition is embodied, that raises problems for artificial intelligence. Since computers don’t have bodies, let alone sensations, what are the implications of these findings for their becoming conscious—that is, achieving strong AI? Lakoff is uncompromising: “It kills it.” Of Ray Kurzweil’s singularity thesis, he says, “I don’t believe it for a second.” Computers can run models of neural processes, he says, but absent bodily experience, those models will never actually be conscious.

On the other hand, roboticists such as Rodney Brooks, an emeritus professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, have suggested that computers could be provided with bodies. For example, they could be given control of robots stuffed with sensors and actuators. Brooks pondered Lakoff’s ideas in his 2002 book, Flesh and Machines, and supposed, “For anything to develop the same sorts of conceptual understanding of the world as we do, it will have to develop the same sorts of metaphors, rooted in a body, that we humans do.”

But Lera Boroditsky wonders if giving computers humanlike bodies would only reproduce human limitations. “If you’re not bound by limitations of memory, if you’re not bound by limitations of physical presence, I think you could build a very different kind of intelligence system,” she says. “I don’t know why we have to replicate our physical limitations in other systems.”

What’s emerging from these studies isn’t just a theory of language or of metaphor. It’s a nascent theory of consciousness. Any algorithmic system faces the problem of bootstrapping itself from computing to knowing, from bit-shuffling to caring. Igniting previously stored memories of bodily experiences seems to be one way of getting there. And so may be the ability to create asymmetric neural linkages that say this is like (but not identical to) that. In an age of brain scanning as well as poetry, that’s where metaphor gets you.

Michael Chorost is the author of Rebuilt: How Becoming Part Computer Made Me More Human (Houghton Mifflin, 2005) and World Wide Mind: The Coming Integration of Humanity, Machines, and the Internet (Free Press, 2011).

City and rural super-dialects exposed via Twitter (New Scientist)

11 August 2014 by Aviva Rutkin

Magazine issue 2981.

WHAT do two Twitter users who live halfway around the world from each other have in common? They might speak the same “super-dialect”. An analysis of millions of Spanish tweets found two popular speaking styles: one favoured by people living in cities, another by those in small rural towns.

Bruno Gonçalves at Aix-Marseille University in France and David Sánchez at the Institute for Cross-Disciplinary Physics and Complex Systems in Palma, Majorca, Spain, analysed more than 50 million tweets sent over a two-year period. Each tweet was tagged with a GPS marker showing whether the message came from a user somewhere in Spain, Latin America, or Spanish-speaking pockets of Europe and the US.

The team then searched the tweets for variations on common words. Someone tweeting about their socks might use the word calcetas, medias, orsoquetes, for example. Another person referring to their car might call it theircoche, auto, movi, or one of three other variations with roughly the same meaning. By comparing these word choices to where they came from, the researchers were able to map preferences across continents (

According to their data, Twitter users in major cities thousands of miles apart, like Quito in Ecuador and San Diego in California, tend to have more language in common with each other than with a person tweeting from the nearby countryside, probably due to the influence of mass media.

Studies like these may allow us to dig deeper into how language varies across place, time and culture, says Eric Holt at the University of South Carolina in Columbia.

This article appeared in print under the headline “Super-dialects exposed via millions of tweets”

We speak as we feel, we feel as we speak (Science Daily)

Date: June 26, 2014

Source: University of Cologne – Universität zu Köln

Summary: Ground-breaking experiments have been conduced to uncover the links between language and emotions. Researchers were able to demonstrate that the articulation of vowels systematically influences our feelings and vice versa. The authors concluded that it would seem that language users learn that the articulation of ‘i’ sounds is associated with positive feelings and thus make use of corresponding words to describe positive circumstances. The opposite applies to the use of ‘o’ sounds.

Researchers instructed their test subjects to view cartoons while holding a pen in their mouth in such a way that either the zygomaticus major muscle (which is used when laughing and smiling) or its antagonist, the orbicularis oris muscle, was contracted. Credit: Image courtesy of University of Cologne – Universität zu Köln 

A team of researchers headed by the Erfurt-based psychologist Prof. Ralf Rummer and the Cologne-based phoneticist Prof. Martine Grice has carried out some ground-breaking experiments to uncover the links between language and emotions. They were able to demonstrate that the articulation of vowels systematically influences our feelings and vice versa.

The research project looked at the question of whether and to what extent the meaning of words is linked to their sound. The specific focus of the project was on two special cases; the sound of the long ‘i’ vowel and that of the long, closed ‘o’ vowel. Rummer and Grice were particularly interested in finding out whether these vowels tend to occur in words that are positively or negatively charged in terms of emotional impact. For this purpose, they carried out two fundamental experiments, the results of which have now been published in Emotion, the journal of the American Psychological Association.

In the first experiment, the researchers exposed test subjects to film clips designed to put them in a positive or a negative mood and then asked them to make up ten artificial words themselves and to speak these out loud. They found that the artificial words contained significantly more ‘i’s than ‘o’s when the test subjects were in a positive mood. When in a negative mood, however, the test subjects formulated more ‘words’ with ‘o’s.

The second experiment was used to determine whether the different emotional quality of the two vowels can be traced back to the movements of the facial muscles associated with their articulation. Rummer and Grice were inspired by an experimental configuration developed in the 1980s by a team headed by psychologist Fritz Strack. These researchers instructed their test subjects to view cartoons while holding a pen in their mouth in such a way that either the zygomaticus major muscle (which is used when laughing and smiling) or its antagonist, the orbicularis oris muscle, was contracted. In the first case, the test subjects were required to place the pen between their teeth and in the second case between their lips. While their zygomaticus major muscle was contracted, the test subjects found the cartoons significantly more amusing. Instead of this ‘pen-in-mouth test’, the team headed by Rummer and Grice now conducted an experiment in which they required their test subjects to articulate an ‘i’ sound (contraction of the zygomaticus major muscle) or an ‘o’ sound (contraction of the orbicularis oris muscle) every second while viewing cartoons. The test subjects producing the ‘i’ sounds found the same cartoons significantly more amusing than those producing the ‘o’ sounds instead.

In view of this outcome, the authors concluded that it would seem that language users learn that the articulation of ‘i’ sounds is associated with positive feelings and thus make use of corresponding words to describe positive circumstances. The opposite applies to the use of ‘o’ sounds. And thanks to the results of their two experiments, Rummer and Grice now have an explanation for a much-discussed phenomenon. The tendency for ‘i’ sounds to occur in positively charged words (such as ‘like’) and for ‘o’ sounds to occur in negatively charged words (such as ‘alone’) in many languages appears to be linked to the corresponding use of facial muscles in the articulation of vowels on the one hand and the expression of emotion on the other.

Journal Reference:

  1. Ralf Rummer, Judith Schweppe, René Schlegelmilch, Martine Grice. Mood is linked to vowel type: The role of articulatory movements.Emotion, 2014; 14 (2): 246 DOI: 10.1037/a0035752

Pesquisa identifica padrões de entonação do português brasileiro (Fapesp)

Estudo integra projetos internacionais e inclui o idioma falado no Brasil em banco de dados de fala de diferentes línguas românicas (FFLCH-USP)

Por Diego Freire

Agência FAPESP – Além do vocabulário próprio e de peculiaridades relacionadas aos elementos das frases, o português falado no Brasil tem importantes diferenças em relação ao de Portugal e de outros países lusófonos no ritmo e na entonação da fala.

Foi na melodia da língua falada que se concentraram os estudos da pesquisa “Fraseamento entoacional em português brasileiro”, conduzida com o apoio da FAPESP por Flaviane Romani Fernandes Svartman, do Departamento de Letras Clássicas e Vernáculas da Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas da Universidade de São Paulo (FFLCH-USP).

Frases escritas da mesma forma em todas as variedades do português são faladas de maneiras diferentes em cada lugar. Enquanto um brasileiro lê a sentença “A libanesa maravilhosa rememorava a melodia” pronunciando de forma mais marcante, em termos melódicos, as sílabas tônicas de cada palavra, um português marca melodicamente as sílabas iniciais e finais, dando a impressão de um ritmo mais acelerado.

A sentença faz parte das gravações feitas pelos pesquisadores para os estudos. Por meio de leituras e conversações espontâneas de grupos de pessoas falantes do dialeto paulista, a pesquisa construiu uma base de dados que vai compor o Atlas Interativo da Prosódia do Português, o InAPoP, projeto ao qual a pesquisa de Svartman se vincula, coordenado pela pesquisadora Sónia Frota, da Universidade de Lisboa, com apoio da Fundação para a Ciência e Tecnologia do Ministério da Ciência e do Ensino Superior de Portugal. As gravações permitiram o estudo das estruturas de entonação e do processo de formação de padrões prosódicos de fala.

O trabalho do grupo de Svartman integra também o projeto internacional Intonational Phrasing in Romance, desenvolvido por pesquisadores da Aix Marseille Université, na França, da Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea, no País Basco, da Universidade de Lisboa, em Portugal, e da Universitat Pompeu Fabra, na Catalunha, e incluiu o português brasileiro na construção de um banco de dados da entonação das diferentes línguas românicas, o Romance Languages Database (RLD).

Trata-se de um extenso banco de dados de fala inicialmente criado para os idiomas catalão, português e espanhol, composto por frases com sujeito, verbo e objeto nesta ordem e padronizadas em número de sílabas e em complexidade sintática e prosódica – permitindo, dessa forma, uma comparação direta entre as línguas e suas variedades. Além de Svartman, colaboram com o RLD a catalã Pilar Prieto, a portuguesa Sónia Frota e o espanhol Gorka Elordieta.

Parte da base de dados do dialeto paulista já está disponível para pesquisadores e interessados em geral no site do InAPoP. Com o auxílio de alunos de iniciação científica e de mestrado da FFLCH, foram realizadas gravações de sentenças interrogativas, exclamativas e focalizadas – aquelas em que há ênfase em alguma parte da frase, como quando se fala “João veio, mas não o Pedro, reforçando a palavra “João” em oposição a “Pedro”.

Uma das gravações foi feita durante uma tarefa de localização e indicação de direções em mapas por mulheres na faixa etária de 20 a 40 anos; outra, durante um relato oral sobre a profissão e experiências marcantes vividas por uma pessoa com mais de 65 anos. As pessoas são separadas por gênero e idade de modo a não permitir variações de fala em um mesmo grupo.

Em seguida, foram feitas descrições e análises do fraseamento entoacional de parte desses dados, comparando-os com outras variedades do português brasileiro e do português europeu. Os resultados foram divulgados na comunicação “Fatores determinantes na atribuição de acentos tonais em sentenças neutras do português”, proferida no Castilho – II Congresso Internacional de Linguística Histórica da USP.

Guiné-Bissau e Europa

Na comparação com outras línguas românicas, a pesquisa observou que no espanhol, no português do norte de Portugal e no português brasileiro há variação melódica entre o sujeito e o predicado, diferente do português europeu padrão – o dialeto lisboeta.

A pesquisa incluiu ainda a variedade falada na Guiné-Bissau como objeto das análises comparativas. A inclusão foi proporcionada pelo contato com intercambistas do país africano, vindos como alunos regulares do curso de Letras da FFLCH-USP por meio de convênio internacional com instituições de ensino superior.

A pesquisa investigou até que ponto as variedades de português se aproximam ou se distanciam quanto a aspectos prosódicos. Tanto nos dados analisados do português brasileiro como nos da Guiné-Bissau há variações melódicas associadas a praticamente cada palavra das sentenças.

No português brasileiro não há variação depois da última sílaba tônica da última palavra que compõe o sujeito em sentenças neutras, enquanto no português da Guiné-Bissau a variação melódica é percebida.

Por exemplo, na sentença “O boliviano mulherengo memorizava uma melodia”, um brasileiro pronuncia de forma mais marcante, melodicamente, as sílabas tônicas do sujeito – o “a” de “boliviano” e o “ren” de “mulherengo” – e um guineense, além disso, também marca a última sílaba da última palavra que compõe esse elemento. Em outras sentenças os falantes do português da Guiné-Bissau podem marcar elementos sintáticos diferentes, como o objeto.

Além da FAPESP, os estudos contaram com o apoio institucional do Laboratório de Apoio à Pesquisa e ao Ensino de Letras (Lapel) da FFLCH-USP na constituição de bases de dados de fala.

Rapid Language Evolution in 19th-century Brazil: Data Mining, Literary Analysis and Evolutionary Biology – A Study of Six Centuries of Portuguese-language Texts (Stanford University)

Reporter: Aviva Lev-Ari, PhD, RN

Stanford collaboration offers new perspectives on evolution of Brazilian language

Using a novel combination of data mining, literary analysis and evolutionary biology to study six centuries of Portuguese-language texts, Stanford scholars discover the literary roots of rapid language evolution in 19th-century Brazil.

L.A. Cicero Stanford biology Professor Marcus Feldman, left, and Cuahtemoc Garcia-Garcia, a graduate student in Iberian and Latin American Cultures, combined forces to investigate the evolution of Portuguese as spoken in Brazil.

Literature and biology may not seem to overlap in their endeavors, but a Stanford project exploring the evolution of written language in Brazil is bringing the two disciplines together.

Over the last 18 months, Iberian and Latin American Cultures graduate student Cuauhtémoc García-García and biology Professor Marcus Feldman have been working together to trace the evolution of the  Brazilian Portuguese language through literature.

By combining Feldman’s expertise in mathematical analysis of cultural evolution with García-García’s knowledge of Latin American culture and computer programming, they have produced quantifiable evidence of rapid historical changes in written Brazilian Portuguese in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Specifically, Feldman and García-García are studying the changing use of words in tens of thousands of texts, with a focus on the personal pronouns that Brazilians used to address one another.

Their digital analysis of linguistics development in literary texts reflects Brazil’s complex colonial history.

The change in the use of personal pronouns, a daily part of social and cultural interaction, formed part of an evolving linguistic identity that was specific to Brazil, and not its Portuguese colonizers.

“We believe that this fast transition in the written language was due primarily to the approximately 300-year prohibition of both the introduction of the printing press and the foundation of universities in Brazil under Portuguese rule,” García-García said.

What Feldman and García-García found was that spoken language did in fact evolve during those 300 years, but little written evidence of that process exists because colonial restrictions on printing and literacy prevented language development in the written form.

A national sentiment of “write as we speak” arose in Brazil after Portuguese rule ended. García-García said their data shows an abrupt introduction in written texts of the spoken pronouns that were developed during the 300-year colonization period.

Drawing on Feldman’s experience with theoretical and statistical evolutionary models, García-García developed computer programs that count certain words to see how often they appear and how their use has changed over hundreds of years.

In Brazilian literary works produced in the post-colonial period, Feldman said, they have “found examples of written linguistic evolution over short time periods, contrary to the longer periods that are typical for changes in language.”

The findings will figure prominently in García-García’s dissertation, which addresses the transmission of written language across time and space.

The project’s source materials include about 70,000 digitized works in Portuguese from the 13th to the 21st century, ranging from literature and newspapers to technical manuals and pamphlets.

García-García, a member of The Digital Humanities Focal Group at Stanford, said their research “shows how written language changed, and through these changes in pronoun use, we now have a better understanding of how Brazilian writing evolved following the introduction of the printing press.”

Feldman, a population geneticist and one of the founders of the quantitative theory of cultural evolution, said he sees their project as a natural approach to linguistic evolution.

“I believe that evolutionary science and the humanities have a lot to offer each other in both theoretical and empirical explorations,” Feldman said.

Language by the numbers

García-García became interested in language evolution while studying Brazilian Portuguese under the instruction of Stanford lecturer Lyris Wiedemann. He approached Feldman, proposing an evolutionary study of Brazilian Portuguese, and Feldman agreed to help him analyze the data. García-García then enlisted Stanford lecturer Agripino Silveira, who provided linguistic expertise.

García-García worked with Stanford Library curators Glen Worthey, Adan Griego and Everardo Rodriguez for more than a year to develop the technical infrastructure and copyright clearance he needed to access Stanford’s entire digitized corpus of Portuguese language texts. After incorporating even more source material from the HathiTrust digital archive, García-García began the time-consuming task of “cleaning” the corpus, so data could be effectively mined from it.

“Sometimes there were duplicates, issues with the digitization, and works with multiple editions that created ‘noise’ in the corpus,” he said.

Following months of preparation, Feldman and García-García were able to begin data mining. Specifically, they counted the incidences of two pronouns, tu and você, which both mean the singular “you,” and how their incidence in literature changed over time.

“After running various searches, I could correlate results and see how and when certain words were used to build up a comprehensive image of this evolution,” he said.

Tu was – and still is – used in Portugal as the typical way to say ‘you.’ But, in Brazil, você is the more normal way to say it, particularly in major cities like Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo where the majority of the population lives,” García-García explained.

However, that was not always the case. When Brazil was a Portuguese colony, and up until the arrival of the printing press in1808, tu was the canonical form in written language.

As part of the run-up to independence in 1822, universities and printing presses were established in Brazil for the first time in 1808, having been prohibited by the Portuguese colonizers in what García-García calls “cultural repression.”

By the late 19th century, você emerged as the way to address people, shedding part of the colonial legacy, and tu quickly became less prominent in written Brazilian Portuguese.

“Our findings quantifiably show how pronoun use developed. We have found that around 1840, vocêwas used about 10-15 percent of the time by authors to say ‘you.’ By the turn of the century, this had increased to about 70 percent,” García-García said.

“Our data suggest that você was rarely used in the late 17th and 18th centuries, but really appears and takes hold in the middle of the 19th century, a few decades after 1808. Thus, the late arrival of the printing press marks a critical point for understanding the evolution of written Portuguese in Brazil, ” he said.

From Romanticism to realism

Their research revealed an intriguing literary coincidence – the period of transition from tu to vocêcorrelated with the broad change in the dominant literary genre in Brazilian literature from European Romanticism to Latin American realism.

Interestingly, the researchers noticed that the rapid change was most evident several decades after Brazil’s independence in the 1820s because it took that long for Brazilian writers to develop their own voice and style.

For centuries Brazilian writers were forced to write in the style of the Portuguese, but as García-García said, “with their new freedom they wanted to write stories that reflected their national identity.”

“Machado de Assis, arguably Brazil’s greatest author, is a fine example. His early novels are archetypally Romanticist, and then his later novels are deeply Realist, and the use of the pronouns shift from one to the other,” García-García said.

Nonetheless, in Machado’s work there is sometimes a purposeful switch back to the tu form if, for example, the author wanted to evoke a certain sentiment or change the narrative voice.

“The data-mining project cannot ascertain subtle uses of words and how, in some works, the pronouns are ‘interchangeable,’” he added.

Computational expertise was no substitute for literary expertise, and García-García used the two disciplines in tandem to get a clearer picture in his data.

“I had to stop using the computer and go back to a close reading of a large sample of books, and the literary genre change reflects this period of post-colonial social and historical change,” he said.

Feldman and García-García hope to use their methodology to explore different languages.

“Next we hope to study the digitized Spanish language corpus, which currently comprises close to a quarter of a million works from the last 900 years,” García-García said.

Tom Winterbottom is a doctoral candidate in Iberian and Latin American Cultures at Stanford. For more news about the humanities at Stanford, visit the Human Experience.

As malocas da praça de maio (Taqui Pra Ti)

José Ribamar Bessa Freire

01/06/2014 – Diário do Amazonas


Na Argentina, elas foram reprimidas por baionetas quando indagaram, em 1977, pelos filhos presos. Os generais golpistas debocharam: “son las locas de Plaza de Mayo“. Obstinadas, não desistiram. Desafiaram o terror e continuaram ocupando a Praça de Maio, desfilando o seu protesto semanal diante da Casa Rosada e da catedral até que, finamente, reconhecidas pela sociedade, contribuíram para o fim da ditadura e a prisão dos torturadores.
No Brasil, vários movimentos nos fizeram ouvir a voz de quem foi silenciado. No entanto, como ninguém entende línguas indígenas, nem se interessa por aprendê-las, não se escuta o clamor dos índios, seja de mães indígenas por seus filhos ou de índios por seus pais desaparecidos. Desta forma, os índios, sempre invisíveis na historia do Brasil, ficaram de fora das narrativas e não figuram nas estatísticas dos desaparecidos políticos. Na floresta, não há praças de maio.
Mas agora isso começa a mudar. Relatório do Comitê Estadual da Verdade do Amazonas, que será em breve publicado pela Editora Curt Nimuendajú, de Campinas (SP), dá voz aos índios e mapeia os estragos, comprovando que na Amazônia, mais do que militantes de esquerda, a ditadura eliminou índios, entre outros, Cinta-Larga e Surui (RO/MT), Krenhakarore na rodovia Cuiabá-Santarém, Kanê ou Beiços-de-Pau do Rio Arinos (MT), Avá-Canoeiro (GO), Parakanã e Arara (PA), Kaxinawa e Madiha (AC), Juma, Yanomami e Waimiri-Atroari (AM/RR).
O foco do primeiro relatório, de 92 páginas, já encaminhado à Comissão Nacional da Verdade (CNV), incide sobre os Kiña, denominados também como Waimiri-Atroari, cujos desaparecidos são conhecidos hoje por seus nomes, graças a um trabalho cuidadoso que ouviu índios em suas línguas, consultou pesquisadores e indigenistas, fuçou arquivos e examinou documentos, incluindo desenhos que mostram índios metralhados por homens armados com revólver, fuzil, rifles, granadas e cartucheira, jogando bombas sobre malocas incendiadas.
Os desaparecidos
De noite, nas malocas, os sobreviventes narram a história da violência sofrida, que começou a ser escrita e desenhada por crianças, jovens e adultos alfabetizados na língua Kiña pelos professores Egydio e Doroti Schwade com o método Paulo Freire. Toda a aldeia Yawará, no sul de Roraima, participou do processo, em 1985 e 1986, até mesmo crianças de colo. A comunicação foi facilitada pelo fato de o casal morar lá com seus quatro filhos pequenos, antes de ser expulso pelo então presidente da Funai, Romero Jucá, lacaio subserviente das empresas mineradoras.
Todo o processo de alfabetização ocorreu num clima que iniciou com a narração oral das historias e continuou com a criação dos desenhos, a leitura dos desenhos, a discussão sobre eles e, finalmente, com a escrita alfabética.
Durante esse período, Egydio registrou, com ajuda de Doroti, as narrativas contadas por quem testemunhou os fatos ou por quem ouviu falar sobre eles. Os primeiros textos escritos por recém-alfabetizados, ilustrados por desenhos, revelaram “o método e as armas usadas para dizimá-los: aviões, helicópteros, bombas, metralhadoras, fios elétricos e estranhas doenças. Comunidades inteiras desapareceram depois que helicópteros com soldados sobrevoaram ou pousaram em suas aldeias” – diz o relatório.
Com a abertura da rodovia BR-174 e a entrada das empresas mineradoras, muitas outras aldeias foram varridas do mapa. “Pais, mães e filhos mortos, aldeias destruídas pelo fogo e por bombas. Gente resistindo e correndo pelos varadouros à procura de refúgio em aldeia amiga. A floresta rasgada e os rios ocupados por gente agressiva e inimiga. Esta foi a geografia política e social vivenciada pelo povo Kiña desde o início da construção da BR-174, em 1967, até sua inauguração em 1977” – segundo o relatório.
Alguns sobreviventes refugiados na aldeia Yawará conviveram durante dois anos com Egydio e Doroti.  Lá, todas as pessoas acima de dez anos eram órfãs, exceto duas irmãs, cuja mãe sobreviveu ao massacre. O relatório transcreve a descrição feita pelo índio Panaxi:
“Civilizado matou com bomba” – escreve Panaxi ao lado do desenho, identificando um a um os mortos com seus nomes: Sere, Podanî, Mani, Priwixi, Akamamî, Txire, Tarpiya.
A eles se somaram outros de uma lista feita por Yaba: Mawé, Xiwya, Mayede – marido de Wada, Eriwixi, Waiba, Samyamî – mãe de Xeree, Pikibda, a pequena Pitxenme, Maderê, Wairá – mulher de Amiko, Pautxi – marido de Woxkî, Arpaxi – marido de Sidé, Wepînî – filho de Elsa, Kixii e seu marido Maiká, Paruwá e sua filha Ida, Waheri, Suá – pai de Warkaxi, sua esposa e um filho, Kwida – pai de Comprido, Tarakña e tantos outros.
Quem matou
A lista é longa, os mortos têm nomes, mas às vezes são identificados pelo laço de parentesco: “a filha de Sabe que mora no Mrebsna Mudî, dois tios de Mário Paruwé, o pai de Wome, uma filha de Antônio”, etc. O relatório se refere ao“desaparecimento de mais de 2.000 Waimiri-Atroari em apenas dez anos”. Na área onde se localiza hoje a Mineradora Taboca (Paranapanema) desapareceram pelo menos nove aldeias aerofotografadas pelo padre Calleri, em 1968, em sobrevoos a serviço da FUNAI. Os alunos da aldeia Yawará desenharam casas e escreveram ao lado frases como:
– Apapa takweme apapeme batkwapa kamña nohmepa [o meu pai foi atirado com espingarda por civilizado e morreu] – escreveu Pikida, ao lado do desenho que ilustra o fato.
– Taboka ikame Tikiriya yitohpa. Apiyamyake, apiyemiyekî? [Taboca chegou, Tikiria sumiu, por que? Por que?]
A resposta pode ser encontrada no ofício 042-E2-CONF. do Comando Militar da Amazônia, de 21/11/1974, assinado pelo General Gentil Nogueira, que recomendava o uso da violência armada contra os índios, segundo o relatório encaminhado à Comissão Nacional da Verdade. Era uma política de Estado a serviço de interesses privados, implementada com métodos de bandidagem.
Um mês e meio depois, o sertanista Sebastião Amâncio da Costa, nomeado chefe de Frente de Atração Waimiri-Atroari (FAWA), em entrevista ao jornal O Globo (06/01/1975), assumiu de público as determinações do general Gentil, declarando que faria “uma demonstração de força dos civilizados que incluiria a utilização de dinamite, granadas, bombas de gás lacrimogêneo e rajadas de metralhadoras e o confinamento dos chefes índios em outras regiões do País”.
O resultado de toda essa lambança é descrito por Womé Atroari, em entrevista à TV Brasil, relatando um ataque aéreo a uma aldeia e outros fatos que presenciou:
– Foi assim tipo bomba, lá na aldeia. O índio que estava na aldeia não escapou ninguém. Ele veio no avião e de repente esquentou tudinho, aí morreu muita gente. Foi muita maldade na construção da BR-174. Aí veio muita gente e pessoal armado, assim, pessoal do Exército, isso eu vi. Eu sei que me lembro bem assim, tinha um avião assim um pouco de folha, assim, desenho de folha, assim, um pouco vermelho por baixo, só isso. Passou isso aí, morria rapidinho pessoa. Desse aí que nós via.
Os tratores que abriam a estrada eram vistos pelos índios como tanques de guerra. “Muitas vezes os tratores amanheciam amarrados com cipós.Essa era uma maneira clara de dizer que não queriam que as obras continuassem. Como essa resistência ficou muito forte, o Departamento Estadual de Estradas de Rodagem do Amazonas-DER-AM, inicialmente responsável pela construção, começou a usar armas de fogo contra os indígenas”.
Sacopã e Parasar
O relatório informa que “as festas que reuniam periodicamente os Waimiri-Atroari foram aproveitadas pelo PARASAR para o aniquilamento dos índios”. Conta detalhes. Registra ainda o desaparecimento de índios que se aproximaram, em agosto de 1985, do canteiro de obras da hidrelétrica do Pitinga, então em construção:
“É muito provável que tenham sido mortos pela Sacopã, uma empresa de jagunços, comandada por dois ex-oficiais do Exército e um da ativa, subordinado ao Comando Militar da Amazônia, empresa muito bem equipada, que oferecia na época serviços de “limpeza” na floresta à Paranapanema no entorno de seus projetos minerais. Os responsáveis pela empresa foram autorizados pelo Comando Militar da Amazônia a manter ao seu serviço 400 homens equipados com cartucheiras 20 milímetros, rifle 38, revolveres de variado calibre e cães amestrados”.
Os autores do relatório dão nomes aos bois, esclarecendo que quem comandava a Sacopã no trabalho de segurança da Mineração Taboca/Paranapanema e no controle de todo acesso à terra indígena eram dois militares da reserva: o tenente Tadeu Abraão Fernandes e o coronel reformado Antônio Fernandes, além de um coronel da ativa, João Batista de Toledo Camargo, então chefe de polícia do Comando Militar da Amazônia.
É Rondon de cabeça pra baixo: “Matar ainda que não seja preciso; morrer nunca”, num processo iniciado com o colonizador e ainda não concluído.  Na Amazônia, o cônego Manoel Teixeira, irmão do governador Pedro Teixeira, em carta ao rei de Portugal, em 5 de janeiro de 1654, escrita no leito da morte, na hora da verdade, declara que “no espaço de trinta e dois anos, são extintos a trabalho e a ferro, segundo a conta dos que ouviram, mais de dois milhões de índios de mais de quatrocentas aldeias”.
O relatório é um bom começo, porque evidencia que os índios precisam de uma Comissão da Verdade não apenas para os 21 anos de ditadura militar, mas para os 514 anos de História em que crimes foram e continuam sendo cometidos contra eles. Assim, podem surgir praças de maio dentro das malocas para que o Brasil generoso e solidário cobre mudanças radicais na política indigenista do país, impedindo que o Estado continue a serviço de interesses privados escusos.

Some Monkeys Have Conversations That Resemble Ours (Wired)



A pair of common marmosets. Image: Bart van Dorp/Flickr

The sounds of marmoset monkeys chattering may hint at the mysterious origins of human language.

A new study shows that marmosets exchange calls in a precisely timed, back-and-forth fashion typical of human conversation, but not found in other primates. The monkeys don’t appear to have a language, but the timing suggests the foundations of our own.

“That could be the foundation of more sophisticated things, like syntax,” said psychologist Asif Ghazanfar of Princeton University, co-author of the study, which was published today in Current Biology. “You can’t have any of those other really cool aspects of language without first having this.”

‘If you went back 10 million years, you’d be hard-pressed to predict that an ape would end up with the planet’s most complex vocal communication.’

How language, so complex and information-rich, evolved in Homo sapiens and, as far as we know, no other species, is one of anthropology’s outstanding questions. The traditional, seemingly intuitive answer is that it arose from the vocalizations of ancestors who were capable of a few rudimentary noises and wanted to say more.

Confounding that narrative, though, is the comparatively less-vocal nature of many other primates, including our closest living relatives, chimpanzees and bonobos. They do vocalize, of course, and even say some interesting things, but not with the same flow expected of some proto-human linguistic capability.

That conundrum has led researchers to propose another possible origin of language, one rooted not in our voices but rather our bodies, and in particular our hands. According to this narrative, gesture would have been as important to our ancestors as sound. Indeed, neurological processes underlying speech and language are also intimately linked with motor skills, raising the possibility that language formed on the cognitive scaffold of gesture — and chimpanzees do have a large repertoire of hand movements.

But many scientists, including Ghazanfar and the study’s lead author, fellow Princeton psychologist Daniel Takahashi, aren’t convinced. If human language did follow on gesture, they wonder, why don’t chimps talk more? There’s also no evidence in chimpanzees for vocal turn-taking, or waiting for another person to finish speaking before replying, which is universal in human languages. “If we don’t take turns, if we’re overlapping, it’s very difficult to understand each other,” said Ghazanfar. “Turn-taking is foundational.”

Yet even if chimps don’t take turns, Ghazanfar and Takahashi found that marmosets do. In the new study, they placed pairs of marmosets in the opposite corners of a room, separated by a curtain that allowed them to hear but not see each other, and recorded the ensuing chatter.

These proved to follow turn-taking patterns, with a pause of several seconds between the completion of one monkey’s whistles and the other’s beginning. And unlike the duets of birds, which are often highly synchronized, the exchanges had nothing to do with mating or territoriality. The monkeys were conversing.

Monkey Conversation:
Whistles encoding information about the caller’s identity are exchanged back and forth according to rules of timing also found in human conversation.

Audio: Takahashi et al./Ethology

As for what they said, marmoset whistles are thought to encode information about a caller’s identity, age, gender and location. Ghazanfar thinks the conversations are a sort of “vocal grooming,” a way of easing stress or conveying affection, but delivered at a distance. It only works when monkeys know they’re being addressed individually, which is conveyed by the turn-taking form.

“It could be a pre-adaptation for language,” said evolutionary biologist Thore Bergman of the University of Michigan, who was not involved in the study. Bergman’s own research involveshuman-sounding lip smacks made by monkeys called geladas.

As for why marmosets and humans take turns, but not chimpanzees, Ghazanfar suspects it’s a function of our social systems. Marmosets are cooperative breeders: Group members take care of offspring unrelated to them, creating community-oriented dynamics of behavior and communication. Ancestral humans may have lived the same way.

Without a time machine, of course, questions about the origin of human language won’t ever be settled. As Bergmann noted, the findings don’t exclude the possible importance of gesture. It’s possible that human language arose from the fortuitous interactions of gesture, vocalization and social structure with evolutionary pressure.

Indeterminacy aside, though, it’s fun to speculate, and also to wonder whether the seeds of complex language now exist in animals other than ourselves. Many whales and dolphins, along with syntax-using monkeys and even prairie dogs, communicate in very sophisticated ways.

“If you went back 10 million years, you’d be hard-pressed to predict an ape would end up with the planet’s most complex vocal communication system,” said Thore Bergman. “Why that happened is a really big puzzle.”

Citation: “Coupled Oscillator Dynamics of Vocal Turn-Taking in Monkeys.” By Daniel Takahashi, Darshana Narayanan and Asif Ghazanfar. Current Biology, 17 October 2013.

Orangutans Plan Their Future Route and Communicate It to Others (Science Daily)

Sep. 11, 2013 — Male orangutans plan their travel route up to one day in advance and communicate it to other members of their species. In order to attract females and repel male rivals, they call in the direction in which they are going to travel. Anthropologists at the University of Zurich have found that not only captive, but also wild-living orangutans make use of their planning ability.

Male orangutans face the direction they plan to travel and emit ‘long calls’ in that direction. (Credit: UZH)

For a long time it was thought that only humans had the ability to anticipate future actions, whereas animals are caught in the here and now. But in recent years, clever experiments with great apes in zoos have shown that they do remember past events and can plan for their future needs. Anthropologists at the University of Zurich have now investigated whether wild apes also have this skill, following them for several years through the dense tropical swamplands of Sumatra.

Orangutans communicate their plans

Orangutans generally journey through the forest alone, but they also maintain social relationships. Adult males sometimes emit loud ‘long calls’ to attract females and repel rivals. Their cheek pads act as a funnel for amplifying the sound in the same way as a megaphone. Females that only hear a faint call come closer in order not to lose contact. Non-dominant males on the other hand hurry in the opposite direction if they hear the call coming loud and clear in their direction.

“To optimize the effect of these calls, it thus would make sense for the male to call in the direction of his future whereabouts, if he already knew about them,” explains Carel van Schaik. “We then actually observed that the males traveled for several hours in approximately the same direction as they had called.”

In extreme cases, long calls made around nesting time in the evening predicted the travel direction better than random until the evening of the next day.Carel van Schaik and his team conclude that orangutans plan their route up to a day ahead. In addition, the males often announced changes in travel direction with a new, better-fitting long call. The researchers also found that in the morning, the other orangutans reacted correctly to the long call of the previous evening, even if no new long call was emitted.

“Our study makes it clear that wild orangutans do not simply live in the here and now, but can imagine a future and even announce their plans. In this sense, then, they have become a bit more like us,” concludes Carel van Schaik.

Journal Reference:

  1. Carel P. van Schaik, Laura Damerius, Karin Isler. Wild Orangutan Males Plan and Communicate Their Travel Direction One Day in AdvancePLoS ONE, 2013; 8 (9): e74896 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0074896

Language can reveal the invisible, study shows (University of Wisconsin-Madison)

Public release date: 26-Aug-2013

By Gary Lupyan, University of Wisconsin-Madison

MADISON, Wis. — It is natural to imagine that the sense of sight takes in the world as it is — simply passing on what the eyes collect from light reflected by the objects around us.

But the eyes do not work alone. What we see is a function not only of incoming visual information, but also how that information is interpreted in light of other visual experiences, and may even be influenced by language.

Words can play a powerful role in what we see, according to a study published this month by University of Wisconsin–Madison cognitive scientist and psychology professor Gary Lupyan, and Emily Ward, a Yale University graduate student, in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

“Perceptual systems do the best they can with inherently ambiguous inputs by putting them in context of what we know, what we expect,” Lupyan says. “Studies like this are helping us show that language is a powerful tool for shaping perceptual systems, acting as a top-down signal to perceptual processes. In the case of vision, what we consciously perceive seems to be deeply shaped by our knowledge and expectations.”

And those expectations can be altered with a single word.

To show how deeply words can influence perception, Lupyan and Ward used a technique called continuous flash suppression to render a series of objects invisible for a group of volunteers.

Each person was shown a picture of a familiar object — such as a chair, a pumpkin or a kangaroo — in one eye. At the same time, their other eye saw a series of flashing, “squiggly” lines.

“Essentially, it’s visual noise,” Lupyan says. “Because the noise patterns are high-contrast and constantly moving, they dominate, and the input from the other eye is suppressed.”

Immediately before looking at the combination of the flashing lines and suppressed object, the study participants heard one of three things: the word for the suppressed object (“pumpkin,” when the object was a pumpkin), the word for a different object (“kangaroo,” when the object was actually a pumpkin), or just static.

Then researchers asked the participants to indicate whether they saw something or not. When the word they heard matched the object that was being wiped out by the visual noise, the subjects were more likely to report that they did indeed see something than in cases where the wrong word or no word at all was paired with the image.

“Hearing the word for the object that was being suppressed boosted that object into their vision,” Lupyan says.

And hearing an unmatched word actually hurt study subjects’ chances of seeing an object.

“With the label, you’re expecting pumpkin-shaped things,” Lupyan says. “When you get a visual input consistent with that expectation, it boosts it into perception. When you get an incorrect label, it further suppresses that.”

Experiments have shown that continuous flash suppression interrupts sight so thoroughly that there are no signals in the brain to suggest the invisible objects are perceived, even implicitly.

“Unless they can tell us they saw it, there’s nothing to suggest the brain was taking it in at all,” Lupyan says. “If language affects performance on a test like this, it indicates that language is influencing vision at a pretty early stage. It’s getting really deep into the visual system.”

The study demonstrates a deeper connection between language and simple sensory perception than previously thought, and one that makes Lupyan wonder about the extent of language’s power. The influence of language may extend to other senses as well.

“A lot of previous work has focused on vision, and we have neglected to examine the role of knowledge and expectations on other modalities, especially smell and taste,” Lupyan says. “What I want to see is whether we can really alter threshold abilities,” he says. “Does expecting a particular taste for example, allow you to detect a substance at a lower concentration?”

If you’re drinking a glass of milk, but thinking about orange juice, he says, that may change the way you experience the milk.

“There’s no point in figuring out what some objective taste is,” Lupyan says. “What’s important is whether the milk is spoiled or not. If you expect it to be orange juice, and it tastes like orange juice, it’s fine. But if you expected it to be milk, you’d think something was wrong.”

Before Babel? Ancient Mother Tongue Reconstructed (Live Science)

Tia Ghose, LiveScience Staff Writer

06 May 2013, 03:00 PM ET

an old oil painting of the Tower of Babel.The idea of a universal human language goes back at least to the Bible, in which humanity spoke a common tongue, but were punished with mutual unintelligibility after trying to build the Tower of Babel all the way to heaven. Now scientists have reconstructed words from such a language. CREDIT: Pieter Brueghel the Elder (1526/1530–1569) 

The ancestors of people from across Europe and Asia may have spoken a common language about 15,000 years ago, new research suggests.

Now, researchers have reconstructed words, such as “mother,” “to pull” and “man,” which would have been spoken by ancient hunter-gatherers, possibly in an area such as the Caucusus. The word list, detailed today (May 6) in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, could help researchers retrace the history of ancient migrations and contacts between prehistoric cultures.

“We can trace echoes of language back 15,000 years to a time that corresponds to about the end of the last ice age,” said study co-author Mark Pagel, an evolutionary biologist at the University of Reading in the United Kingdom.

Tower of Babel

The idea of a universal human language goes back at least to the Bible, in which humanity spoke a common tongue, but were punished with mutual unintelligibility after trying to build the Tower of Babel all the way to heaven. [Image Gallery: Ancient Middle-Eastern Texts]

But not all linguists believe in a single common origin of language, and trying to reconstruct that language seemed impossible. Most researchers thought they could only trace a language’s roots back 3,000 to 4,000 years. (Even so, researchers recently said they had traced the roots of a common mother tongue to many Eurasian languages back 8,000 to 9,500 years to Anatolia, a southwestern Asian peninsula that is now part of Turkey.)

Pagel, however, wondered whether language evolution proceeds much like biological evolution. If so, the most critical words, such as the frequently used words that define our social relationships, would change much more slowly.

To find out if he could uncover those ancient words, Pagel and his colleagues in a previous study tracked how quickly words changed in modern languages. They identified the most stable words. They also mapped out how different modern languages were related.

They then reconstructed ancient words based on the frequency at which certain sounds tend to change in different languages — for instance, p’s and f’s often change over time in many languages, as in the change from “pater” in Latin to the more recent term “father” in English.

The researchers could predict what 23 words, including “I,” “ye,” “mother,” “male,” “fire,” “hand” and “to hear” might sound like in an ancestral language dating to 15,000 years ago.

In other words, if modern-day humans could somehow encounter their Stone Age ancestors, they could say one or two very simple statements and make themselves understood, Pagel said.

Limitations of tracing language

Unfortunately, this language technique may have reached its limits in terms of how far back in history it can go.

“It’s going to be very difficult to go much beyond that, even these slowly evolving words are starting to run out of steam,” Pagel told LiveScience.

The study raises the possibility that researchers could combine linguistic data with archaeology and anthropology “to tell the story of human prehistory,” for instance by recreating ancient migrations and contacts between people, said William Croft, a comparative linguist at the University of New Mexico, who was not involved in the study.

“That has been held back because most linguists say you can only go so far back in time,” Croft said. “So this is an intriguing suggestion that you can go further back in time.”