Is “Huh?” a Universal Word? Conversational Infrastructure and the Convergent Evolution of Linguistic Items

PLoS ONE 01/2013; 8(11):e78273
Published: November 8, 2013
DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0078273

Mark Dingemanse, Francisco Torreira, N. J. Enfield

Language and Cognition Department, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
(N. J. Enfield, Centre for Language Studies, Radboud University, Nijmegen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

A word like Huh?–used as a repair initiator when, for example, one has not clearly heard what someone just said– is found in roughly the same form and function in spoken languages across the globe. We investigate it in naturally occurring conversations in ten languages and present evidence and arguments for two distinct claims: that Huh? is universal, and that it is a word. In support of the first, we show that the similarities in form and function of this interjection across languages are much greater than expected by chance. In support of the second claim we show that it is a lexical, conventionalised form that has to be learnt, unlike grunts or emotional cries. We discuss possible reasons for the cross-linguistic similarity and propose an account in terms of convergent evolution. Huh? is a universal word not because it is innate but because it is shaped by selective pressures in an interactional environment that all languages share: that of other-initiated repair. Our proposal enhances evolutionary models of language change by suggesting that conversational infrastructure can drive the convergent cultural evolution of linguistic items.

http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0078273

Rumor Diffusion in an Interests-Based Dynamic Social Network

The Scientific World Journal
Volume 2013 (2013), Article ID 824505, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/824505

Mingsheng Tang [1], Xinjun Mao [1], Zahia Guessoum [2], and Huiping Zhou [1]

[1] College of Computer, National University of Defense Technology, Changsha 410073, China
[2] LIP 6, Université Pierre et Marie Curie Paris, 75006 Paris, France

Received 12 July 2013; Accepted 3 November 2013

Academic Editors: H. M. Chamberlin and Y. Zhang

Copyright © 2013 Mingsheng Tang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

To research rumor diffusion in social friend network, based on interests, a dynamic friend network is proposed, which has the characteristics of clustering and community, and a diffusion model is also proposed. With this friend network and rumor diffusion model, based on the zombie-city model, some simulation experiments to analyze the characteristics of rumor diffusion in social friend networks have been conducted. The results show some interesting observations: (1) positive information may evolve to become a rumor through the diffusion process that people may modify the information by word of mouth; (2) with the same average degree, a random social network has a smaller clustering coefficient and is more beneficial for rumor diffusion than the dynamic friend network; (3) a rumor is spread more widely in a social network with a smaller global clustering coefficient than in a social network with a larger global clustering coefficient; and (4) a network with a smaller clustering coefficient has a larger efficiency.

http://www.hindawi.com/journals/tswj/2013/824505/

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3881697/

Joking in the face of death: A terror management approach to humor production

Humor
Volume 26, Issue 4 (19 Oct 2013), Pages 493–509
DOI: 10.1515/humor-2013-0012

Christopher R. Long [1], Dara N. Greenwood [2]

[1] Ouachita Baptist University
[2] Vassar College

Abstract

Terror management theory has spawned a body of experimental research documenting a multitude of defensive responses to mortality salience manipulations (e.g., rigid adherence to dominant cultural values, self-esteem bolstering). Another substantive body of work suggests that humor functions as a natural and often effective means of down-regulating stressful or traumatic experiences. Integrating a terror management paradigm with a cartoon captioning task, the present study finds that participants subliminally primed with death wrote funnier captions than those primed with pain, as judged by outside raters. Interestingly, a reverse pattern was obtained for participants' own ratings of their captions; explicitly death-primed participants rated themselves more successful at generating humorous captions than their pain-primed counterparts, while no significant difference emerged between the two subliminal priming conditions. Findings contribute new insights to recent research suggesting that death reminders may sometimes facilitate creativity and open-mindedness.

Keywords: humor; terror management; mortality; creativity

http://www.degruyter.com/view/j/humr.2013.26.issue-4/humor-2013-0012/humor-2013-0012.xml

Where are you? Location talk in mobile phone conversations

Mobile Media & Communication
September 2013 vol. 1 no. 3 314-334
doi: 10.1177/2050157913493773

Ditte Laursen
State Media Archive
State and University Library
Viktor Albecksvej 1
8000 Aarhus C
Denmark

Margaret H. Szymanski
Work Practice & Technology
Xerox Innovation Group
USA

Abstract

Conversational studies have shown that location cannot be considered as an external framework that shapes interaction; rather it is to be analyzed as a resource and an achievement in interaction (Schegloff, 1972). Building on a corpus of 93 recorded mobile phone conversations from the United States and Denmark, this article adds to current interaction research by investigating how location is produced, understood and socially accomplished via mobile phones. More specifically, we investigate how location talk operates in the opening sequences of the call. We find that location is an opening-relevant topic: speakers introduce it as the reason for the call and topicalize it following initial engagement. When referring to location, speakers predominately use two variations: inquiries (where are you), and reports of their whereabouts (I just got home). Further, speakers formulate their locations in two ways: location specific (I’m sitting on a train) or status of transit (we are on our way). In addition to open format where-are-you elicitations, location talk can take the form of a candidate (are you at Union street); candidate formulations show how speakers orient to the collaborative work of meeting up with one another and display knowledge about each other’s activities. Finally, we treat the case of reciprocal location inquiries and reports, where both caller and callee state their whereabouts, showing how location talk is sequence organized.

http://mmc.sagepub.com/content/1/3/314.abstract

‘Christ fucking shit merde!’ Language preferences for swearing among maximally proficient multilinguals

Sociolinguistic Studies
Vol 4, No 3 (2010) 595–614
doi : 10.1558/sols.v4i3.595

Jean-Marc Dewaele

Birkbeck, University of London, London, England

Abstract

The present study investigates language preferences for swearing among two groups of multilinguals. The first group consisted of 386 adult multilinguals who filled out the Bilingualism and Emotion web based questionnaire (BEQ, Dewaele and Pavlenko,2001–2003) and had declared that they were maximally proficient in their L1 and L2 and used both languages constantly. The second group consisted of 20 multilinguals with a similar sociobiographical profile who were interviewed about their language choice for the communication of emotion. A statistical analysis of the quantitative data revealed that despite similar levels of self-perceived proficiency and frequency of use in the L1 and L2, the L1 was used significantly more for swearing and L1 swearwords were perceived to have a stronger emotional resonance. An analysis of the quantitative data from the BEQ and the interview data confirmed the findings of the quantitative analysis while adding rich detail about the difficulties in deciding which language to choose for swearing.

https://www.equinoxpub.com/journals/index.php/SS/article/view/7344

http://www.academia.edu/1475912/Christ_fucking_shit_merde_Language_preferences_for_swearing_among_maximally_proficient_multilinguals

Swearing as a response to pain

Neuroreport. 5 August 2009 - Volume 20 - Issue 12 - pp 1056-1060
doi: 10.1097/WNR.0b013e32832e64b1

Stephens, Richard; Atkins, John; Kingston, Andrew

School of Psychology, Keele University, Keele, Staffordshire, UK

Abstract

Although a common pain response, whether swearing alters individuals' experience of pain has not been investigated. This study investigated whether swearing affects cold-pressor pain tolerance (the ability to withstand immersing the hand in icy water), pain perception and heart rate. In a repeated measures design, pain outcomes were assessed in participants asked to repeat a swear word versus a neutral word. In addition, sex differences and the roles of pain catastrophising, fear of pain and trait anxiety were explored. Swearing increased pain tolerance, increased heart rate and decreased perceived pain compared with not swearing. However, swearing did not increase pain tolerance in males with a tendency to catastrophise. The observed pain-lessening (hypoalgesic) effect may occur because swearing induces a fight-or-flight response and nullifies the link between fear of pain and pain perception.

http://journals.lww.com/neuroreport/abstract/2009/08050/swearing_as_a_response_to_pain.4.aspx

You Bastard: A Narrative Exploration of the Experience of Indignation within Organizations

Organization Studies
November 2005 vol. 26 no. 11 1625-1640

David Sims
Cass Business School, London, UK

Abstract

Our patience with forming interpretations and reinterpretations of others' behaviour is not unlimited. The time comes when we lose interest in trying to understand, and conclude that another person is behaving in a way that is simply unacceptable. This paper explores the narratives that go with immoderate indignation, even for those best versed in the idea that they should attempt to understand the perspective of the other. The paper offers a reflexive comment on the difficulty of analysing such a topic, on the grounds that the phenomenon under discussion can debilitate analytic writing. Three narratives are discussed in which one person was seen as behaving in a despicable way by others. The description and analysis of the narratives are used to offer a narrative understanding of the process by which some people become indignant with others. It suggests a narrative construction of how sense is made of indignation, particularly in cases where two narratives come up against each other. It concludes by considering how the process of being indignant can produce conflicting emotions of joy and guilt for those involved.

http://oss.sagepub.com/content/26/11/1625