61–70 of 70 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's nothing even slightly strange about it. The terms are self-recapitulating because parents mistake children's babbling for first words. If anything, it'd be strange if they weren't the same. Take a read of this: http://languagehat.com/trask-on-mama-and-papa/
Then why isn't aunt "gaga" in all languages?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This one btw doesn't include the one that is strangest to me: that Chinese for mom or momma is 妈妈 "mama" and pop , pappa is 爸爸 "baba".
There's nothing even slightly strange about it. The terms are self-recapitulating because parents mistake children's babbling for first words. If anything, it'd be strange if they weren't the same. Take a read of this: http://languagehat.com/trask-on-mama-and-papa/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
These are nearly universal AFAIK. I've heard stipulated a link between this and the fact that these are the first sounds a child will learn.
> these are the first sounds a child will learn. Not really, no. 'Gaga' or 'kaka' are just as easy yet aren't universal. The mystery is not solved. (Could be just areal effects, for example.)
It's no coincidence that sounds like 'gaga' and 'kaka' tend to be associated with either more distant relatives or with defecation: the kid's going to be older when those things get introduced.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I always presumed these were universal because they are the easiest sounds for infants to make.
I'm not sure why that was downvoted. It's a reasonable assertion.
http://archive.aramcoworld.com/issue/201405/the.water.below....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a great list of these at https://web.archive.org/web/20070227031854/http://members.ao...
This one btw doesn't include the one that is strangest to me: that Chinese for mom or momma is 妈妈 "mama" and pop , pappa is 爸爸 "baba".
The best example I've always thought of is the verb "to understand". Picture standing under something; you get to know it better.
In my native language Twi [1], the to understand is literally constructed as "to to sit under" I know of several other languages with very similar constructions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The 'ma' and 'pa' sounds are some of the easiest sounds to make by babies since they just require the lips and don't involve the tongue.
You might be interested in the article by Larry Trask linked to here: http://languagehat.com/trask-on-mama-and-papa/
The Arabic countries led by the Muslims were the most advanced scientists/engineers in the world, until they let the religious crazies take over. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_science_and_engine...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not sure why that was downvoted. It's a reasonable assertion.
And correct, as it happens. Though long-running cultural associations with certain consonants (such as 'm', 'n' and 'b' and mother or grandmother, 'p' and 'd' with father or grandfather, &c.) to play a huge role in it too: the parents need to be culturally primed to mistake the babbling for actual half-formed words, and subsequently build that association in the child's mind in return.