MySilverWhining

Recently there were news articles about analytical and empathic thinking being competing cognitive functions. Are there cognitive functions that compete with linguistic ability? I remember in college that I would be immersed in a math proof, wide awake and making good progress, and sometimes if someone interrupted me I would just stare at them for a few seconds with no words in my brain, struggling to make sense of what they said. Twenty seconds later I would be perfectly articulate, but often not before I slurred out a few disjointed words in an attempt to greet them or answer their question. What was going on in my brain when that happened?

I was so happy to see "doodlebug." I hadn't heard the word since I was a child.

When I look at dialect maps, I expect to be able to be able to see areas with strong Hispanic influence in places like California and Texas, but I usually can't differentiate them. I know there is a distinct accent associated with Spanish-speaking Hispanic English speakers in Texas, even those who grow up speaking English as a native language alongside Spanish, even many who are more comfortable in English than Spanish. (They are native English speakers just as much as anybody else, in other words.) Why don't I see a distinct Hispanic dialect region in places like the Rio Grande Valley? Maybe the English they speak looks the same on the page (same grammar, same word choice) even though the accent is different? Or am I not looking at the right maps?

To put it another way, could you devise questions in the same format as the NY Times Dialect Quiz that would highlight areas with large numbers of native bilingual Hispanics?

How do you think the cause of animal rescue interacts with conservation and larger environmental concerns such as global warming? I like that it emotionally engages people who don't yet have an intellectual connection with the environment, but at the same time, I feel like it pulls already sympathetic people even closer while further alienating people who are skeptical or on the fence. Many people are alienated from environmental issues by the perception that environmentalism is driven by a wasteful and sentimental concern for animals in defiance of common sense and at the expense of human interests. Seeing the extraordinary logistics and expense that go into saving a single bear or a single elephant, effort that could arguably accomplish much more if it were not guided by the entertainment values of charismatic megafauna and relatable narrative, does feed that perception. Do you think wildlife rescue is a net positive or a net negative in its effect on global environmental issues?