Regruntled.com

There are a few human languages that are deficient in words for numbers.  One would expect that people who lack words for numbers larger than two would have difficulty performing certain numeric tasks, but recent research suggests that this is not so:

British and Australian researchers assessed 45 indigenous Australian children aged between four and seven years.

They compared those who lived in remote areas and only spoke Warlpiri or Anindilyakawa - two Aboriginal languages with very few number words - with those who lived in Melbourne and spoke English.

There was no difference in numerical ability between the children who spoke languages without number words and the English-speaking children.

Study leader Professor Brian Butterworth, from the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at University College London, said two studies in tribes in the Amazon had concluded that words were necessary for exact number tasks but this research showed otherwise.

I don’t know about this.  We seem to have internalized the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis to the point that learning something new is inseparable from learning a new vocabulary.  On the other hand, crows are said to be able to count up to three, and parrots up to six.  Maybe we have some very simple innate numerical ability, but anything beyond that requires language.

Synchronicity department

After I posted this, I heard about John McCain having more houses than he could count.  I swear that the timing was entirely coincidental.

A study in the Journal of Applied Social Psychology concludes that bumper stickers are a predictor for road rage.  The abstract:

Aggressive driving has received substantial media coverage during the past decade. We report 3 studies testing a territorial explanation of aggressive driving. Altman (1975) described attachment to, personalization of, and defense of primary territories (e.g., home) as being greater than for public territories (e.g., sunbathing spot on a beach). Aggressive driving may occur when social norms for defending a primary territory (i.e., one’s automobile) become confused with less aggressive norms for defending a public territory (i.e., the road). Both number of territory markers (e.g., bumper stickers, decals) and attachment to the vehicle were significant predictors of aggressive driving. Mere presence of a territory marker predicts increased use of the vehicle to express anger and decreased use of adaptive/constructive expressions.

Shankar Vedantam at the Washington Post has a good discussion.

That’s the surprising conclusion of a recent study by Colorado State University social psychologist William Szlemko. Drivers of cars with bumper stickers, window decals, personalized license plates and other “territorial markers” not only get mad when someone cuts in their lane or is slow to respond to a changed traffic light, but they are far more likely than those who do not personalize their cars to use their vehicles to express rage — by honking, tailgating and other aggressive behavior.

 

It does not seem to matter whether the messages on the stickers are about peace and love — “Visualize World Peace,” “My Kid Is an Honor Student” — or angry and in your face — “Don’t Mess With Texas,” “My Kid Beat Up Your Honor Student.”

I wonder if something similar applies to T shirts with messages vs. plain T shirts.