Skip to main content

A Universal Rhythm Guides How We Speak: Global Analysis Reveals 1.6-Second Units

2 months 1 week ago
"The truly universal properties of languages are not independent of our physiology and cognition," argues the co-author of a new study. Instead he says their research "strengthens the idea that intonation units are a universal feature of language." Phys.org explains: Have you ever noticed that a natural conversation flows like a dance — pauses, emphases, and turns arriving just in time? A new study has discovered that this isn't just intuition; there is a biological rhythm embedded in our speech... According to the study, led by Dr. Maya Inbar, alongside Professors Eitan Grossman and Ayelet N. Landau, human speech across the world pulses to the beat of what are called intonation units, short prosodic phrases that occur at a consistent rate of one every 1.6 seconds. The research analyzed over 650 recordings in 48 languages spanning every continent and 27 language families. Using a novel algorithm, the team was able to automatically identify intonation units in spontaneous speech, revealing that regardless of the language spoken, from English and Russian to endangered languages in remote regions, people naturally break their speech into these rhythmic chunks. "These findings suggest that the way we pace our speech isn't just a cultural artifact, it's deeply rooted in human cognition and biology," says Dr. Inbar. "We also show that the rhythm of intonation units is unrelated to faster rhythms in speech, such as the rhythm of syllables, and thus likely serves a different cognitive role...." Most intriguingly, the low-frequency rhythm they follow mirrors patterns in brain activity linked to memory, attention, and volitional action, illuminating the profound connection between how we speak and how we think. The work is published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

EditorDavid

30 Years of Satellite Data Confirm Predictions from Early Models of Sea Level Rise

2 months 1 week ago
"The ultimate test of climate projections is to compare them with what has played out..." says earth sciences professor Torbjörn Törnqvist, lead author on a new study published in the open-access journal Earth's Future (published by the American Geophysical Union). But after "decades of observations," he says his researchers "were quite amazed how good those early projections were, especially when you think about how crude the models were back then, compared to what is available now." "For anyone who questions the role of humans in changing our climate, here is some of the best proof that we have understood for decades what is really happening, and that we can make credible projections...." A new era of monitoring global sea-level change took off when satellites were launched in the early 1990s to measure the height of the ocean surface. This showed that the rate of global sea-level rise since that time has averaged about one eighth of an inch per year. Only more recently, it became possible to detect that the rate of global sea-level rise is accelerating. When NASA researchers demonstrated in October 2024 that the rate has doubled during this 30-year period, the time was right to compare this finding with projections that were made during the mid-1990s, independent of the satellite measurements. In 1996, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published an assessment report soon after the satellite-based sea-level measurements had started. It projected that the most likely amount of global sea-level rise over the next 30 years would be almost 8 centimeters (3 inches), remarkably close to the 9 centimeters that has occurred. But it also underestimated the role of melting ice sheets by more than 2 centimeters (about 1 inch). At the time, little was known about the role of warming ocean waters and how that could destabilize marine sectors of the Antarctic Ice Sheet from below. Ice flow from the Greenland Ice Sheet into the ocean has also been faster than foreseen. "The findings provide confidence in model-based climate projections," according to the paper. Again, its two key points: The largest disparities between projections and observations were due to underestimated dynamic mass loss of ice sheets Comparison of past projections with subsequent observations gives confidence in future climate projections Thanks to Slashdot reader Mr. Dollar Ton for sharing the news.

Read more of this story at Slashdot.

EditorDavid