Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utcsrgv.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcsrgv!donald From: donald@utcsrgv.UUCP (Don Chan) Newsgroups: net.religion Subject: Plusgood Tonguespeak Message-ID: <3299@utcsrgv.UUCP> Date: Fri, 17-Feb-84 09:51:58 EST Article-I.D.: utcsrgv.3299 Posted: Fri Feb 17 09:51:58 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 17-Feb-84 10:20:16 EST Organization: CSRG, University of Toronto Lines: 33 For a secular (and disinterested) view of glossolalia ("speaking in tongues") I'd recommend William J. Samarin Tongues of Men and Angels (The Religious Language of Pentecostalism) 1972, Macmillian Co., New York, N.Y. A bit dry, but contains some interesting info. Apparently glossolalia is not unknown in other cultures, and is a moderately researched phenomenon. Analysis of recorded tonguespeak reveals it to be randomly jumbled phonemes chained into pseudo-language syntax. The book often cited by pro-tonguespeakers, Sherrill's "They Speak in Other Tongues", is most charitably described as highly uncritical. In any pentecostal church you'll find some variant of the story "one service person X started speaking in tongues and person Y, a newcomer to the church, recognized it as High Slobovian. Person X has never even hear of Slobovia." Needless to say, nobody can ever offer more than that. Usually the person telling the story got it second or third-hand. To be fair, most tonguespeak is not claimed as xenoglossia (speaking of actual foreign language), but just as a sign to believers. If tonguespeak can produce xenoglossia, do formal languages count as well as natural ones? Imagine attending a febrile fundamentalist rally and noticing that the tonguespeaker next to you is reciting C code! -- Don Chan, University of Toronto Department of Computer Science { utzoo linus ihnp4 floyd allegra uw-beaver ubc-vision cornell watmath hcr decwrl }!utcsrgv!donald