2013年2月24日 星期日

Language and Finance--"Why speaking English can make you poor when you retire"--a CNN Article

This is an interesting article.  A topic I've never thought of.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21518574

Why speaking English can make you poor when you retire

By Tim Bowler Business  reporter, BBC News

23 February 2013 Last updated at 00:19 GMT

Could the language we speak skew our  financial decision-making, and does the fact that you're reading this in English make you less likely than a Mandarin speaker to save for your old age?


It is a controversial theory which has been given some weight by new findings  from a Yale University behavioural economist, Keith Chen.

Prof Chen says his research proves that the grammar of the language we speak  affects both our finances and our health.

My comments: Really?!

Bluntly, he says, if you speak English you are likely to save less for your old age, smoke more and get less exercise than if you speak a language like  Mandarin, Yoruba or Malay.

Future-speak

Prof Chen divides the world's languages into two groups, depending on how  they treat the concept of time.

Strong future-time reference languages (strong FTR)  require their speakers to use a different tense when speaking of the future.  Weak future-time reference (weak FTR) languages do not.


"If I wanted to explain to an English-speaking colleague why I can't attend a  meeting later today, I could not say 'I go to a seminar', English grammar would oblige me to say 'I will go, am going, or have to go to a seminar'.

"If, on the other hand, I were speaking Mandarin, it would be quite natural  for me to omit any marker of future time and say 'I go listen seminar' since the  context leaves little room for misunderstanding," says Prof Chen.

My comments: But when speaking Mandarin, we add a marker "Yao" (要) before the verb if the subject is mentioned.

Even within European languages there are clear grammatical differences in the  way they treat future events, he says.

"In English you have to say 'it will rain tomorrow' while in German you can  say 'morgen regnet es' - it rains tomorrow."

Disassociating the future

Speakers of languages which only use the present tense when dealing with the  future are likely to save more money than those who speak languages which  require the use a future tense, he argues.

So how does a mere difference in grammar cause people to  save less for their retirement?


"The act of savings is fundamentally about understanding that your future  self - the person you're saving for - is in some sense equivalent to your  present self," Prof Chen told the BBC's Business Daily.

"If your language separates the future and the present in its grammar that  seems to lead you to slightly disassociate the future from the present every  time you speak.

"That effectively makes it harder for you to save."

Even more controversial, is Prof Chen's assertion that language differences  underpin wider differences in people's behaviour.

My comments: Agreed.  Language and culture/custom are strongly interrelated.

In  his research paper, he says that compared to speakers of languages which use  a future tense, speakers of languages with no real future tense are:

  • Likely to have saved 39% more by the time they retire

  • 31% more likely to save in a year

  • 24% less likely to smoke

  • 29% more likely to be physically active

  • 13% less likely to be obese


Far-fetched?

Not surprisingly, Prof Chen's findings have been criticised by both  economists and linguists.

They argue there are number[s] of cultural, social, or economic reasons why  different language speakers behave differently.

It is a point Prof Chen acknowledges, saying "I completely agree, it seemed  far-fetched to me when I started doing this research as well."

But he says his research has controlled for all these factors, by concentrating on nine multi-lingual countries: Belgium, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia,  Estonia, DR Congo, Nigeria, Malaysia, Singapore, and Switzerland.

"You can find families that live right next door to each other, have exactly the same education levels, exactly the same income and even exactly same  religion.

"Yet the family that speaks a language that doesn't distinguish between the  future and the present will save dramatically more," he says.

In Nigeria, for example, Hausa has multiple future tenses, while Yoruba does  not.

"You can find Nigerians who speak Hausa and Yoruba who live next to each  other and yet have radically different savings behaviour."

Findings challenged

But Morten Lau, director of Durham University's Centre  for Behavioural Economics, says the factors which affect how much people savehave little to do with language.


"In my own work with savings, it is interest rates that determine savings  behaviour."

Prof Lau says there are often significant differences within language groups,  and just using the average of these results in analysis can prove  problematic.

"You have to be careful the inferences you make from correlations like these. It is very difficult to control for multiple factors."

"For instance, in our own research in Denmark, we found that male smokers  wanted a higher interest rate on their savings than did non-smokers. But that  this did not apply to women smokers."

'A tempting  idea'

Linguist John McWhorter, of Columbia University, says any influence a  language's structure has on the way its speakers see their world is extremely  subtle.

"The extent to which the language shapes the thought is tiny. We're talking  about milliseconds of reaction.

"None of it has ever been proven to have anything to do with how people see  the world or experience life.

"It's a tempting idea that simply doesn't make any sense."

Also, he says, some languages have been wrongly classified, thus undermining  the statistical correlations.

"Russian, and languages like it, are a lot more like Mandarin than Keith Chen  thinks."

Despite his critics, Prof Chen insists his findings are robust.

"What's remarkable, is when you find correlations this strong and that  survive so many aggressive sets of controls, it's actually hard to come up with  a story of what else might be causing this."

So what does Prof Chen think of the idea that if he is right, then English  speakers who want to start saving more for their retirement, should talking  entirely in the present tense?

"It actually seems like encouraging yourself to think in the present tense  makes it a little bit easier to engage in self-control."

My comments: There's still room for further research.

沒有留言:

張貼留言