Glossolalia or speaking in tongues

[Medawlinno]

So, I did a little “research” last night on Youtube and listened to a number of speakers exhibiting glossolalia - most of what I was able to find was recorded here in the US so almost all the subjects were speakers of American English with the exception of one or two who also had some knowledge of (I believe) Spanish. I tried Sufi glossolalia but it didn’t turn up much; one was really cool though; a young, I’m guessing possibly Persian/Farsi woman (I think her name is “Yasmeen”/Jasmine), who apparenlty sings in glossolalia. Very interesting as I’ve never heard anyone actually sing in it.

I would like to post my own brief very simple linguistic analysis of what I saw, but will need to do so on a later post - I will need a bit of time to put it together.

I will say that I was really amazed at what IS out there for glossolalia specimens/examples on Youtube (ain’t technology wonderful -LOL) - the recordings are considerably more clear and concise (for the most part) that what I saw and heard 25 years ago which greatly facilitates any sort of analysis. There are a number of linguistic papers published on-line as well which delve into the subject in much greater depth.

Hope to have the post up by the end of the week.

 

[ltwin]

I tried Sufi glossolalia but it didn’t turn up much; one was really cool though; a young, I’m guessing possibly Persian/Farsi woman (I think her name is “Yasmeen”/Jasmine), who apparenlty sings in glossolalia. Very interesting as I’ve never heard anyone actually sing in it.

In Pentecostal/charismatic Christianity, singing in tongues is called “singing in the spirit.” There is a reference to it in 1 Corinthians 14.

There are youtube videos of IHOP (as in International House of Prayer, not Pancakes ) worship where they sing in tongues. There is also a youtube video of a meeting led by John Wimber (founder of the Vineyard Movement) where the he leads the congregation in singing in the Spirit.

 

[BeProfOSX]

Within Protestant/Evangelical circles we generally have three camps:

1 - Cessationist. Believes that all the supernatural gifts of the Spirit (or charisms, if you prefer), including tongues, ended with the closing of the cannon of the New Testament.

2 - Pentecostal. Believes that speaking in tongues is the only valid initial evidence of being filled with the Holy Spirit.

3 - Charismatic. Often used interchangeably with Pentecostal, but is in reality more of the ‘mushy middle’ between the Cessationist and Pentecostal traditions.

My particular church struggled with this issue in the 50s and A.W. Tozer was the one who finally settled it by formulating a rule that remains with us to this day: Seek not. Forbid not.

Tongues, as it is practiced today, may or may not be the authentic gift of tongues as shown in the New Testament and tongues may or may not be evidence of being filled with the Holy Spirit, but regardless, it’s a secondary issue and we shouldn’t divide over it. Some will speak in tongues. Some won’t. Don’t make a bigger deal out of it than that and don’t look down on someone else for either doing it or not doing it.

Personally, I believe that tongues as it is practiced today is a somewhat well known but poorly understood psychological phenomenon. You find it among Christians and non-Christians. Tonges in the New Testament, however, were very clearly a supernatural gift that related to the ability to speak and/or to be understood in human languages. There is no sense in the New Testament, at least that I can find, of the sort of aimless babbling that passes for tongues today.

Again, that’s my personal view. Take it or leave it. I’m not going to look down on you if you do it. Please don’t look down on me if I don’t join in.

 

[ggarcia19]

So, I did a little “research” last night on Youtube and listened to a number of speakers exhibiting glossolalia - most of what I was able to find was recorded here in the US so almost all the subjects were speakers of American English with the exception of one or two who also had some knowledge of (I believe) Spanish. I tried Sufi glossolalia but it didn’t turn up much; one was really cool though; a young, I’m guessing possibly Persian/Farsi woman (I think her name is “Yasmeen”/Jasmine), who apparenlty sings in glossolalia. Very interesting as I’ve never heard anyone actually sing in it.

I would like to post my own brief very simple linguistic analysis of what I saw, but will need to do so on a later post - I will need a bit of time to put it together.

I will say that I was really amazed at what IS out there for glossolalia specimens/examples on Youtube (ain’t technology wonderful -LOL) - the recordings are considerably more clear and concise (for the most part) that what I saw and heard 25 years ago which greatly facilitates any sort of analysis. There are a number of linguistic papers published on-line as well which delve into the subject in much greater depth.

Hope to have the post up by the end of the week.

Thanks for your research. I have found many videos of people speaking in tongues but when I searched on Youtube, I had to also type Satanic because the people that have posted many of the videos believed it was Satanic and not Godly or Holy. Some Christians or Muslims filmed the video only to insult the believers are teach against it, therefore its called “Satanic”.

 

[Medawlinno]

OK - guess I have to d othis in parts so…

First, I applogize for an inordinately long post, but…

As mentioned in an earlier post I finally had the opportunity to do a little research on Youtube regarding glossolalia. I was pleasantly surprised at the amount of material out there; both positive and negative. What I also found to be quite nice is that the recorded examples were, for the most part, nice and clear so that a basic analysis could be made.

What follows is just a very general analysis of what I saw and heard from purely a linguistic point of view. Really more just my thoughts than any type of formal analysis.

First a few additional insights on glossolalia itself – This is offered in no particular order, just some random observations and additional info on the phenomenon.

The glossolalia exhibited by any one speaker seems to be governed by the phonological rules of that person’s native language and any other language they may be familiar with. This is especially true of consonant clusters.

I’ll use English as my example. Certain consonant clusters just aren’t allowed in English; we do not have things like cht- or dl- or tl- or jb- or ng- at the beginnings of words in English. Likewise, It seems too that in the glossolalia of speakers of English, any disallowed word-initial clusters (or word-medial or word-final for that matter) are also not exhibited/allowed in their glossolalia. This would seem to support the theory that glossolalia must also conform or be based on the same phonological rules that govern the speaker’s native language.

Also as I previously stated in another post, a particular person’s glossolalia does not seem to contain any sounds not found in the phonetic inventory of their native language or any other language they may be familiar with. A language’s Phonetic Inventory are all the sounds that make up that particular language – English contains about 24 consonant phonemes and about 12 vowel phonemes in its inventory.

In other words, if a person knows or has only ever been exposed to English, their glossolalia will not contain the sounds made by say, the German ü or ö, nor any sound or combination of sounds that do not occur naturally in their native language (or any they may be familiar with).

Syllable structure is also rather unique to some degree. What I have observed seems to concur with what others have written about glossolalia. Syllable structure is typically not at all like the syllable structure in the speaker’s native language. Glossolalia typically exhibits a very open syllable structure, that is, the syllables of a given string (I hesitate to use “word”) are typically Consonant (C) Vowel (V) and strings typically consist of a repetition of this structure, so something like CVCVCVCV, etc. With the final segment of the string, there seems to be a choice of using either an open syllable or a closed one (a closed syllable has the structure CVC). So a given string is something like CVCVCVCVCVC, etc. Where I have C (consonant) here, it should be understood, though I’m not indicating it here as such for simplicity’s sake, that it could be just a single consonant or an allowed consonant cluster. One speaker I noticed seemed to like to end his strings with -Vsht (where V is some vowel). I should also point out too that where I have V (for vowel), it should be understood that it could also be an allowable diphthong or tripthong.

The syllable structure of CVCV (i.e. mainly just open syllables) is most definitely found in real languages as well – the Polynesian languages (Hawaiian for example) are perhaps the best examples. English, tends to favor closed syllables so one might be inclined to think it’s an example of how glossolalia is really a language of some sort. The thing is, though that glossolalia resembles babbling in structure and the syllable structure of “babble” is CVCV (i.e. open syllables no matter what your native language may favor).

In short, it seems as if a person’s glossolalia is subject to the same “rules” as that person’s native language.

Getting to what I observed, I would have to classify the examples into two different categories; one being spoken by a given person who was in a non-religious setting (just sitting down behind a desk or doing whatever), and the other being spoken by a given a person in/at a Pentecostal service.

I have to take each one separately as they seem to be distinct from one another.

First the examples exhibited by people who appeared to be in a just normal everyday setting. These examples were perhaps the more interesting to me as they seemed to more resemble actual languages. They seemed, upon initial examination, to have more of a structure to them and were actually very reminiscent of so called “conlangs” (i.e. constructed languages) which are very popular amongst linguists and sci-fi enthusiasts. If you’ve seen the movie “Avatar”, for example, “Na’vi”, the language of those tall blue natives, is a conlang. Incidentally so are the majority of languages found in Tolkien’s works (particularly the two Elvish tongues, Quenya and Sindarin) as well as perhaps the most famous one of all, “Klingon” from the Star Trek movies!

The difference with conlangs versus glossolalia however is that conlangs are specific, purposefully designed languages and are actual languages in the sense that they have a defined set of phonemes, defined phonological and grammar rules, etc., though not naturally spoken by anyone (you have to learn them from “scratch” - there are no native speakers). They typically will also have some sort of orthography (writing system) either invented or based on an orthography already in existence.

to be continued…

 

[Medawlinno]

part 2…

Upon closer examination of this first type of glossolalia, I noticed that most of the syllables were very repeated – like some type of advanced form of word-play, as I mentioned in a previous post, not unlike some very advanced forms of Pig Latin. Similar syllables seemed to be repeated but with just different endings tacked on which gave the impression that there was something grammatical going on (i.e. verb endings or noun inflections, something of that sort).

Again, though, no space, if you will, between strings; like uttering a complete sentence with no breaks between the words. They seemed to be just very long strings of repeated syllables just subbing out different vowels and endings here and there. Essentially, considerable repetition of the same sounds or sequence of sounds. Also reminded me of someone trying to imitate someone else speaking in some language. As if you were trying to imitate someone you just heard speaking in say, Zulu or Gaelic, some language not commonly heard.

There was a definite intonation or at least an attempt at it, but the accent or primary stress seemed to fall, as it does in English, on the first syllable of a given string with sometimes a secondary stress given to the last syllable in the string since that’sa the one that typically exhibited the changes in endings.

The second type I watched, exhibited by speakers who were attending (or usually preaching at) a service was a whole different ballgame all together. This glossolalia was, to me anyways, spoken by individuals who were clearly in some form or state of religious euphoria/fervor.

Strings of speech were very frequently interrupted by English words or sentences. The examples of this type that I saw had no discernable structure whatsoever; simply a syllable or two consistently repeated over and over and built upon by adding additional syllables to it to create a string. The intonation was extremely emotional so no real “normal” intonation could be defined.

This repetition of the same string (long as well as short strings) was much more prevalent in this second type. One speaker seemed to have three strings in his repertoire which he just constantly repeated over and over with an occasional twist at the end by adding extra syllables to the string.

I would not describe this as being anything like the first type described above at all. I don’t know enough about glossolalia to offer this as “theory”, but I have to wonder if perhaps there might be different subsets of this phenomenon. Glossolalia is also manifested in some forms of schizophrenia, but I have never heard this type so can’t make any sort of informative opinion as to whether or not it could be described as yet another type entirely.

to be continued…

 

[Medawlinno]

last part…

This second type I would have to describe as being, as many people have suggested, just a type of word play on simple babbling (sort of what younger toddlers do before they learn to form words). It was actually vaguely reminiscent of how a good auctioneer works with word-play; that same type of repetitiveness and adding onto the initial syllable in the string.

What struck me as kind of interesting is that there were a few videos that seemed to be intended as “instructional” - not so much as a “how to” and “this is what you should say” or “this is how you should start and just let it evolve” type thing, so much as offering insights on putting one’s self in the proper state of mind (for lack of a better way to say it) so as to be able to generate strings of glossolalia by just starting to speak.

A few final observations – it appears that no two speakers will ever seem to have the same glossolalia, so mutual intelligibility simply does not seem to exist. Could this be an argument that glossolalia really is just simply something generated in the subconscious, based on the individual’s language experience? Possibly. To be fair, I suppose on the flip side, it could also be argued that it’s “tongues”, not “tongue”, hence the reason no two ever sound alike.

From what I have seen, it seems that more people are able to generate glossolalia than know what it is supposed to mean or translate to.

I have to say that as someone who is familiar with a lot of languages, I could, with very little effort, emulate just about anything I have heard on these videos. Actually I think with a little practice really anyone can emulate glossolalia, or perhaps “emulate” isn’t quite the right word; more like actually exhibit/perform glossolalia.

I really think it’s nothing more than advanced forms of word play done within the subconscious and its production by anyone may boil down to simply a matter of not being “afraid to play with your language” – something almost anyone over the age of four or so has forgotten how to do.

The subconscious mind can do some amazing things – anyone who has studied a foreign language may be able to attest to the seemingly baffling fact that you can actually not only dream in the language you’re studying, but in the dream, you’re able to speak the darn thing as fluently as if you’ve lived in the country where it’s spoken all your life!! Upon waking, you soon discover however that you’re struggling to spit out even the simplest of sentences again!

The subconscious mind doesn’t have the limitations the conscious mind does and, at least in dreams anyway, is able to generate flawless sentences/speech in your target language even though consciously you struggle with it. The subconscious is able to put all those horrible grammar rules, noun inflections, verb conjugations, etc., etc. together virtually instantly because, unlike the conscious mind, it doesn’t have to “think” about it; it’s instantaneous. It doesn’t make a lot of sense, I know….but I can tell you from personal experience, it’s a little scary how well it works – if I were able to speak all those languages as seamlessly as I do in dreams, I’d like to think I’d be making some pretty big bucks at the UN!!

I’m inclined to believe glossolalia is working on the same sort of principles as how foreign language seems to come so naturally and flawlessly in the subconscious mind of dreams and how subconsciously we play with words/language. It’s as if the subconscious is trying to generate language based on what the individual speaker’s knowledge of not only his/her own native language is (or others s/he may have been exposed to), but also that person’s perception of what a non-English language is “supposed” to sound like.

To end this rather long post, I don’t wish to offend anyone, but there is nothing of what I saw or heard that I would construe as being anything inherently religious in nature. That said, I certainly do not condone anyone for believing in glossolalia/tongues or for practicing the phenomenon whether spontaneously or otherwise. For many people this is a large component of their beliefs and as such, I would not be critical of your beliefs/opinions on glossolalia. If it can be viewed as a tool to strengthen one’s Spiritual Path and increase one’s faith in his/her beliefs……perhaps it can be said that, that’s the true “gift” of glossolalia.

 

[Medawlinno]

So, I listened to several examples of glossolalia in a sung version (“singing in the Spirit”, as it’s called).

Music and singing voices aside, what I concentratd on was what wasactuaaly sung and how it fitted the musical phrases.

One of my hobbies (though some of my friends would say “addictions”) is folk instruments and folk music from around the world (I am a non-professional musician) which kind of goes nicely with all the languages.

The words to most of the songs were essentially of the two trypes of glossolalia I described in my previous post(s). The main difference being that some of the vowels were drawn out over the musical phrases as you’d do singing in any language. The styles themelves seem to encompas a bunch of different genres (I thought it might just be more “gospel-style”, but obviously not) - OK I said I wasn’t going to get into the music…

I don’t know how songs are passed on (or even if they are) in this tradition, but if it’s done in a true folk tradition, people try and copy other people’s songs and either change the words to make their own version of the song or also crib the lyrics. The tradition is very much an oral one. Not sure how it works here or if indeed songs are ‘copied’ and past on - perhaps not due to the nature of glossolalia, but music is different - people learn to sing along with songs in languages they have never previously heard before if the tune is catchy enough.

I mention this because one of the things I noticed that was very unexpected was that in four of the samples I listed to, the singers (all different and presumably all recorded at different times and different locations) seemed to repeat variations of what sounded like the same string of glossolalia.

As I listed to it in more detail, they sounded to my ears like various corruptions of the phrase “Kyrie eleison”, One string I can recall of the top of my head was (phonetically) “kee-ree-ee-lay-shon-mee” just repeated at the begining of each musical phrase with the added extra syllable “mee” at the end. The other three singers’ strings were very simmilar corruptions.

I have no idea if perhaps that’s a common phrase in the Pentecostal tradition (?), if not, it’s not exactly uncommon either, so hard to tell where it may have been picked up, but obviously a phrase each singer had heard somewhere before.

Note too that, again, ther are no sounds in “Kyrie eleison” that do not exist in English even though the phrase is Greek.

One other one that caught my attention was sung by a female singer and it sounded like a corruption of a Spanish lullaby. The melody was *very *lullaby-ish (there’s a word for ya!) and many of the words she was singing were, to me anyways, definitaly corruptions of Spanish words (“corazón” and “mañana” were two that come to mind that she repeated several times).

 

[wholebread]

hello – i go to 3 different prayer groups-- who utilize - praying in tongues – in the verious ways–
once a person understands what saint paul ment – when he said - we (are-can) a temple of God and have the hOLY SPIRIT in us–

we are a type of – fax machine-- or a Smart phone-- and as such we can – function spiritually-- so long as we have the #app.

would you evualate the message of the fax machine – by the sounds of the beeps and clicks on the telephone? – no of course not–

so if a person can keep his “natural mind” under control-- then he will be renewed and hear in the spirit of his mind—

and as saint paul said-- the natural mind finds it foolishness-

it is far more easy to get answered prayer-- when you are hearing what God suggestes you to say and pray–

The prayers of a righteous man avail much-- Isaah – prayed 4 it not to rain for 3 years–

becasue that is what he was supposted to pray–

it is a little more direct than saying a “hail mary” or an “our father”

this is what praying in the spirit is all about-- romans 12-- presenting you body-mind-spirit and soul-- as a living sacraface

 

[RC_David333]

**the Catholic monk, brother Dimond, totally destroys the heretical arguments of the calvinist in this debate. Here is the link to that debate…

youtube.com/watch?v=Qn1vC1Ez-OI

To learn more about brother Dimond, his Monastery and the true teachings of our Lord, Jesus Christ, then please visit VaticanCatholic.com or MostHolyFamilyMonastery.com **

 

[Medawlinno]

What I’m sort of getting at is that glossolalia is in of itself just as I and other Linguists, etc. have described; a learned manipulation of sounds and syllables which imitate language. Once the method of production is learned, one can switch it on and off just as easily as if while someone speaking language A, switches to language B midstream, then back to language A again.

My impression is that it seems as if it’s used as sort of a way to induce one’s self into a religious ecstasy /fervor /zeal, call it what you will, in order to enhance one’s religious experience. Or actually perhaps, it’s the other way around; it’s one of the many results of said experience which, in turn, reinforces that experience.

From the small amount of evidence I have seen on-line, it seems to be something one must first learn how to do; it does not seem to be at all initially spontaneous with any given speaker. Once a person learns how to play with his/her language and manipulate the sounds and syllables, only then, it seems, can s/he produce glossolalia spontaneously at will.

What I’ve also seen from several “instructional” type videos offered by presumably legitimate pastors, seems to concur with many studies as well as the above in that glossolalia is very much a learned behaviour. Once learned, it can be ”turned on” at will just as any other language.

I certainly would never do this, it’s just plain mean, and I don’t say this to be insulting, but I’m pretty sure that I could do a simple two minute recording mimicking some of the videos I’ve seen, put it out Youtube, and get the same comments any other glossolalia video of that type would get.

Again, please understand that I don’t condone it at all – I acknowledge it to be an integral part of a particular Christian tradition and, in that tradition, it’s something very real and spiritual. Absolutely nothing wrong with that, particularly if it is something which strengthens the Spiritual Path of the practitioner.

 

[ltwin]

What I’m sort of getting at is that glossolalia is in of itself just as I and other Linguists, etc. have described; a learned manipulation of sounds and syllables which imitate language. Once the method of production is learned, one can switch it on and off just as easily as if while someone speaking language A, switches to language B midstream, then back to language A again.

Well, one can speak at tongues at will. “The spirits of prophets is subject to prophets” (1 Corinthians 14:32).

My impression is that it seems as if it’s used as sort of a way to induce one’s self into a religious ecstasy /fervor /zeal, call it what you will, in order to enhance one’s religious experience. Or actually perhaps, it’s the other way around; it’s one of the many results of said experience which, in turn, reinforces that experience.

Well, as I’ve said before on this thread, you don’t have to be in a state of ecstasy, fervor, zeal. It’s simply prayer. I can prayer in the same state of mind that I can pray in English. I can pray in tongues in any situation in which I can pray in English. I don’t have to think about it because it’s not about thinking.

From the small amount of evidence I have seen on-line, it seems to be something one must first learn how to do; it does not seem to be at all initially spontaneous with any given speaker. Once a person learns how to play with his/her language and manipulate the sounds and syllables, only then, it seems, can s/he produce glossolalia spontaneously at will.

I certainly was not taught how to speak in tongues. I was simply told, “open up your mouth and praise God.” Pentecostals are taught to praise God and naturally let praise flow. As the Holy Spirit gives utterance, the tongues will come. It’s not something you think about or produce. All you really do is yield your tongue.

What I’ve also seen from several “instructional” type videos offered by presumably legitimate pastors, seems to concur with many studies as well as the above in that glossolalia is very much a learned behaviour. Once learned, it can be ”turned on” at will just as any other language.

Considering that anyone these days can declare themselves a “legitimate pastor,” that title doesn’t really inspire confidence at all. I’m not sure what instructional videos you’ve seen, but the only valid instruction, in Pentecostal churches, is how to pray to receive the Holy Spirit, a by-product is speaking in tongues. It’s about first praying and believing for the gift of the Holy Spirit. It’s then about praising Him for fulfilling what He promised in faith. It then comes naturally as a byproduct of our prayer life.

I certainly would never do this, it’s just plain mean, and I don’t say this to be insulting, but I’m pretty sure that I could do a simple two minute recording mimicking some of the videos I’ve seen, put it out Youtube, and get the same comments any other glossolalia video of that type would get.

I know of questionable “ministries” that teach people to produce sounds. E-cono-lodge; See-me-ty-my-shoe; etc. They are just non-sense words. You simply don’t learn how to speak in tongues listening to tapes (yes, there are misguided people who do that). Speaking in tongues can’t be “learned” like that. You may learn how to give a good performance, but you don’t have authenticity–no matter what you may think.

You probably could. I could probably fake tongues (and since I know what it “sounds” like I could probably be good at it). However, it would not be the gift of tongues as the Holy Spirit gives the utterance. It would just produced sounds.

Again, please understand that I don’t condone it at all – I acknowledge it to be an integral part of a particular Christian tradition and, in that tradition, it’s something very real and spiritual. Absolutely nothing wrong with that, particularly if it is something which strengthens the Spiritual Path of the practitioner.

What you’re describing is not speaking in tongues in any Christian tradition. It’s an insult to all denominations (whether they believe that tongues have ceased, still exist as miraculously speaking foreign languages, or still exists as glossolalia).

 

[ggarcia19]

What I’m sort of getting at is that glossolalia is in of itself just as I and other Linguists, etc. have described; a learned manipulation of sounds and syllables which imitate language. Once the method of production is learned, one can switch it on and off just as easily as if while someone speaking language A, switches to language B midstream, then back to language A again.

My impression is that it seems as if it’s used as sort of a way to induce one’s self into a religious ecstasy /fervor /zeal, call it what you will, in order to enhance one’s religious experience. Or actually perhaps, it’s the other way around; it’s one of the many results of said experience which, in turn, reinforces that experience.

From the small amount of evidence I have seen on-line, it seems to be something one must first learn how to do; it does not seem to be at all initially spontaneous with any given speaker. Once a person learns how to play with his/her language and manipulate the sounds and syllables, only then, it seems, can s/he produce glossolalia spontaneously at will.

What I’ve also seen from several “instructional” type videos offered by presumably legitimate pastors, seems to concur with many studies as well as the above in that glossolalia is very much a learned behaviour. Once learned, it can be ”turned on” at will just as any other language.

I certainly would never do this, it’s just plain mean, and I don’t say this to be insulting, but I’m pretty sure that I could do a simple two minute recording mimicking some of the videos I’ve seen, put it out Youtube, and get the same comments any other glossolalia video of that type would get.

Again, please understand that I don’t condone it at all – I acknowledge it to be an integral part of a particular Christian tradition and, in that tradition, it’s something very real and spiritual. Absolutely nothing wrong with that, particularly if it is something which strengthens the Spiritual Path of the practitioner.

I think its a great subject! I believe that people should study every aspect of the bible. I stopped reading the bible and I started doing research on how it came to exist.(now I am reading the catholic bible) I believe the same kind of study should be done on all religious beliefs in the world as well as all practices in the bible. Its a good that you took time to study the gift of speaking in tongues, I hope to see more research from more people in the future. I pray that the world see the gift of Glossolalia and learn to understand it and its power.

If I want to feel the spirit of speaking in tongues, I personally choose to fast for a few days, disregard television, radio and all food. You might say that it would make me subconscious but I feel more powerful when I pray. However I haven’t practiced the Pentcoastal faith in years…

 

[Medawlinno]

I’ll reply in more detail probably tomorrow - busy week

I’m in the process of trying to do a simple “experiment/study”, if you will, by looking at the phenomenon of glossolalia at different age levels - from very young children, to pre-teens, teen, and finally adults.

 

[Medawlinno]

Apparently this will need to be a two part post….

As I mentioned, I tried conducting a short study/experiment taking a look at glossolaliacs (speakers of glossolalia) of different age groups and attempting to discern any sort of pattern to their speaking and trying to ascertain if there was any sort of developmental stages of glossolalia. I also wanted to better look at how glossolalia developed in these speakers.

In the perfect world, the best way to do such a study would be to follow several speakers through the course of time to observe how their glossolalia develops and how they first come by it. This is not possible to do by watching a video that captures only a moment of a given speaker’s ability at a specific time. Nonetheless, I was able to draw some definite conclusions based on my observations.

I tried taking a look at several age groups; very young children, pre-teens, teens, and finally, adults.

I’ll go through each group separately.

Young Children - ages ranged from toddlers up to about eight or nine. What I observed in this age group was not at all surprising. In about 85% of samples, the children were very obviously imitating what they were seeing or what they had seen. Parents were, in the vast majority samples observed, egging them on by not only providing positive reinforcement but in some cases actually telling the kids what to say or imitating what the kids were saying and encouraging them to continue. The glossolalia presented as one would expect in this age group and was commensurate with what their natural language ability was for their respective ages. The natural language in all samples being English. These kids essentially spoke their glossolalia at the same developmental level as their English; strings of no more than two or three syllables repeated over and over in random sequences. At this age level, it is most definitely a learned behaviour - there is absolutely nothing I saw and any video that would even remotely suggest the kids were not simply imitating what they were seeing and hearing around them whether at home or in a church setting.

Pre-Teens/Teens - Not a lot of videos in this age group. The glossolalia of this age group presented as considerably more emotional, but it could definitely be argued that what I observed was not typical considering the lack of adequate samples. Most of what I was able to find occurred in a church setting which also could account for the more emotionally charged glossolalia. The glossolalia of this age group presented in more advanced patterns and much more developed sounds and syllables than in younger children (again, nothing surprising there), more or less at par with adults.

Adults - this is probably the more difficult group, as unless the video expressly stated it, there was no way to determine how long the subject has been a glossolaliac. Again, this glossolalia presented as I have described in previous posts.

The conclusion I was forced to draw based on my observations is that the phenomenon of glosolailia is clearly a learned one. Small children, learn it the same way they learn almost anything - by observation, repetition, imitation, positive reinforcement and encouragement from adults. Older people learn it by watching and imitating what they see and hear. Once a person learns the methodology behind it, glosolalia can be done at will in any setting; church, sitting in a chair at home, wherever. I don’t believe that it must first present itself in a church setting either - it can be virtually anywhere.

What is very interesting is that in studies that have been done on a considerably wider and more formal scope than my simple observations, seem to draw the same conclusions. In her book, “Speaking in tongues; a cross-cultural study of glossolalia”, Felicitas Goodman for example, observed that the speakers string(s) “virtually mirror that of the person who guided the speaker into that behaviour. There is little variation of sound patterns within the group arising around a particular guide.”

She further observed that “the importance of the leader was well illustrated by the fact that the style of glossolalia adapted by the group bore a close resemblance to the way in which the leader spoke [his/her glosolalia]…it is not uncommon for linguists to be able to tell which prominent glossolalist has introduced a congregation to tongue-speaking.”

Continued……

 

[Medawlinno]

Continued from above….

No one (I don’t think anyway) actually sits down and decides that “today I’m going to start learning how to speak in tongues”. It is learned by exposure to the environment or cultural/religious setting in which glossolalia occurs and either consciously or subconsciously imitating what is occurring (typically imitating the most prominent person (the “guide” as Goodman describes it)). The many instructional type videos I have seen are not “how to” videos (though some come pretty darn close to being just that) per se, but rather they seem to instruct the would-be glossolaliac how to essentially put one self in the proper mind-set so as to allow the speech to flow naturally. Some videos actually suggest how to start by just repeating one or two syllables.

The other issue with glossolalia which seems to diminish its validity as something divinely acquired seems to be the supposed interpretation of a given string or strings. Studies have been done where a recorded sample of a complete string/utterance was shown to several people capable of offering an interpretation - the results were very non-inspiring: ask ten different people, get ten different answers. No two interpretations were even remotely similar. I guess, in all fairness, it could be argued that a given utterance may by its very nature have several meanings/interpretations, but that seems a bit like a ‘pulling at straws’ or a ‘way too convenient’ way to explain this away.

I am forced to conclude that glossolalia is very much a learned behaviour - anyone can learn to do it. With some it comes easier than for others (much the same way as learning a foreign language). People learn glossolalia by first observing then imitating - it may be slow and extremely repetitive at first, but as one becomes more comfortable with it, and the more one is exposed to the phenomenon in various (typically a church) settings, the more easily it is produced and the more complex it seems to become.

No offense intended to anyone who practices glossolalia, however, outside of a religious or spiritual context, glossolalia is simply an advanced form of learned word-play anyone can do. It only has specific significance in a cultural or religious context where it is part of that cultural or religious belief system.

 

[ltwin]

No offense intended to anyone who practices glossolalia, however, outside of a religious or spiritual context, glossolalia is simply an advanced form of learned word-play anyone can do. It only has specific significance in a cultural or religious context where it is part of that cultural or religious belief system.

Your observations ignore a lot of new research. Recent studies of glossolalia do not place all the emphasis on learned behavior or imitation. Instead, scholars recognize a lot of factors are in play. Anyway, all I really have to say is that in authentic speaking in tongues the speaker ALWAYS has control over whether to speak or not or how loud they speak. However, the speaker will NEVER have control over the actual syllables or sounds that are made. Those are my thoughts as someone who believes that tongues are a spiritual gift and someone who speaks in tongues.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

Ironically, I first experienced charismatic worship with glossolalia in a high school gym of a Catholic school. Nuns were leading the worship but so much of it was spontaneous and left me shaking in emotion.

Foolishly, I did not understand why I did not have the gift of speaking in toques and confessed my disappointment to a Lutheran priest. Fr Author explained that the gifts of the Spirit include many talents and that my faith was the greatest of gifts.

I have not worshiped among charismatics for decades and would like to return.

 

[ltwin]

Ironically, I first experienced charismatic worship with glossolalia in a high school gym of a Catholic school. Nuns were leading the worship but so much of it was spontaneous and left me shaking in emotion.

Foolishly, I did not understand why I did not have the gift of speaking in toques and confessed my disappointment to a Lutheran priest. Fr Author explained that the gifts of the Spirit include many talents and that my faith was the greatest of gifts.

I have not worshiped among charismatics for decades and would like to return.

I wonder have you heard of Mother Basilea Schlink, founder of the (Lutheran) Evangelical Sisterhood of Mary? I first learned of her hearing a well known charismatic author describe her as a true “oracle of the Lord.” At first I thought she might have been Catholic, but I found out she was actually German and Lutheran.

 

[EvangelCatholic]

I wonder have you heard of Mother Basilea Schlink, founder of the (Lutheran) Evangelical Sisterhood of Mary? I first learned of her hearing a well known charismatic author describe her as a true “oracle of the Lord.” At first I thought she might have been Catholic, but I found out she was actually German and Lutheran.

I know of the Sisterhood of Mary and their piety. Do they practice speaking in tongues?

canaaninthedesert.com/prayer_garden.php#