WEBVTT - Tip of the Tongue 0:00:03.080 --> 0:00:06.160 Welcome to Stuff to Blow your Mind from housetop works 0:00:06.200 --> 0:00:14.600 dot com. Hey wasn't a stop to blow your mind. 0:00:14.600 --> 0:00:17.680 My name is Robert Lamb and my name is Joe McCormick. 0:00:17.760 --> 0:00:20.000 And we're gonna start with a quick question. All right, 0:00:20.079 --> 0:00:22.520 I'll try to answers as fast as you can. This 0:00:22.600 --> 0:00:24.400 is for everybody. This is the listener. This is not 0:00:24.440 --> 0:00:26.960 a necessarily a meat reco question. Right, are you you 0:00:27.040 --> 0:00:31.720 out there listening? What's the word for a stone coffin, 0:00:31.800 --> 0:00:36.599 typically adorned with a sculpture or inscription and associated with 0:00:36.720 --> 0:00:46.919 ancient Egypt, Rome or Greece. Answer sarcophagus. Okay, a lot 0:00:47.000 --> 0:00:49.360 of you listeners probably knew that word. It does come 0:00:49.440 --> 0:00:51.640 up quite a bit. I mean, we do talk about 0:00:51.680 --> 0:00:54.560 containers for dead bodies a lot, an awful lot. I 0:00:54.600 --> 0:00:57.720 wonder why that happens. But anyway, some of you knew 0:00:57.760 --> 0:00:59.200 that word, and some of you knew it and you 0:00:59.240 --> 0:01:01.480 were able to say it immediately you thought about it, 0:01:01.760 --> 0:01:03.480 or maybe you thought about it for a split second 0:01:03.520 --> 0:01:07.080 and you just called it to mind. Sarcophagus. Okay. Some 0:01:07.200 --> 0:01:09.559 of you might not have been familiar with the word, 0:01:09.600 --> 0:01:11.520 had no idea what it was, or maybe you just 0:01:11.560 --> 0:01:13.960 didn't have any clue what we were getting at with it. 0:01:14.000 --> 0:01:16.240 You knew the word, but you didn't you didn't think 0:01:16.319 --> 0:01:18.800 we were heading in that direction. But then there's a 0:01:18.880 --> 0:01:22.400 third category of you out there. Some of you knew 0:01:22.440 --> 0:01:25.760 that you knew the word, but you couldn't deliver it 0:01:25.840 --> 0:01:30.520 on command. So you experienced this feeling of knowing, this 0:01:30.720 --> 0:01:35.160 feeling that you are just about to consummate the retrieval 0:01:35.319 --> 0:01:38.600 of that information from your memory. The word was it 0:01:38.600 --> 0:01:40.480 felt like it was right there, and you might have 0:01:40.520 --> 0:01:42.959 made a noise. You might have gone, uh, I know 0:01:43.080 --> 0:01:46.200 this and snapped your fingers like you had an itch 0:01:46.280 --> 0:01:49.520 you couldn't scratch. And this is referred to in the 0:01:49.560 --> 0:01:53.240 psychological literature as tip of the tongue phenomenon, when a 0:01:53.280 --> 0:01:56.040 word is on the tip of your tongue, the feeling 0:01:56.680 --> 0:01:58.600 of that tip of the tongue sensation is going to 0:01:58.680 --> 0:02:01.480 be the subject of today's episode. Yeah, And it's often 0:02:01.520 --> 0:02:05.160 abbreviated to t O t or taught. So yesterday I 0:02:05.160 --> 0:02:08.360 did a lot of reading about tots, about tots. We 0:02:08.360 --> 0:02:10.440 we will be talking about tots a good bit today. 0:02:11.040 --> 0:02:14.040 But if you were stuck looking for the word even 0:02:14.080 --> 0:02:17.120 momentarily if you you didn't call it to mind immediately, 0:02:17.160 --> 0:02:19.400 and you weren't just completely stumped and had no idea, 0:02:19.480 --> 0:02:21.440 but you were in that middle state where you knew 0:02:21.480 --> 0:02:24.480 you knew the word, but you couldn't bring it to mind. 0:02:25.000 --> 0:02:28.079 Stop for a second and reflect back on what that 0:02:28.160 --> 0:02:32.680 inner experience was like, sort of review the cognitive journey 0:02:32.720 --> 0:02:36.400 you traveled to try to find the right word. Before 0:02:36.480 --> 0:02:40.160 you had the word, what did you feel did you 0:02:40.200 --> 0:02:42.480 have a sense that you knew what letter the word 0:02:42.560 --> 0:02:45.560 started with? Did you feel like you might have known 0:02:45.639 --> 0:02:49.600 how many syllables the word had roughly? And once you 0:02:49.760 --> 0:02:52.600 heard the word, were you write about those things? And 0:02:53.400 --> 0:02:56.400 did you keep thinking of a similar word, something that 0:02:56.520 --> 0:02:59.200 sounds kind of like sarcophagus within going no, no, that's 0:02:59.240 --> 0:03:02.520 not the word. Here, we're going to do another one 0:03:02.560 --> 0:03:04.400 so you can have a chance to think about it again. 0:03:04.440 --> 0:03:06.960 This time we're going to do a proper name. And 0:03:07.040 --> 0:03:09.639 this I have to add, this is where I experience 0:03:10.040 --> 0:03:14.720 uh tip of the tongue phenomenon the most, almost almost exclusively, 0:03:14.919 --> 0:03:17.560 Like I really don't encounter the word based one any 0:03:17.919 --> 0:03:20.920 not much. But when it comes to the names of actors, 0:03:21.320 --> 0:03:23.640 this is like a weekly game I play in my head. 0:03:23.720 --> 0:03:25.680 Uh huh, And we should add that Robert and I 0:03:25.720 --> 0:03:27.720 played this game back and forth a little bit before 0:03:27.760 --> 0:03:29.440 we went on air, and I think I stumped him 0:03:29.480 --> 0:03:32.640 with this one. So what's the name of the actor 0:03:32.760 --> 0:03:43.600 who played Fredo in The Godfather? Answer? John Kaze Yeah, 0:03:43.680 --> 0:03:47.360 John Kazale. He was in The Godfather, Godfather Part two, 0:03:47.520 --> 0:03:51.280 Dog Day Afternoon, what else, the Deer Hunter. I think 0:03:51.280 --> 0:03:53.680 some of these, some of these big, these big Oscar 0:03:53.680 --> 0:03:56.320 winning movies of the seventies. He died young. He was 0:03:56.320 --> 0:03:58.880 a character actor, and he's one of those people who 0:03:59.160 --> 0:04:01.840 I think a lot of people who like movies, who 0:04:01.880 --> 0:04:05.560 appreciate especially you know, the critically acclaimed American cinema have 0:04:05.760 --> 0:04:08.800 encountered his name at some point. Yeah, you would know it. 0:04:08.880 --> 0:04:11.000 You would know that you had it back in the 0:04:11.160 --> 0:04:14.320 in the casks of your memory somewhere, but it's not 0:04:14.440 --> 0:04:17.840 easy to reach. Yeah, like we were discussing before we 0:04:18.240 --> 0:04:20.800 rolled here in this episode, Yeah, he he died young, 0:04:21.000 --> 0:04:22.480 but he was a character actor. If he's been a 0:04:22.560 --> 0:04:24.680 leading man and he died at his age, we'd have 0:04:24.760 --> 0:04:27.120 him on T shirts everywhere. But no, he was a 0:04:27.160 --> 0:04:29.680 character actor and as a character actor. You kind of 0:04:29.720 --> 0:04:32.680 have to have enough films under your belt, you have 0:04:32.720 --> 0:04:35.120 to like he needed like another decade before he would 0:04:35.120 --> 0:04:38.480 have reached the status of say of you Simi or 0:04:39.160 --> 0:04:41.559 you know, Ron Pearlman or any of these other character 0:04:41.600 --> 0:04:44.400 actors who have have reached the point where they're just 0:04:44.640 --> 0:04:47.400 such a part of our cinematic experience that we cannot 0:04:47.440 --> 0:04:49.720 forget them, right. And of course James Dean only had 0:04:49.720 --> 0:04:52.479 a few movies, but leading Man there, he'll be on 0:04:52.560 --> 0:04:55.280 t shirts, so there will be biopics about him. Here's 0:04:55.279 --> 0:04:57.000 the weird thing, just to throw in, like a personal 0:04:57.040 --> 0:04:58.440 one of mine. And this may not be in the 0:04:58.480 --> 0:05:01.599 case anymore because I keep talking about with Joe this week, 0:05:01.800 --> 0:05:05.440 but previously, Oliver Reid will come up a lot, like 0:05:05.480 --> 0:05:08.719 I'll try and remember who's that actor who played that role. 0:05:08.760 --> 0:05:11.039 Who's the guy who's the lead in the Devil's the 0:05:11.040 --> 0:05:13.600 guy who can't sing in Tommy? Yeah, it was he 0:05:13.720 --> 0:05:17.680 and Tommy. I don't know. I've never seen Tommy plays 0:05:17.760 --> 0:05:20.760 Bill Sikes in a movie adaptation of Oliver, you know 0:05:20.920 --> 0:05:22.560 that would that would make sense. He's been He's been 0:05:22.560 --> 0:05:24.560 in so many things because I think his last film 0:05:24.640 --> 0:05:29.040 was Gladiator, wonderful actor, did some great movies, did some 0:05:29.400 --> 0:05:32.560 horrible movies that are in their own way great, and 0:05:32.560 --> 0:05:34.880 and I've seen plenty of them. But for some reason, 0:05:35.279 --> 0:05:38.760 it'll come up, like I'll be watching Mystery Science Theater 0:05:38.800 --> 0:05:41.760 through thousand with some friends or just setting around thinking 0:05:41.800 --> 0:05:47.120 about movies, and I'll picture him in his bearded, masculine glory, 0:05:47.400 --> 0:05:49.680 and I'll try and remember his name, and it just 0:05:49.800 --> 0:05:53.039 doesn't form. And so it's just like the phantom limbs 0:05:53.080 --> 0:05:56.159 of my of my mind reaching out towards his face. 0:05:56.400 --> 0:05:59.240 But you've captured the essence of tip of the tongue here, 0:05:59.279 --> 0:06:01.840 because it's not just that you don't know. It's a 0:06:01.880 --> 0:06:05.520 combination of not knowing and having the sense that you 0:06:05.680 --> 0:06:09.800 really should know and you're just about to get it. Yeah. 0:06:09.920 --> 0:06:11.880 And the weird thing about this, and of course this 0:06:11.920 --> 0:06:14.080 is one of the challenges. We wanted to kick off 0:06:14.080 --> 0:06:16.719 this episode with an example, and when we wanted to 0:06:16.720 --> 0:06:19.520 throw out some examples, but it's it's very difficult, if 0:06:19.600 --> 0:06:23.279 not impossible, to find the perfect example of of a 0:06:23.360 --> 0:06:26.920 t O t or a taught because it's gonna vary 0:06:26.960 --> 0:06:30.960 depending on an individual's you know, personal mind map. Yeah, 0:06:31.000 --> 0:06:34.359 one thing scientists have found in studying this phenomenon is 0:06:34.400 --> 0:06:37.479 that it definitely happens more often with words we encounter 0:06:37.640 --> 0:06:41.240 less frequently, and depending on who you are, you might 0:06:41.360 --> 0:06:43.960 encounter some words more often than others. Robert and I 0:06:44.040 --> 0:06:47.360 probably would not be stumped by sarcophagus as sarcophag guy 0:06:47.480 --> 0:06:51.040 by sarcophagus the word because, like we said, we read 0:06:51.080 --> 0:06:53.640 and talk about containers for dead bodies a whole lot, 0:06:53.880 --> 0:06:56.200 but some people just probably don't talk about that all 0:06:56.240 --> 0:06:58.960 that much. So if that's a more a less often 0:06:59.000 --> 0:07:02.200 occurring word in your day to day language, you're probably 0:07:02.240 --> 0:07:05.240 more likely to be stumped by it, right, And the 0:07:05.279 --> 0:07:07.600 same is probably true for actors. Actors that you talk 0:07:07.640 --> 0:07:09.560 about all the time are really probably not going to 0:07:09.640 --> 0:07:11.560 give you a hard time. But the ones that you 0:07:11.840 --> 0:07:14.320 logged in your memory at some point in the past 0:07:14.520 --> 0:07:17.080 and have not come up since, those are the ones 0:07:17.320 --> 0:07:20.040 where it's really likely to hit you hard. Yeah, a lot, 0:07:20.240 --> 0:07:23.080 especially with you know, like that guy. Actors they're sometimes 0:07:23.120 --> 0:07:25.600 referred to as those character actors that have been in everything, 0:07:25.640 --> 0:07:28.440 but there there maybe not. They're not even in that 0:07:28.560 --> 0:07:32.160 Ron Pearlman, Steve the semi area. You know that they're 0:07:32.200 --> 0:07:35.280 the kind of actor who always plays a cop. You know, 0:07:35.360 --> 0:07:37.760 they always play a white cop in a film, and 0:07:37.800 --> 0:07:40.520 therefore they just kind of completely all blend together. Paul 0:07:40.560 --> 0:07:43.640 Marco and Conrad Brooks. Yeah, I guess see. I I 0:07:43.680 --> 0:07:45.720 have trouble picturing them, but I'm sure if you showed 0:07:45.720 --> 0:07:47.600 me their photos right now, I would say, oh, yeah, 0:07:47.600 --> 0:07:52.400 there the cops in the Edwood movies. Oh yes, yes, okay. So, 0:07:52.400 --> 0:07:55.600 so we should look at what the scientists and psychologists 0:07:55.600 --> 0:07:57.880 of history have made of this tip of the tongue phenomenon, 0:07:57.920 --> 0:08:00.680 because it goes beyond just being like a weird curiosity 0:08:00.720 --> 0:08:03.920 of everyday memory. It it's sort of an interesting way 0:08:03.960 --> 0:08:07.200 to think about what happens when we try to interact 0:08:07.280 --> 0:08:11.960 with words and uh and and information retrieval in our brains. 0:08:12.000 --> 0:08:16.480 So William James, the American psychologist and philosopher, you might 0:08:16.520 --> 0:08:19.560 be familiar with him from the Varieties of Religious Experience, 0:08:19.920 --> 0:08:22.480 great text in the History of Study of Religions. Yeah, 0:08:22.480 --> 0:08:24.239 he's and he's definitely come up on the show before 0:08:24.240 --> 0:08:27.080 in the past. Was he the brother of Henry James, 0:08:27.080 --> 0:08:29.600 the writer? For some reason, I have that in my 0:08:29.640 --> 0:08:31.960 mind that could be completely wrong. I don't know, but 0:08:32.000 --> 0:08:34.960 if they if not, I like the idea of exploring 0:08:34.960 --> 0:08:37.520 it as like a red con buddy picture. You know. 0:08:38.679 --> 0:08:42.000 But so William James wrote about tip of the tongue phenomenon. 0:08:42.040 --> 0:08:43.200 As far as we know, he was one of the 0:08:43.200 --> 0:08:45.920 first people to really write about it. Robert, why don't 0:08:45.960 --> 0:08:49.440 you read William James quote about this? Al right? He? 0:08:49.760 --> 0:08:52.320 This is how he described it. He said, suppose we 0:08:52.400 --> 0:08:55.280 try to recall a forgotten name. The state of our 0:08:55.280 --> 0:08:58.760 consciousness is peculiar. There is a gap therein, but no 0:08:58.840 --> 0:09:01.960 mere gap. It is a gap that is intensely active. 0:09:02.200 --> 0:09:04.600 A sort of wraith of the name is in it, 0:09:04.920 --> 0:09:08.480 beckoning us in a given direction, making us at moments 0:09:08.559 --> 0:09:11.440 tingle with the sense of our closeness, and then letting 0:09:11.480 --> 0:09:15.439 us sink back without the longed for term. If wrong 0:09:15.600 --> 0:09:20.040 names are proposed to us, this singularly definite gap acts 0:09:20.080 --> 0:09:23.600 immediately so as to negate them. They do not fit 0:09:23.640 --> 0:09:26.840 into its mold, and the gap of one word does 0:09:26.880 --> 0:09:30.080 not feel like the gap of another, all empty of content, 0:09:30.400 --> 0:09:34.360 as both might seem necessarily to be when described as gaps. 0:09:35.200 --> 0:09:37.720 I really like this way of picturing it, because he's 0:09:38.679 --> 0:09:43.160 he's casting the negative space there the gap between your 0:09:43.200 --> 0:09:45.520 knowledge that you know the word and the fact that 0:09:45.559 --> 0:09:48.520 you can't call up the word as as a thing, 0:09:48.640 --> 0:09:51.600 a literal thing, like the negative space is in its 0:09:51.600 --> 0:09:55.400 own right, uh, and entity acting in your mind because 0:09:55.480 --> 0:09:59.480 it negates the the other path when you know that 0:10:00.240 --> 0:10:02.880 it's not this other word. You know, right when you're 0:10:02.880 --> 0:10:05.800 looking for John Cazale, you know it's not Al Pacino 0:10:05.880 --> 0:10:08.880 you're looking for. You know it's not James con So 0:10:08.920 --> 0:10:12.600 the negative space there is doing something. It's just not 0:10:12.760 --> 0:10:15.800 leading you to John Kasale exactly. It's like there is 0:10:15.840 --> 0:10:18.240 a there is a silhouette, there is an outline, there 0:10:18.280 --> 0:10:21.720 is a shape there, and you know what, you know 0:10:21.800 --> 0:10:24.360 that certain things are not going to fit in that shape. Okay, 0:10:24.400 --> 0:10:27.520 speaking of that guy. Actors, how about this one. Who's 0:10:27.559 --> 0:10:30.840 the actor who played Nancy's dad in a Nightmare on 0:10:30.880 --> 0:10:39.560 Elm Street? Answer? Who's John Saxon? Of course, the great 0:10:39.640 --> 0:10:42.480 John Saxon. Now you submitted that question and answer, But 0:10:42.520 --> 0:10:44.440 do you think it would have stumped you? If you hadn't, 0:10:44.559 --> 0:10:46.880 it would not have stumped me. Um, this was very 0:10:46.960 --> 0:10:50.760 much one Unlike Oliver read, I know John Saxson when 0:10:50.880 --> 0:10:53.160 I see him, and like the John Saxson. I guess 0:10:53.160 --> 0:10:55.840 it's just more of a singular name. It sticks out more, 0:10:55.880 --> 0:10:59.000 whereas Oliver read even though Oliver Reid was very much 0:10:59.000 --> 0:11:01.480 one of a kind, he name is a little Uh, 0:11:01.559 --> 0:11:04.120 I don't know, it's a little British e. I don't know. Yeah, 0:11:04.240 --> 0:11:06.120 John Saxon to me, I think i'd know him better 0:11:06.200 --> 0:11:09.679 from Enter the Dragon, where he plays the most boring 0:11:09.720 --> 0:11:12.800 of all the fighters. He does play the most boring 0:11:12.840 --> 0:11:15.199 about the fighter thing. He doesn't even really fight all 0:11:15.240 --> 0:11:17.040 that hard. It just kind of happens to be in 0:11:17.040 --> 0:11:18.880 the right place at the right time, doesn't it. John 0:11:18.920 --> 0:11:22.120 Saxon in a nutshell? Okay, So back to William James. 0:11:22.160 --> 0:11:24.120 So we said William James was the first person to 0:11:24.240 --> 0:11:27.760 really describe the sensation that we know about, but he 0:11:27.800 --> 0:11:31.720 didn't call it tip of the tongue phenomenon. The name, 0:11:31.800 --> 0:11:34.480 as far as we know, just comes from regular language, right, 0:11:34.559 --> 0:11:39.160 that's colloquial usage. Yeah, it's It's apparently a universal thing. Uh. 0:11:39.360 --> 0:11:42.200 In particular, we were looking at the nineteen and ninety 0:11:42.280 --> 0:11:45.600 nine paper Sparkling at the End of the Tongue, the 0:11:45.640 --> 0:11:49.640 ideology of tip of the tongue phenomenology, and what they 0:11:49.679 --> 0:11:52.040 did is they surveyed fifty one language and they found 0:11:52.080 --> 0:11:55.640 that forty five of them. So it's about expressed the 0:11:55.679 --> 0:12:01.600 feeling of temporary inaccessibility with the same tongue metaphor here. Yeah, 0:12:01.640 --> 0:12:04.760 and so you might see this in terms of having 0:12:04.840 --> 0:12:06.840 the word on your tongue or at the back of 0:12:06.840 --> 0:12:09.600 your tongue or in the mouth or in the throat 0:12:09.720 --> 0:12:12.360 or something. Uh. The one that's in the title of 0:12:12.360 --> 0:12:16.320 that paper, sparkling at the end of the tongue is 0:12:16.880 --> 0:12:19.160 I should say, it's worth noting that that expression comes 0:12:19.160 --> 0:12:22.880 from Korean and that's just pure wildfire. It's so good, 0:12:23.000 --> 0:12:25.760 sparkling at the end of the tongue. Yeah, that that 0:12:25.840 --> 0:12:28.240 kind of draws back to that that the description from 0:12:28.360 --> 0:12:31.600 James that it's wraith like, you know, this is supernatural 0:12:31.679 --> 0:12:35.280 energy to it. Interestingly, enough, of the the languages surveyed here, 0:12:35.720 --> 0:12:41.160 American Sign language, Icelandic to sub Saharan African languages, and 0:12:41.400 --> 0:12:50.120 Indonesian do not use the tongue metaphor. Now, Additionally, five languages, Cantonese, Mandarin, Hindijasa, 0:12:50.600 --> 0:12:54.720 and Ebo use the related expression in the mouth to 0:12:54.800 --> 0:12:59.400 describe the experience. The Japanese use the expression out of 0:12:59.440 --> 0:13:03.400 the throat and uh. And some use multiple metaphors, so 0:13:03.400 --> 0:13:05.120 you have the tongue, but then you have another one 0:13:05.120 --> 0:13:08.480 in use as well, with the French being in my opinion, 0:13:08.480 --> 0:13:12.720 the most exciting because they use both the tip of 0:13:12.720 --> 0:13:16.959 the tongue and hole in my head. Yeah, it's like, oh, 0:13:17.000 --> 0:13:18.920 it's it's like I almost have it, but there's a 0:13:18.960 --> 0:13:21.199 hole in my head. And it's I guess the thought 0:13:21.320 --> 0:13:23.560 like flew out that the word just flew out of 0:13:23.559 --> 0:13:25.720 my head and I cannot grasp it. Oh, that adds 0:13:25.720 --> 0:13:28.480 a whole new meaning to I need to think of 0:13:28.559 --> 0:13:32.080 John Kazale like I need a hole in my head. Yeah, 0:13:32.120 --> 0:13:34.719 it's it's it's interesting. Uh And certainly one of those 0:13:34.760 --> 0:13:38.199 where you you know, you start thinking of languages is 0:13:38.280 --> 0:13:42.240 kind of like little ecosystems of symbolism and metaphor and 0:13:42.280 --> 0:13:44.800 if you uh and and and some of those ideas 0:13:44.840 --> 0:13:47.960 are universal, some of them are confined to a number 0:13:47.960 --> 0:13:51.200 of ecosystems, and some seem to be just perfectly encapsulated 0:13:51.440 --> 0:13:55.120 within that particular language. Yeah, totally. So we're gonna come 0:13:55.120 --> 0:13:57.680 back to that paper in a minute, but I do 0:13:57.720 --> 0:13:59.800 want to go back and mention that there's sort of 0:13:59.840 --> 0:14:02.120 a landmark paper in the study of tip of the 0:14:02.120 --> 0:14:05.480 tongue phenomenon that came in nineteen sixty six by Roger 0:14:05.520 --> 0:14:08.400 Brown and David McNeil, and this was just called the 0:14:08.400 --> 0:14:10.920 Tip of the Tongue Phenomenon published in the Journal of 0:14:11.040 --> 0:14:14.760 Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. And these guys made some 0:14:14.800 --> 0:14:18.040 of the first systematic observations of what happens during a 0:14:18.040 --> 0:14:20.880 tip of the tongue state in an experimental setting. They 0:14:21.120 --> 0:14:23.880 define tip of the tongue is a failure to recall 0:14:23.920 --> 0:14:28.120 a word of which one has knowledge, again bringing these 0:14:28.160 --> 0:14:31.240 distinctions of sort of stages of knowledge into things. So 0:14:31.400 --> 0:14:34.800 what does it mean when you think you remember something 0:14:34.880 --> 0:14:38.080 but you can't bring it to mind. And one of 0:14:38.080 --> 0:14:39.840 the things they point out at the outside of their 0:14:39.880 --> 0:14:43.160 paper is that it's interesting, like, if you can't recall 0:14:43.240 --> 0:14:46.560 the word, how do we know that the person experiencing 0:14:46.600 --> 0:14:48.600 a tip of the tongue state a tot if you will, 0:14:48.920 --> 0:14:51.800 actually has knowledge of the word. What if it's just 0:14:51.880 --> 0:14:54.680 an illusion that you actually have knowledge of the word. 0:14:54.920 --> 0:14:57.040 And they think that's not the case, because you can 0:14:57.040 --> 0:14:59.640 observe a couple of things. One of the things is 0:14:59.720 --> 0:15:02.480 that sometimes people resolve the tip of the tongue state 0:15:02.480 --> 0:15:05.440 by themselves. So you might sit there for a minute 0:15:05.440 --> 0:15:07.840 going like, oh, oh, oh, I know it, I know it, 0:15:07.920 --> 0:15:10.400 and then figure it out and then so that sort 0:15:10.440 --> 0:15:12.680 of proves that you did actually have it. It's not 0:15:12.760 --> 0:15:16.400 just a phenomenal illusion that you would have access to 0:15:16.480 --> 0:15:19.440 the word. And then there are other cases where the 0:15:19.480 --> 0:15:22.240 purpose where the person, even if they don't resolve the 0:15:22.280 --> 0:15:25.840 state by themselves, they can recognize the word once it's 0:15:25.880 --> 0:15:28.920 presented from the outside, and they can negate other words. 0:15:28.920 --> 0:15:31.200 So even if you couldn't come up with John Kazale, 0:15:31.480 --> 0:15:34.680 you could say no, not that actor, not that actor. No, no, no, 0:15:35.200 --> 0:15:37.280 You could say no to all the other names in 0:15:37.320 --> 0:15:40.840 the world. Someone says John Cassavetti's and you you instantly 0:15:40.840 --> 0:15:42.880 no is no, it's not John Cassavetti's. But that might 0:15:42.880 --> 0:15:45.200 be enough to say, oh, it's John Kazale, right. And 0:15:45.240 --> 0:15:47.160 that's one of the other things that's really interesting and 0:15:47.240 --> 0:15:49.160 study of the tip of the tongue phenomenon is that 0:15:49.280 --> 0:15:52.680 certain clues related to the sound of the word can 0:15:52.680 --> 0:15:55.120 trigger it. They can send you down the right path. 0:15:56.200 --> 0:15:58.760 But I like this description they give what the tip 0:15:58.760 --> 0:16:00.880 of the tongue state is, like they say, the signs 0:16:00.920 --> 0:16:03.880 of it were unmistakable. He would appear to be in 0:16:04.080 --> 0:16:07.720 mild torment, something like the brink of a sneeze, and 0:16:07.760 --> 0:16:11.400 if he found the word, his relief was considerable. I 0:16:11.440 --> 0:16:14.320 think we've we've all found ourselves in a situation. I 0:16:14.320 --> 0:16:16.480 don't know I'm speaking for everybody here, but speak for myself. 0:16:16.600 --> 0:16:19.560 I have certainly found myself in a situation where a 0:16:19.560 --> 0:16:22.880 a tot is induced in my own mind, and in 0:16:23.040 --> 0:16:26.520 a conversation with several people. Everyone else moves on to 0:16:26.680 --> 0:16:28.960 something a little more and more just, and I'm still 0:16:28.960 --> 0:16:32.400 in that tot, and so everything's just going on around me. 0:16:32.560 --> 0:16:35.720 And then I resolved the tot, and then I disturbed 0:16:35.800 --> 0:16:39.400 the conversation again by saying I was don knots don 0:16:39.480 --> 0:16:41.920 Knots played Barney five or whatever the top mind and 0:16:41.960 --> 0:16:44.200 nobody else knows what you're talking about. Everybody else has 0:16:44.240 --> 0:16:47.720 totally forgotten this what what has actually been just a 0:16:48.160 --> 0:16:51.280 situation of mental anguish for me for you know, a 0:16:51.320 --> 0:16:53.840 few seconds anyway. Yeah, Okay, so I think we've we 0:16:53.840 --> 0:16:56.880 we sort of described the phenomenon. Now. It's it's these 0:16:56.960 --> 0:16:59.960 two main features inability to recall a word or phrase, 0:17:00.400 --> 0:17:04.359 and then the subjective sensation that recall is imminent, it's inbound, 0:17:04.400 --> 0:17:06.679 You're just about to have it. But one of the 0:17:06.680 --> 0:17:10.480 really interesting things about this subject is thinking about what 0:17:10.760 --> 0:17:15.560 broader implications this has for how we understand language working 0:17:15.560 --> 0:17:18.520 in the brain, Like, how does the retrieval of a 0:17:18.640 --> 0:17:23.000 word happen when you're putting together the language you speak? 0:17:23.960 --> 0:17:26.800 Just consider this for a second. Usually speaking happens so 0:17:26.920 --> 0:17:29.679 fast you don't have time to analyze it. When you 0:17:29.680 --> 0:17:34.680 go to speak a sentence, where do your words come from? 0:17:34.720 --> 0:17:37.960 One of the creepiest things is how little awareness we 0:17:38.040 --> 0:17:41.040 really seem to have of how language comes out of us. 0:17:41.040 --> 0:17:43.800 So I start speaking a sentence, and the sentence happens, 0:17:44.119 --> 0:17:46.359 but I don't really know how it happened. I'm not 0:17:46.440 --> 0:17:50.000 consciously aware of choosing each and every one of the 0:17:50.040 --> 0:17:52.720 words I use from some kind of dictionary in my 0:17:52.760 --> 0:17:55.840 brain as I go along. Uh, it just sort of 0:17:55.880 --> 0:17:57.919 happens and then it's out, and I don't know what 0:17:58.080 --> 0:18:01.360 happened in between. But it's only really in that tip 0:18:01.400 --> 0:18:04.840 of the tongue state. By contrast, that the mystery of 0:18:04.880 --> 0:18:08.280 the regular fluidity of language becomes so clear and so 0:18:08.600 --> 0:18:12.400 starkly weird. And it is weird, isn't it, Like I 0:18:12.400 --> 0:18:15.720 I can't help but think now about the difference between 0:18:16.480 --> 0:18:19.119 um my, my, my spoken use of language and my 0:18:19.119 --> 0:18:20.960 written use of language, and not just in the fact, 0:18:21.000 --> 0:18:23.520 and you know, the obvious fact that with written language 0:18:23.560 --> 0:18:27.679 one has the opportunity to revise and uh and shift 0:18:27.720 --> 0:18:29.679 things around and tweak it until you get in an 0:18:29.720 --> 0:18:32.680 exact form you want. But just my, you know, by 0:18:32.760 --> 0:18:36.320 the moment, my real time use of language, I feel 0:18:36.520 --> 0:18:41.480 is rather different in both the spoken in the written form. Yeah, yeah, 0:18:41.560 --> 0:18:43.680 I think that's totally true. And in fact, I think 0:18:43.720 --> 0:18:48.400 I have more of the sensation of consciously dealing with 0:18:48.480 --> 0:18:51.840 something like a mental dictionary when I'm writing than when 0:18:51.840 --> 0:18:56.119 I'm talking. When i'm talking, it feels much more mysterious 0:18:56.200 --> 0:18:58.639 and obscure to me where the words come from. Yeah, Like, 0:18:58.640 --> 0:19:01.159 when I'm writing, there's like a little guy in my 0:19:01.240 --> 0:19:04.160 head and he's going into a little library and saying, 0:19:04.480 --> 0:19:06.000 you know, I think we'll have this word and this 0:19:06.080 --> 0:19:07.600 word and this word, these are the ones we're going 0:19:07.680 --> 0:19:11.000 to use, Whereas when I'm speaking, it's more like a 0:19:11.119 --> 0:19:14.720 scene from a like a submarine movie. But like, all right, 0:19:14.800 --> 0:19:16.560 let's get the torpedoes in there. We've got to go. 0:19:16.600 --> 0:19:18.760 We've got to go. He has to somehow express what 0:19:18.840 --> 0:19:21.080 he wants on his sandwich. Is that the right word? 0:19:21.080 --> 0:19:23.120 I don't care. Get it out there, because these sandwiches 0:19:23.160 --> 0:19:25.680 have to happen and the sentences out before you even 0:19:25.680 --> 0:19:27.679 know what happened. And then you may have had some 0:19:27.760 --> 0:19:31.280 Freudian slips. You mentioned weird body organs that you didn't 0:19:31.280 --> 0:19:34.920 mean to why why, I don't know the Freudian slip, 0:19:34.960 --> 0:19:39.920 and another area worthy of consideration, you know, I feel 0:19:39.920 --> 0:19:42.440 like we really should come up with our own proprietary 0:19:42.520 --> 0:19:45.119 expression for tip of the tongue, states. I don't know 0:19:45.160 --> 0:19:46.840 exactly what it should be. Maybe we'll think about it 0:19:46.840 --> 0:19:49.080 by the end of the episode. But I do want 0:19:49.119 --> 0:19:53.200 to mention that in there was a paper we looked 0:19:53.240 --> 0:19:55.879 at that that had It was called a Review of 0:19:55.920 --> 0:19:59.320 the Tip of the Tongue Experience in Psychological Bulletin by 0:19:59.359 --> 0:20:01.720 Alan sp Around, And this is just a helpful way 0:20:01.720 --> 0:20:05.720 to quickly summarize some quick findings since that nineteen sixty 0:20:05.800 --> 0:20:09.040 six paper that are on the table about what what's 0:20:09.080 --> 0:20:10.560 the deal with tip of the tongue? Well, what does 0:20:10.600 --> 0:20:13.119 science found out. They found that one, it's a nearly 0:20:13.240 --> 0:20:17.960 universal experience. Pretty much everybody experiences it. Number two. On average, 0:20:17.960 --> 0:20:20.840 it occurs about once a week for people. I feel 0:20:20.880 --> 0:20:23.639 like that sounds kind of low. It does we when 0:20:23.680 --> 0:20:25.960 we just triggered it, like at least half a dozen 0:20:26.000 --> 0:20:28.680 times for each of us in It may be unusual 0:20:28.720 --> 0:20:31.240 in US because we spend way more time talking about 0:20:31.280 --> 0:20:34.760 movies that are full of barely recognizable actors that we 0:20:34.840 --> 0:20:38.359 feel like lots of forgettable names. Yeah. Um, the number 0:20:38.400 --> 0:20:42.000 three they say it increases with age. The number four, 0:20:42.240 --> 0:20:45.560 it's frequently elicited by proper names. It's so probably more 0:20:45.600 --> 0:20:48.479 often than dictionary words. It's you're going to be searching 0:20:48.520 --> 0:20:51.119 for who was that actor, who was that famous person? 0:20:52.119 --> 0:20:54.760 Because these were these names are not necessarily part of 0:20:54.760 --> 0:20:58.160 your vocabulary and your Yeah, and it's it's I feel 0:20:58.160 --> 0:21:00.000