MSI Press Blog

  Foreign alphabets were never a real impediment to learning a language—and certainly no obstacle when navigating a new country. In the course of studying languages that used them, I worked with eight alphabets: Latin, Slavic, Hebrew, Arabic, Pashto, Greek, Malayalam, and Georgian. Along the way, I picked up the basics of two more—Korean (both the short version and the longer, Japanese-based version) and Thai—just by moving between metro stops, shopping, and eating in countries where those scripts are part of daily life. Some alphabets came more easily than others. The Slavic alphabets, despite their variations in letter count and degree of reform, were relatively straightforward. Roughly one-third of the letters resemble Latin characters (though not always phonetically—CCCP, for instance, is pronounced SSSR), another third resemble Greek letters (familiar to most college graduates via fraternities and sororities), and the final third are entirely new. Thanks to this overlap, I...

One of the reasons I can learn a new language rapidly—often with just a few dozen sentences as input—is the foundation I gained from coursework in general linguistics field methods, especially the emphasis on tagmemics. That training didn’t just shape how I study languages—it revealed how I was already doing it instinctively. 🔍 What Is Tagmemics? Developed by Kenneth Pike in the mid-20th century, tagmemics was designed for field linguists working with unwritten, undocumented languages. Pike needed a system that could describe grammar based on function and context, not just form. His framework views each grammatical unit (or tagmeme ) as a combination of: Slot: its position in a sentence Class: the type of word or phrase that can fill that slot Role: the communicative function it serves This trimodal lens—phonology, grammar, lexicon—allows for a flexible, behavior-based understanding of language. It’s not just about parsing structure; it’s about observing how meaning is construc...

  Linguacy, a term coined by Brecht and Ingold (2002), is not just about speaking or understanding a language. It’s about grasping the systems of meaning that shape how people think, solve problems, and communicate—whether through words, numbers, diagrams, or gestures. I didn’t set out to learn these things, but over time, I found myself needing to understand them in order to function across unfamiliar terrains. Some of the differences were subtle. In certain places, math is taught through calculation first, theory later. That reversal of order changes how students approach problems. Instead of being handed a formula and told to apply it, they’re expected to wrestle with the numbers and discover the logic through use. It’s not better or worse—it’s just a different way of thinking. The orientation of math problems also varies. Some are designed to be solved forward, step by step. Others are meant to be worked backward, with the answer in mind and the path reconstructed. That shi...

  Being polylingual is both a gift and a complexity. With twenty languages in active or passive use, my brain has become a vast library—rich, layered, and sometimes slow to navigate.  When I reach for a word, I’m not just choosing the right term; I’m choosing the right language. This internal sorting process can create brief hesitation, especially when switching contexts or speaking spontaneously -- or when another language has a "better" word for what I want to say than the language I am speaking.  It’s not confusion—it’s competition. Each language offers its own nuance, its own rhythm, and my brain weighs those options before committing. Studies show that bilinguals and polylinguals often experience this lexical competition, but they also demonstrate stronger executive function: better task-switching, sharper inhibition, and more flexible thinking.  For learners, this means that acquiring multiple languages doesn’t dilute fluency—it deepens it. The occasional pause...