MISUNDERSTOOD.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 224, 21 September 1928, Page 6

MISUNDERSTOOD.

There is a quaint touch of humour in the Bishop of London's onslaught on Dr. F. G. Donnan for his supposed contention that scientists would be able to make souls in a. laboratory. Dr. Donnan actually used the word "cell," but the bishop only heard a wireless record of the speech and m'istook the word "cell" for "soul." This adds a new terror for the public speaker. It is bad enough When a speaker suffers from soma error in reporting or some slip in the printing of a speech. One speaker, in referring u> Maoris returning to the pa, was made by a misprint to refer to them as returning to the "pub." This led to no little controversy till the misunderstanding was cleared up. Another time, when the captain of a vessel said they had run into a tornado, a misprint reported him as saying that they had run into a tomato. But if to these accidents that are incidental to what the Latins call "Oratio obliqua" are to beadded the accidents of a mishearing on the headphones, public speaking will provide new pitfalls for those called upon to undertake it. Suppose, for instance, tfce bishop iu speaking over the wireless expressed a wish that some clerical opponent would go to Hull, and he were to be misheard to the extent of confusing the vowel sound of "u" with the vowel sound of "e," there would be much matter for protest. International misunderstanding might easily arise if an American announcer were to Utie some English words which have a quite different signification in America to that which they have in England. We have seen an instance of this recently in the use of the word "flapper." "Votes for flappers" would apparfentlv mean something very different in the United States to what it would in the English Press. One can understand that many misconceptions might arise if an announcer were to use the words "monkey" and "pony" in the sense in which they are used by the betting fraternity, since thousands of his listeners would probably be unaware of their technical meaning. A traveller, in lecturing on thiligs he had seen abroad, said that amongst other things he had seen a donkey die. In one printed report of his speech he was made to say that he had seen a 'donkey pie." This led to quite an interesting little controversy till the misprint was discovered. One can well understand the misconceptions that might arise if an announcer were dealing with Russian or Polish names. Some people would probably protest against the use of bad language. But it does seem strange that a bishop, without reading any printed report of a speech and merely on the* streugth of a wireless record, should denounce a distinguished scientist, when it must have been obvious that no man would claim the ability to make a soul. If this is done with words pronounced differently, it is a little disconcerting to reflect what might happen with the many words in the English language, such* as "whole" and "hole," or "soul" and 'sole." which are identical in sound. The microphone will make the average speaker more nervous than ever. —W.M.