Well, I'm involved in other things, besides physics. In fact, mostly now in other things.
Bhuel, tá baint agam le rudaí eile seachas fisic I bhfirínne, in ábhair seachas fisic is mó faoi láthair.
One thing is distant relationships among human languages. And the professional, historical linguists in the U.S. and in Western Europe mostly try to stay away from any long-distance relationships, big groupings, groupings that go back a long time, longer than the familiar families. They don't like that. They think it's crank. I don't think it's crank. And there are some brilliant linguists, mostly Russians, who are working on that, at Santa Fe Institute and in Moscow, and I would love to see where that leads.
Tá rud amháin faoi leith i dteangacha an chine daonna. Déanann teangeolaithe gairmiúla, stairiúla sna SAM agus in Iarthar na hEorpa iarracht chun cianchaidrimh a sheachaint; grúpaí móra, grúpaí a théann i bhfad siar níos faide siar ná na teaghlaigh teanga cailiúla. Cha dtaitníonn sé sin leo; síleann gur raiméis í. Ach, ní shílim gur amhlaidh atá. Agus tá roinnt mhaith teangeolaithe iontacha, Rúisigh is mó, atá ag déanamh staidéir air sin ag Institiúd Santa Fe agus i Moscó, agus ba bhreá liom na torthaí a fheiceáil.
Does it really lead to a single ancestor some 20, 25,000 years ago? And what if we go back beyond that single ancestor, when there was presumably a competition among many languages? How far back does that go? How far back does modern language go? How many tens of thousands of years does it go back?
An dtéann sé i bhfad siar go sinsear amháin 20,000 nó 25,000 bliain ó shin? Agus cad é a tharlaíonn má théann muid níos faide siar roimh an tsinsir amháin sin, nuair is dócha go raibh iomaíocht idir roinnt mhaith teangacha? Cé chomh fada siar a théann sé sin? Cé chomh fada siar a théann teangacha an lae inniu? Cá mhéad mílte bliain a théann sé siar?
Chris Anderson: Do you have a hunch or a hope for what the answer to that is?
Chris Anderson: An bhfuil cliú nó smaoineamh ar an fhreagra a bhfaighfear?
Murray Gell-Mann: Well, I would guess that modern language must be older than the cave paintings and cave engravings and cave sculptures and dance steps in the soft clay in the caves in Western Europe, in the Aurignacian Period some 35,000 years ago, or earlier. I can't believe they did all those things and didn't also have a modern language. So, I would guess that the actual origin goes back at least that far and maybe further.
Murray Gell-Mann: Bhuel, mheasfainn go gcaithfidh teangacha an lae inniu a bheith níos sine ná na pictiúir agus an ghreanadóireacht agus na dealraimh a tchítear sna huaimheanna agus lorg coise ó rincí a fágadh i gcré bhog uaimheanna in Iarthar na hEorpa. sa Tréimhse Aragnaisiúnach timpeall 35,000 bliain ó shin, nó níos túisce. Cha dtig liom a chreidbheáil go ndearna siad na rudaí seo go léir agus nach raibh cumas acu i dteanga nua-aimseartha. Mar sin mheasfainn ar a laghad go dtéann na fréamhacha comh fada siar sin, agus b'fhéidr níos faide arís.
But that doesn't mean that all, or many, or most of today's attested languages couldn't descend perhaps from one that's much younger than that, like say 20,000 years, or something of that kind. It's what we call a bottleneck.
Ach, chan ionann é sin is a rá nach dtig leis na teangacha uilig, nó cuid mhaith acu, nó an chuid is mó acu, a bheith tagtha ó abraimis, 20,000 bliain ó shin, nó rud éigin cosúil leis sin. Tugaimid caolas teanga air sin.
CA: Well, Philip Anderson may have been right. You may just know more about everything than anyone. So, it's been an honor. Thank you Murray Gell-Mann. (Applause)
CA: Bhuel, b'fhéidir go raibh an ceart ag Philip Anderson. B'fhéidir go bhfuil níos mó eolais agatsa ar achan rud ná duine ar bith eile. Mar sin, ónóir a bhí ann domhsa. Go raibh maith agat a Mhurray Gell-Mann. (Bualadh bos)