WHAT DO YOU KNOW ABOUT THE FOOD YOU EAT?

Most of us tend not to think about what we eat. Sure, we might have our favourite recipes, or worry about whether our food has been sprayed with pesticides, but the processes and discoveries that have gone into its production remain a closed book. Some, however, think differently. Why, they wonder, is frozen milk yellow? Why does your mouth burn for longer when you eat chillies than when you eat mustard? And what would happen if you threw yourself into a swimming pool full of jelly?

It was for such people that New Scientist developed its ‘Last Word’ column, in which readers pose – and answer – questions on all manner of abstruse scientific issues, as they relate to everyday life. Many of the issues raised have simple answers. For the questions above, they would be: it depends on your taste – the relevant chemical in mustard is more easily washed away by your saliva; and, you’d float, but don’t dive in headfirst!

Other questions allow us to explore issues that are relevant to everyone. For example, what’s the difference between sell-by-dates and use-by-dates? You might expect the answer to involve overcautious health and safety regulation. But it’s more complex than that. The shelf life of food is actually determined by its manufactures, although lab tests and government guidelines also come into play. Food is tested periodically, at various temperatures, to check the level warmer it is, the more likely your prawn sandwich is to make you ill. After the lab tests, producers set a use-by-date or a best-before date. Fresh shellfish need to be consumed by their use-by date (the date by which you must eat them). But tinned beans will probably last long beyond their best-before date (the date by which it’s best to eat them), although they might not taste as good as they once did.

The same research explains why even bottled mineral water, which had previously lain underground for decades, needs a best-before date. The problem isn’t the water, but the bottling process: either bacteria can be introduced that multiply and, over time, contaminate the water, or unpleasant chemicals, such as antimony, leach into the water from the plastic bottles.

Sometimes, this kind of scientific study takes us to some strange places. For example, we now know that the amount of oxygen in the air inside green peppers is higher than in red (by a whopping 1.23 percent), probably due to the different rate at which green peppers photosynthesise. The relevance of this research is that green peppers will decay faster than red if keep in sunlight: higher oxygen levels provide more resources to feed any bacteria that are present. Generally, cooler environments preserve food best – apart from tropical fruit. Banana skins, for example, have evolved to survive in warm conditions, because that is where they grown best. Anything below 13.3^oC damages the membranes, releasing enzymes which lead to skin blackening. To avoid a mushy banana, keep it away from the chiller.

It is not just fears for our health that keep food scientists busy. They are also involved in other areas. Their precision has, for example, also been applied to bottles – in particular, to the discovery that the optimum number of sharp pointy bits on a bottle cap is 21. Go on, count them. Years of trial and error led to the internationally accepted German standard DIN 6099, which ensures that almost every bottle cap is the same. This is because 21 is the ideal number when you take into account the circumference of the cap, the likelihood of its metal splitting, and the chances of it sticking in the capping machine. So, next time you open a bottle with a cap on it, pay homage to those who bothered to find out, starting with William Painter, in 1892.

Of course, some researchers do care about the more serious stuff, driven by fear of the future and an ever-increasing population on a warning, land-impoverished planet. Sadly, New Scientist’s correspondents concluded that there was no one foodstuff that could feed the world on its own. However, they did come up with a menu that could feed a family of four for 365 days a year, using only eight square metres of land. Rotating crops (so that the soil didn’t lose one nutrient more than any other) would be vital, as would ploughing back dead plant matter and maintaining a vegetarian diet. After that, you would need to grow crops that take up a very little space and grown vertically rather than horizontally, if possible.

THIRD CULTURE KIDS

In a world where international careers are becoming commonplace, the phenomenon of third culture kids (TCKs) – children who spend a significant portion of their developmental years in a culture outside their parents’ passport culture(s) – is increasing exponentially. Not only is their number increasing, but their cultural complexity and relevance of their experience and the adult TCKs (ATCKs) they become, is also growing.

When Ruth Hill Useem, a sociologist, first coined this term in the 1950s, she spent a year researching expatriates in India. She discovered that folks who came from their home (or first) culture and moved to a host (or second) culture, had, in really, formed a culture, or lifestyle, different from either the first or second cultures. She called this the third culture and the children who grew up in this lifestyle ‘third culture kids’. At that time, most expatriate families had parents from the same culture and they often remained in one host culture while overseas.

This is no longer the case. Take, for example, Brice Royer, the founder of TCKID.com. His father is a half-French/half-Vietnamese UN peacekeeper, while his mom is Ethiopian. Brice lived in seven countries before he was eighteen including France, Mayotte, La Reunion, Ethiopia, Egypt, Canada and England. He writes, ‘When people ask me “Where are you from?” I just joke around and say “My mom says I’m from heaven.” ’ What other answer he can give?

ATCK Elizabeth Dunbar’s father, Roy, moved from Jamaica to Britain as a young boy. Her mother, Hortense, was born in Britain as the child of Jamaican immigrants who always planned to repatriate ‘one day’. While Elizabeth began life in Britain, her dad’s international career took the family to the United States, then to Venezuela and back to living in three different cities in the US. She soon realized that white racial diversity may be recognized, the hidden cultural diversity of her life remained invisible.

Despite such complexities, however, most ATCKs say their experience of growing up among different cultural worlds has given them many priceless gifts. They have seen the world and learnt several languages. More importantly, through friendships that cross the usual racial, national or social barriers, they have also learned the very different ways people see life. This offers a great opportunity to become social and cultural bridges between worlds that traditionally would never connect. ATCK Mikel Jentzsch, author of a best-selling book in Germany, Bloodbrothers – Our Friendship in Liberia, has a German passport but grew up in Niger and then Liberia. Before the Liberian civil war forced his family to leave, Mikel played daily with those who were later forced to become soldiers for that war. Through his eyes, the stories of those we would otherwise overlook to life for the rest of us.

Understanding the TCK experience is also important for other reasons. May TCKs are now in positions of influence and power. Their capacity to often think ‘outside the box’ can offer new and creative thinking for doing business and living in our globalizing world. But the same thinking can create fear for those who see the world from a more traditional world view. Neither the non-ATCKs nor the ATCKs may recognize that there may be a cultural clash going on because, by traditional measures of diversity such as race or gender, they are alike.

In addition, many people hear the benefits and challenges of the TCK profile described and wonder why they relate to it when they never lived overseas because of a parent’s career. Usually, however, they have grown up cross-culturally in another way, perhaps children of immigrants, refugees, bi-racial or bi-cultural unions, international adoptees, even children of minorities. If we see the TCK experience as a Petri dish of sorts – a place where the effects of growing up among many cultural worlds accompanied by a high degree of mobility have been studied – then we can look for what lessons may also relevant to helping us understand issues other cross-cultural kids (CCKs) may also face. It is possible we may discover that we need to rethink our traditional ways of defining diversity and identity. For some, as for TCKs, ‘culture’ may be something defined by shared experience rather than shared nationality or ethnicity. In telling their stories and developing new models for our changing world, many will be able to recognize and use well the great gifts of a cross-cultural childhood and deal successfully with the challenges for their personal, communal and corporate good.

ORGANIC FOOD : WHY?

Today, many governments are promoting organic or natural farming methods that avoid the use of pesticides and other artificial products. The aim is to show that they care about the environment and about people’s health. But is this the right approach?

Europe is now the biggest market for organic food in the world, expanding by 25 percent a year over the past 10 years. So what is the attraction of organic food for some people? The really important thing is that organic sounds more ‘natural’. Eating organic is a way of defining oneself as natural, good, caring, different from the junk-food- scoffing masses. As one journalist puts it: ‘It feels closer to the source, the beginning, the start of things.’ The real desire is to be somehow closer to the soil, to Mother Nature.

Unlike conventional farming, the organic approach means farming with natural, rather than man-made, fertilizers and pesticides. Techniques such as crop rotation improve soil quality and help organic farmers compensate for the absence of man-made chemicals. As a method of food production, organic is, however, inefficient in its use of labour and land; there are severe limits to how much food can be produced. Also, the environment benefits of not using artificial fertilizer are tiny compared with the amount of carbon dioxide emitted by transporting food (a great deal of Britain’s organic produce is shipped in from other countries and transported from shop to home by car).

Organic farming is often claimed to be safer than conventional farming- for the environment and for consumers. Yet studies into organic farming worldwide continue to reject this claim. An extensive review by the UK Food Standards Agency found that there was no statistically significant difference between organic and conventional crops. Even where results indicated there was evidence of a difference, the reviewers found no sign that these differences would have any noticeable effect of health.

The simplistic claim that organic food is more nutritious than conventional food was always likely to be misleading. Food is a natural product, and the health value of different foods will vary for a number of reasons, including fitness, the way the food is cooked, the type of soil it is grown, the amount of sunlight and rain drops have received, and so on. Likewise, the flavor of a carrot has less to do with whether it was fertilized with manure or something out of a plastic sack than the variety of carrot and how long ago it was dug up. The differences created by these things are likely to be greater than any differences brought about using an organic or non-organic system of production. Indeed, even some ‘organic’ farms are quite different from one another.

The notion that organic food is safer than ‘normal’ food is also contradicted by the fact that many of our most common food are full of natural toxins. Parsnips cause blisters on the skin of agricultural workers. Toasting bread create carcinogens. As one research expert says: ‘People think that the more natural something is, the better it is for them. That is simply not the case. In fact, it is the opposite that is true: the closer a plan is to its natural state, the more likely it is that it will poison you. Naturally, many plants do not want to be eaten, so we have spent 10,000 years developing agriculture and breeding out harmful traits from crops.’

Yet educated Europeans are more scared of eating traces of a few, strictly regulated, man-made chemicals than they are of eating the ones that nature created directly. Surrounded by plentiful food, it’s not nature they worry about, but technology. Our obsessions with the ethics and safety of what we eat – concerns about antibiotics in animals, additives in food, GM crops and so on- are symptomatic of a highly technological society that has little faith in its ability to use this technology wisely. In this context, the less something is touched by the human hand, the healthier people assume it must be.

Ultimately, the organic farming movement is an expensive luxury for shoppers in well-manicured Europe. For developing parts of the world, it is irrelevant. To European environmentalists, the fact that organic methods require more labour and land than conventional ones to get the same yields is a good thing; to a farmer in rural Africa, it is a disaster. Here, land tends to be so starved and crop yields so low that is simply is not enough organic matter to put back into the soil. Perhaps the focus should be on helping these countries to gain access to the most advanced farming techniques, rather than going back to basics.

Adapted from articles in Spiked.

AUSTRALIAN CULTURE AND CULTURE SHOCK

Sometimes work, study or a sense of adventure take us out of our familiar surroundings to go and live in a different culture. The experience can be difficult, even shocking.

Almost everyone who studies, lives or works abroad has problems adjusting to a new culture. The response is commonly referred to as 'culture shock'. Culture shock can be defined as 'the physical and emotional discomfort a person experiences when entering a culture different from their own' (Weaver,1993).

For people moving to Australia, Price (2001) has identified certain values which may give rise to culture shock. Firstly, he argues that Australians place a high value on independence and personal choices. This means that a teacher or course tutor will not tell students what to do, but will give them a number of options and suggest them work out which one is the best in their circumstances. It also means that they are expected to take action if something goes wrong and seek out resources and support for themselves.

Australians are also prepared to accept a range of opinions rather than believing there is one truth, This means that in an educational setting, students will be expected to form their own opinions and defend the reasons for that point of view and the evidence for it.

Price also comments that Australian are uncomfortable with differences in status and hence idealise the idea of treating everyone equally. An illustration of this is that most adult Australians call each other by their first names. This concern with equality means that Australians are uncomfortable taking anything too seriously and are even ready to joke about themselves.

Australians believe that life should have a balance between work and leisure time. As a consequence, some students may be critical of others who they perceive as doing nothing but study.

Australian notions of privacy mean that areas such as financial matters, appearance and relationships are only discussed with close friends. While people may volunteer such information, they may resent someone actually asking them unless the friendship is firmly established. Even then, it is considered very impolite to ask someone what they earn. With older people, it is so rude to ask how old they are, why they are not married or why they do not have children. It is also impolite to ask people how much they have paid for something, unless there is a very good reason for asking.

Kohls (1996) describes culture shock as a process of change marked by four basic stages. During the first stage, the new arrival is excited to be in a new place, so this is often referred to as the "honeymoon" stage. Like a tourist, they are intrigued by all the new sights and sounds, new smells and tastes of their surroundings. They may have some problems, but usually they accept them as a part of the novelty. At this point, it is the similarities that stand out, and it seems to the newcomer that people everywhere and their way of life are very much alike. This period of euphoria may last from a couple of weeks to a month, but the letdown is inevitable. 

During the second stage, known as the 'rejection' stage, the newcomer starts to experience difficulties due to the differences between the new culture and the way they were accustomed to living. The initial enthusiasm turns into irritation, frustration, anger and depression, and these feelings may have the effects of people rejecting the new culture so that they notice only the things that cause them trouble,  which they then complain about. In addition, they may feel homesick, bored, withdrawn and irritable during this period as well.

Fortunately, most people gradually learn to adapt to the new culture and move on to the third stage, known as 'adjustment and reorientation'. During this stage a transition occurs to a new optimistic attitude. As the newcomer begins to understand more of the new culture, they are able to interpret some of the subtle cultural clues which passed by unnoticed earlier. Now things make more sense and the culture seems more familiar. As a result, they begin to develop problem-solving skills and feelings of disorientation and anxiety no longer affect them.

In Kohls's model, in the fourth stage, newcomers undergo a process of adaptation. They have settled into the new culture, and this results in a feeling of direction and self-confidence. They have accepted the new food, drinks, habits and customs that bothered them so much previously. In addition, they realise that the new culture has good and bad things to offer and that no way is really better than another, just different.

adapted from Intercultural Communication for Students in the Faculty of Economics and Commerce, University of Melbourne.

REVIEW : Giáo trình tiếng Hàn tổng hợp SC1

Sau gần 2 tháng tự học tiếng Hàn + có tham kiến các tiền bối, Jenny đã hoàn thành 15 bài trong cuốn giáo trình tiếng Hàn tổng hợp SC1 và muốn làm 1 bài review ngắn về cuốn sách này cũng như các nguồn tài liệu tham khảo trong suốt quá trình học.

Về phần nội dung, đây là 1 sự lựa chọn tốt nếu như các bạn muốn tự học tiếng Hàn. Phần trình bày của sách rõ ràng, chi tiết, từ vựng và ngữ pháp được ghi rạch ròi, kết hợp với các dạng kĩ năng để luyện (sách có phần luyện nói, luyện nghe, luyện đọc, luyện viết, từ mới bổ sung và phát âm cho mỗi bài). Tuy nhiên trong sách có 1 số phần chưa được đính chính lại (từ vựng + ngữ pháp), mình cũng có hỏi 1 số tiền bối để tránh mắc sai lầm trong cách sử dụng ngữ pháp sau này. Quyển bài tập đi kèm sách cũng khá nhiều và đa dạng, có bài tập về từ vựng, về từng phần ngữ pháp, bài tập phần đọc hiểu. Điểm cộng của giáo trình này là từ mới siêu nhiều luôn, các từ mới cũng thường xuyên được lặp đi lặp lại trong các bài học tiếp theo nên người học dễ học hơn. Mình không tương thích với kiểu cầm 1 list từ mới và học thuộc lòng nên việc tần suất từ mới lặp lại dày như thế này lại rất hữu ích và thú vị.

Trong quá trình học sách tiếng Hàn tổng hợp thì mình cũng đã tham khảo 1 số giáo trình khác như sau :
1, Giáo trình Yonsei 1 : Giáo trình này là giáo trình Anh- Hàn, sẽ phù hợp với những bạn khá tiếng Anh. Tuy nhiên mình cảm giác giáo trình này không "khó" như giáo trình tiếng Hàn tổng hợp, hơn nữa lại khá dài nên mình vẫn ưu tiên học theo giáo trình tổng hợp và chỉ tham khảo qua giáo trình Yonsei thôi.

2, Quyển Yonsei reading 1: quyển Yonsei reading này có cả file nghe nữa, chủ yếu là luyện bài đọc và tăng ngữ pháp. Cá nhân mình khá thích cuốn này vì hợp với phương pháp học từ vựng theo kiểu "mưa dần thấm lâu" của mình. Một điểm cộng nữa là phần từ vựng được giải thích bằng cả tiếng Anh, tiếng Nhật và tiếng Trung, nên mình luyện được cả tiếng Anh và tiếng Trung nữa, lại có thể hiểu từ vựng được sâu hơn, dễ nhớ hơn.

3, Quyển Korean grammar in use (beginning) : Bản mình dùng là bản Anh-Hàn để luyện thêm cả tiếng Anh, sách viết rất đầy đủ, có cả ví dụ, giải thích ngữ pháp, lưu ý và phần bài tập để luyện. Khi học giáo trình tổng hợp có rất nhiều phần ngữ pháp mình chưa hiểu hoặc viết còn sơ sài, mình sẽ tham khảo thêm quyển này để hiểu rõ hơn.

Ngoài ra mình có dùng 1 app để luyện tiếng Hàn (cực kì recommend cho những bạn học Anh, Trung, Nhật, Hàn), đó là app Lingo Deer. Mình biết đến app này khi xem video của 1 polyglot đã thành công học 10 thứ tiếng và cực siêu tiếng Hàn (bạn ý đang phấn đấu lên mức Native - Mastery thì phải). Ngoại trừ 1 điểm là mọi thứ đều phải học từ đầu (kể cả những bạn đã lên trung cấp thì cũng không vượt cấp được), còn lại mọi thứ đều rất thú vị. Mình được nghe nhiều, luyện nói nhiều, luyện từ vựng, giải thích ngữ pháp cũng rất rõ ràng, hơn nữa người học có thể sử dụng app ở mọi lúc, mọi nơi.

Cuối cùng, mình vẫn nhấn mạnh việc học kiến thức mới về ngôn ngữ phải đi kèm với việc rèn luyện một thói quen ngôn ngữ. Mình thường xem (hoặc đôi lúc chỉ nghe dù không hiểu gì) các video bằng tiếng Hàn của những người ngoại quốc học tiếng Hàn thành công, xem các chương trình giải trí của Hàn Quốc ( đợt này thích I can see your voice), xem lại movie và drama tiếng Hàn yêu thích (Secret Garden, Sắc đẹp ngàn cân,...). Ban đầu mới học mình sẽ xem bản có sub Việt, sub Anh hoặc sub Trung (thích sub Anh nhất vì quen rồi). Mỗi ngày học 1 chút, nghe 1 chút, xem 1 chút, nói 1 chút, lúc nào cũng hướng đến tiêu chí " Học là mưa dần thấm lâu", học hành không áp lực thi cử bằng cấp.

Hi vọng sẽ có nhiều bạn tìm được niềm say mê với ngôn ngữ và thành công chinh phục những ngôn ngữ mới nhé!

Đặt mục tiêu học tiếng Hàn cho quyển SC2 : Hoàn thành 15 bài tiếp theo của cuốn SC2 đến ngày 30/10 và ôn tập cả 2 cuốn trong tháng 11.