Keith Chen: Could your language affect your ability to save money?

Translator: Timothy Covell Reviewer: Morton Bast

Prevoditelj: Mladen Barešić Recezent: Ivan Stamenković

The global economic financial crisis has reignited public interest

Globalna ekonomska financijska kriza ponovno je pobudila interes javnosti

in something that's actually one of the oldest questions in economics,

u vezi s jednim od najstarijih ekonomskih pitanja

dating back to at least before Adam Smith.

još od vremena prije Adama Smitha.

And that is, why is it that countries with seemingly similar economies and institutions

Zašto zemlje s naizgled sličnim gospodarstvima i institucijama

can display radically different savings behavior?

mogu iskazivati posve različita ponašanja glede štednje?

Now, many brilliant economists have spent their entire lives working on this question,

Brojni iznimni ekonomisti posvetili su čitave svoje živote ovome pitanju,

and as a field we've made a tremendous amount of headway

čitavo je područje silno napredovalo

and we understand a lot about this.

i mi o svemu znamo osjetno više.

What I'm here to talk with you about today is an intriguing new hypothesis

Danas ću vam govoriti o intrigantnoj novoj hipotezi

and some surprisingly powerful new findings that I've been working on

i o iznenađujuće moćnim otkrićima na kojima sam radio -

about the link between the structure of the language you speak

o vezi između strukture jezika kojim govorimo

and how you find yourself with the propensity to save.

i naših sklonosti štednji.

Let me tell you a little bit about savings rates, a little bit about language,

Dopustite mi nekoliko riječi o stopama štednje, ponešto o jeziku,

and then I'll draw that connection.

a potom ću to dvoje i povezati.

Let's start by thinking about the member countries of the OECD,

Razmotrimo najprije zemlje članice OECD-a,

or the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development.

tj. Organizacije za ekonomsku suradnju i razvoj.

OECD countries, by and large, you should think about these

Općenito, najbogatije,

as the richest, most industrialized countries in the world.

industrijski najrazvijenije zemlje svijeta.

And by joining the OECD, they were affirming a common commitment

Pristupanjem OECD-u, te su zemlje potvrdile zajedničku predanost

to democracy, open markets and free trade.

demokraciji, otvorenim tržištima i slobodnoj trgovini.

Despite all of these similarities, we see huge differences in savings behavior.

Unatoč sličnostima, ogromne su razlike u odnosu prema štednji.

So all the way over on the left of this graph,

Na krajnjem lijevom dijelu ovoga prikaza

what you see is many OECD countries saving over a quarter of their GDP every year,

uočavate da mnoge zemlje OECD-a svake godine uštede više od četvrtine svoga BDP-a

and some OECD countries saving over a third of their GDP per year.

te da neke zemlje OECD-a ugodišnje uštede više od trećine svoga BDP-a.

Holding down the right flank of the OECD, all the way on the other side, is Greece.

Na desnom kraju prikaza je - Grčka.

And what you can see is that over the last 25 years,

Možete vidjeti da je tijekom posljednjih 25 godina

Greece has barely managed to save more than 10 percent of their GDP.

Grčka jedva uspijevala štedjeti više od 10% svoga BDP-a.

It should be noted, of course, that the United States and the U.K. are the next in line.

Napomenuti treba da slijede - SAD i UK.

Now that we see these huge differences in savings rates,

Kad vidimo ove silne razlike u stopama štednje,

how is it possible that language might have something to do with these differences?

kako je moguće da bi jezik mogao imati ikakve veze s njima?

Let me tell you a little bit about how languages fundamentally differ.

Reći ću vam nešto o tome po čemu se jezici suštinski razlikuju.

Linguists and cognitive scientists have been exploring this question for many years now.

Jezikoslovci i kognitivni znanstvenici godinama se već bave ovim pitanjem.

And then I'll draw the connection between these two behaviors.

Objasnit ću kasnije poveznicu između ovih dvaju ponašanja.

Many of you have probably already noticed that I'm Chinese.

Većina je vas vjerojatno već primijetila da sam ja Kinez.

I grew up in the Midwest of the United States.

Odrastao sam na Srednjem Zapadu SAD-a.

And something I realized quite early on

Prilično sam rano shvatio

was that the Chinese language forced me to speak about and --

da me kineski jezik prisiljavao da govorim -

in fact, more fundamentally than that --

ustvari, još i bitnije od toga -

ever so slightly forced me to think about family in very different ways.

da mislim o obitelji na posve različite načine.

Now, how might that be? Let me give you an example.

Kako je to moguće? Dat ću vam primjer...

Suppose I were talking with you and I was introducing you to my uncle.

Pretpostavimo da sam vam predstavljao svoga "unclea" (engl. ujak, stric, tetak).

You understood exactly what I just said in English.

U potpunosti ste razumjeli što sam vam upravo rekao na engleskom.

If we were speaking Mandarin Chinese with each other, though,

Međutim, da smo razgovarali na mandarinskom kineskom,

I wouldn't have that luxury.

ne bi mi bilo tako jednostavno.

I wouldn't have been able to convey so little information.

Ne bih vam mogao dati toliko malo informacija.

What my language would have forced me to do,

Zbog svoga bih vam jezika,

instead of just telling you, "This is my uncle,"

umjesto da vam jednostavno kažem: "Ovo je moj 'uncle'.",

is to tell you a tremendous amount of additional information.

morao prenijeti još i ogromnu količinu dodatnih informacija.

My language would force me to tell you

Moj bi me jezik primorao da vam kažem

whether or not this was an uncle on my mother's side or my father's side,

je li on s majčine ili je s očeve strane;

whether this was an uncle by marriage or by birth,

jesmo li u krvnom srodstvu ili nismo;

and if this man was my father's brother,

i ako mi je stric,

whether he was older than or younger than my father.

je li stariji ili je mlađi od moga oca.

All of this information is obligatory. Chinese doesn't let me ignore it.

Sve su ove informacije obvezne. Kineski mi ne dopušta zanemariti ih.

And in fact, if I want to speak correctly,

Zapravo, želim li ispravno govoriti,

Chinese forces me to constantly think about it.

kineski me primorava da o tome stalno razmišljam.

Now, that fascinated me endlessly as a child,

Još me kao dijete to beskrajno očaravalo,

but what fascinates me even more today as an economist

a danas me još i više kao ekonomista očarava

is that some of these same differences carry through to how languages speak about time.

da se neke od tih razlika izražavaju i u tome kako jezici govore o vremenu.

So for example, if I'm speaking in English, I have to speak grammatically differently

Primjerice, govorim li na engleskom, moram govoriti gramatički različito

if I'm talking about past rain, "It rained yesterday,"

ako govorim o kiši u prošlosti: "Jučer je padala kiša.";

current rain, "It is raining now,"

o kiši u sadašnjosti: "Danas pada kiša.";

or future rain, "It will rain tomorrow."

ili o kiši u budućnosti: "Sutra će padati kiša.".

Notice that English requires a lot more information with respect to the timing of events.

Primijetili ste da engleski iziskuje osjetno više informacija u vezi s vremenom radnje.

Why? Because I have to consider that

Zašto? Zato što to moram uzeti u obzir

and I have to modify what I'm saying to say, "It will rain," or "It's going to rain."

i moram prilagoditi ono što kanim reći: "Past će kiša." ili "Mogla bi pasti kiša."

It's simply not permissible in English to say, "It rain tomorrow."

Na engleskom je jednostavno nedopustivo reći: "Kiša pada sutra.".

In contrast to that, that's almost exactly what you would say in Chinese.

Naprotiv, to je upravo ono što biste rekli na kineskom.

A Chinese speaker can basically say something

Govornik kineskog jezika smije reći nešto

that sounds very strange to an English speaker's ears.

što bi vrlo neobično zvučalo govorniku engleskog jezika.

They can say, "Yesterday it rain," "Now it rain," "Tomorrow it rain."

Kinezi mogu reći: "Jučer pada kiša.", "Danas pada kiša.", "Sutra pada kiša.".

In some deep sense, Chinese doesn't divide up the time spectrum

U nekom dubljem smislu, kineski jezik ne dijeli vremenski spektar

in the same way that English forces us to constantly do in order to speak correctly.

onako kako od nas to engleski traži da bismo ispravno govorili.

Is this difference in languages

Je li ova jezična razlika svojstvena

only between very, very distantly related languages, like English and Chinese?

samo vrlo udaljenim jezicima, poput engleskog i kineskog?

Actually, no.

Zapravo, nije.

So many of you know, in this room, that English is a Germanic language.

Mnogima je među vama poznato da je engleski germanski jezik.

What you may not have realized is that English is actually an outlier.

Možda ipak ne znate da engleski nije tipičan germanski jezik.

It is the only Germanic language that requires this.

Jedini je to germanski jezik koji zahtijeva ovu promjenu.

For example, most other Germanic language speakers

Primjerice, većina govornika ostalih germanskih jezika

feel completely comfortable talking about rain tomorrow

bez ikakvih poteškoća govori o sutrašnjoj kiši

by saying, "Morgen regnet es,"

govoreći: "Morgen regnet es.";

quite literally to an English ear, "It rain tomorrow."

engleskome uhu doslovce: "Sutra pada kiša."

This led me, as a behavioral economist, to an intriguing hypothesis.

Kao bihevioralnog ekonomista, to me dovelo do zanimljive hipoteze.

Could how you speak about time, could how your language forces you to think about time,

Može li to kako govorimo o vremenu i kako, zbog jezika, mislimo o vremenu,

affect your propensity to behave across time?

utjecati na naše ponašajne sklonosti tijekom vremena?

You speak English, a futured language.

Vi govorite engleski, tzv. futurizirani jezik.

And what that means is that every time you discuss the future,

To znači da svaki put kad govorite o budućnosti,

or any kind of a future event,

ili o bilo kojem događaju u budućnosti,

grammatically you're forced to cleave that from the present

gramatički ste ga prisiljeni odcijepiti od sadašnjosti

and treat it as if it's something viscerally different.

i instinktivno o njemu misliti kao o nečemu posve različitom.

Now suppose that that visceral difference

Pretpostavimo da zbog te instinktivne razlike

makes you subtly dissociate the future from the present every time you speak.

jedva primjetno u govoru odvajate budućnost od sadašnjosti.

If that's true and it makes the future feel

Ako je to istina, i ako to budućnost čini

like something more distant and more different from the present,

nečim udaljenijim i različitijim od sadašnjosti,

that's going to make it harder to save.

bit će nam teže i štedjeti.

If, on the other hand, you speak a futureless language,

Naprotiv, ako govorite tzv. besfuturnim jezikom,

the present and the future, you speak about them identically.

o sadašnjosti i o budućnosti govorite jednako.

If that subtly nudges you to feel about them identically,

Ako ih zbog toga i doživljavate jednakima,

that's going to make it easier to save.

bit će vam lakše i štedjeti.

Now this is a fanciful theory.

Dakako, ovo je domišljata teorija.

I'm a professor, I get paid to have fanciful theories.

Profesor sam; plaćaju me za osmišljavanje takvih teorija.

But how would you actually go about testing such a theory?

Ali kako bismo je mogli provjeriti?

Well, what I did with that was to access the linguistics literature.

Ja sam se prihvatio jezikoslovne literature.

And interestingly enough, there are pockets of futureless language speakers

Zanimljivo je da postoje područja s govornicima "besfuturnih" jezika,

situated all over the world.

raširena po cijelome svijetu.

This is a pocket of futureless language speakers in Northern Europe.

Ovo je područje u sjevernoj Europi, gdje se govori "besfuturnim" jezicima.

Interestingly enough, when you start to crank the data,

Započnemo li proučavati te podatke,

these pockets of futureless language speakers all around the world

ispostavit će se da su govornici "besfuturnih" jezika,

turn out to be, by and large, some of the world's best savers.

uglavnom, ponajbolji svjetski štediše.

Just to give you a hint of that,

Primjera radi,

let's look back at that OECD graph that we were talking about.

pogledajmo onaj OECD-ov prikaz o kojemu smo već govorili.

What you see is that these bars are systematically taller

Vidite da su ovi stupci viši

and systematically shifted to the left

i da su dosljedno pomaknuti ulijevo

compared to these bars which are the members of the OECD that speak futured languages.

za razliku od članica OECD-a u kojima se govori "futuriziranim" jezicima.

What is the average difference here?

Kolika je prosječna razlika?

Five percentage points of your GDP saved per year.

Ušteda od pet postotnih bodova BDP-a godišnje.

Over 25 years that has huge long-run effects on the wealth of your nation.

Nakon 25 godina to će imati silne dugoročne učinke na blagostanje nacije.

Now while these findings are suggestive,

Premda su ovi nalazi sugestivni,

countries can be different in so many different ways

zemlje se mogu toliko razlikovati

that it's very, very difficult sometimes to account for all of these possible differences.

da je katkad vrlo teško objasniti sve te moguće razlike.

What I'm going to show you, though, is something that I've been engaging in for a year,

No, prikazat ću vam nešto na čemu sam radio proteklih godinu dana -

which is trying to gather all of the largest datasets

svoja nastojanja da prikupim sve moguće podatke

that we have access to as economists,

do kojih, kao ekonomisti, uopće možemo doći.

and I'm going to try and strip away all of those possible differences,

Nastojat ću odstraniti sve te moguće razlike

hoping to get this relationship to break.

u nadi da ću uspjeti osporiti taj odnos.

And just in summary, no matter how far I push this, I can't get it to break.

Ukratko, koliko god se ja trudio, ne mogu ga posve osporiti.

Let me show you how far you can do that.

Pokazat ću vam koliko daleko uopće možemo ići.

One way to imagine that is I gather large datasets from around the world.

Zamislite me kako prikupljam masu podataka iz cijeloga svijeta.

So for example, there is the Survey of Health, [Aging] and Retirement in Europe.

Primjerice, postoji "Istraživanje o zdravlju, starenju i umirovljenju u Europi".

From this dataset you actually learn that retired European families

Iz tih je podataka moguće naučiti da su umirovljene europske obitelji

are extremely patient with survey takers.

izrazito strpljive s istraživačima.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

So imagine that you're a retired household in Belgium and someone comes to your front door.

Zamislite da ste umirovljenik u Belgiji i netko vam zakuca na vrata.

"Excuse me, would you mind if I peruse your stock portfolio?

"Ispričavam se, smijem li malo proučiti vaš dionički portfelj?

Do you happen to know how much your house is worth? Do you mind telling me?

Znate li možda koliko vrijedi vaša kuća? Možete li mi reći?

Would you happen to have a hallway that's more than 10 meters long?

Je li vaš hodnik možda dulji od 10 metara?

If you do, would you mind if I timed how long it took you to walk down that hallway?

Ako jest, smijem li izmjeriti koliko vam vremena treba da biste njime prošli?

Would you mind squeezing as hard as you can, in your dominant hand, this device

Biste li svojom dominantnom rukom stisnuli ovu napravu najjače što možete

so I can measure your grip strength?

kako bih izmjerio snagu Vašega stiska?

How about blowing into this tube so I can measure your lung capacity?"

A da puhnete najjače što možete u ovu cijev kako bih izmjerio kapacitet Vaših pluća?"

The survey takes over a day.

Anketa traje dulje od cijeloga dana.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Combine that with a Demographic and Health Survey

Povežite to s "Demografskim istraživanjem zdravstvenog stanja",

collected by USAID in developing countries in Africa, for example,

što ga provodi USAID u zemljama u razvoju, u Africi primjerice.

which that survey actually can go so far as to directly measure the HIV status

i kojime je moguće izravno ocijeniti zaraženost HIV-om

of families living in, for example, rural Nigeria.

u obiteljima koje žive, primjerice, u nekom nigerijskom selu.

Combine that with a world value survey,

Povežite to sa Svjetskim istraživanjem vrijednosti,

which measures the political opinions and, fortunately for me, the savings behaviors

kojim se mjere politička uvjerenja i, srećom za mene, navike štednje

of millions of families in hundreds of countries around the world.

u milijunima obitelji, u stotinama zemalja diljem cijeloga svijeta.

Take all of that data, combine it, and this map is what you get.

Objedinite sve te podatke i dobit ćete ovaj zemljovid.

What you find is nine countries around the world

Uočit ćete devet zemalja

that have significant native populations

sa znatnim starosjedilačkim stanovništvom

which speak both futureless and futured languages.

koje govori i "besfuturnim" i "futuriziranim" jezicima.

And what I'm going to do is form statistical matched pairs

Statistički ću upariti

between families that are nearly identical on every dimension that I can measure,

obitelji koje su gotovo istovjetne po svim mjerljivim obilježjima,

and then I'm going to explore whether or not the link between language and savings holds

a potom ću istražiti postoji li veza između jezika i navika štednje

even after controlling for all of these levels.

čak i ako su sva ostala obilježja izjednačena.

What are the characteristics we can control for?

Koja obilježja možemo izjednačiti?

Well I'm going to match families on country of birth and residence,

Izjednačit ću obitelji prema zemlji rođenja i prebivališta;

the demographics -- what sex, their age --

prema demografskim obilježjima - njihovom spolu i njihovoj dobi;

their income level within their own country,

primanjima u odnosu na prosjeke zemalja;

their educational achievement, a lot about their family structure.

obrazovanju i obiteljskim strukturama.

It turns out there are six different ways to be married in Europe.

Ispostavlja se da u Europi postoji šest različitih načina da se vjenčate.

And most granularly, I break them down by religion

U konačnici, izjednačit ću ih prema vjeroispovijesti:

where there are 72 categories of religions in the world --

u svijetu postoje 72 vrste vjeroispovijesti;

so an extreme level of granularity.

dakle, idemo do krajnjih detalja.

There are 1.4 billion different ways that a family can find itself.

Postoji 1,4 milijarde načina definiranja obitelji.

Now effectively everything I'm going to tell you from now on

Praktično sve što ću vam odsad reći

is only comparing these basically nearly identical families.

bit će usporedba ovih, u osnovi, gotovo istovjetnih obitelji.

It's getting as close as possible to the thought experiment

To je vrlo blisko misaonom pokusu

of finding two families both of whom live in Brussels

nalaženja dviju obitelji koje obje žive u Bruxellesu

who are identical on every single one of these dimensions,

i jednake su prema svakome od navedenih obilježja,

but one of whom speaks Flemish and one of whom speaks French;

samo što jedna od njih govori flamanskim, a druga francuskim jezikom;

or two families that live in a rural district in Nigeria,

ili dviju obitelji koje žive u ruralnom području Nigerije,

one of whom speaks Hausa and one of whom speaks Igbo.

i jedna od njih govori jezikom Hausa, a druga Igbo.

Now even after all of this granular level of control,

Čak i kad smo ih izjednačili prema svim ovim sitnim obilježjima,

do futureless language speakers seem to save more?

štede li govornici "besfuturnih" jezika više?

Yes, futureless language speakers, even after this level of control,

Da! Govornici "besfuturnih" jezika, čak i kad ih ovako izjednačimo,

are 30 percent more likely to report having saved in any given year.

30% vjerojatnije izjavit će da su svake godine ponešto uspjeli uštedjeti.

Does this have cumulative effects?

Ima li to kakvih zbirnih učinaka?

Yes, by the time they retire, futureless language speakers, holding constant their income,

Ima! Do umirovljenja, govornici "besfuturnih", s konstantnim primanjima,

are going to retire with 25 percent more in savings.

uštedjet će oko 25% više.

Can we push this data even further?

Možemo li još dalekosežnije zaključivati?

Yes, because I just told you, we actually collect a lot of health data as economists.

Možemo! Rekao sam vam da ekonomisti prikupljaju mnoštvo zdravstvenih podataka.

Now how can we think about health behaviors to think about savings?

Kako možemo zdravstveno ponašanje promatrati kao štednju?

Well, think about smoking, for example.

Sjetite se pušenja, primjerice.

Smoking is in some deep sense negative savings.

Pušenje je, u svojoj suštini, negativna štednja.

If savings is current pain in exchange for future pleasure,

Ako je štednja bol u sadašnjosti, koju razmjenjujemo za užitke u budućnosti,

smoking is just the opposite.

pušenje je njena suprotnost.

It's current pleasure in exchange for future pain.

Ono je užitak u sadašnjosti, kojeg razmjenjujemo za boli u budućnosti.

What we should expect then is the opposite effect.

Ono što bismo potom trebali očekivati je i suprotan učinak.

And that's exactly what we find.

Upravo to i nalazimo.

Futureless language speakers are 20 to 24 percent less likely

Govornici "besfuturnih" jezika će 20 do 24 posto manje vjerojatno

to be smoking at any given point in time compared to identical families,

pušiti u bilo kojem razdoblju života;

and they're going to be 13 to 17 percent less likely

13 do 17 posto manje će vjerojatno

to be obese by the time they retire,

biti gojazni u doba umirovljenja;

and they're going to report being 21 percent more likely

21 posto vjerojatnije izvijestit će

to have used a condom in their last sexual encounter.

da su koristili kondom prilikom posljednjeg spolnog odnosa.

I could go on and on with the list of differences that you can find.

Mogao bih tako unedogled s popisom razlika.

It's almost impossible not to find a savings behavior

Gotovo je nemoguće ne pronaći ponašanje u vezi sa štednjom

for which this strong effect isn't present.

za koje ovaj snažan utjecaj nije vidljiv.

My linguistics and economics colleagues at Yale and I are just starting to do this work

S kolegama jezikoslovcima i ekonomistima s Yalea upravo započinjem raditi na

and really explore and understand the ways that these subtle nudges

istraživanju i razumijevanju kako te nijanse

cause us to think more or less about the future every single time we speak.

utječu na nas da više ili manje mislimo o budućnosti kad god progovorimo.

Ultimately, the goal,

Konačan je cilj da,

once we understand how these subtle effects can change our decision making,

jednom kad shvatimo kako te suptilnosti mogu utjecati na naše odlučivanje,

we want to be able to provide people tools

pružimo ljudima pomagala

so that they can consciously make themselves better savers

kako bi oni svjesno postali bolji štediše

and more conscious investors in their own future.

i svjesnije ulagali u vlastitu budućnost.

Thank you very much.

Hvala vam puno.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)