Theiling Online    Sitemap    Conlang Mailing List HQ   

Re: First report on Conm

From:Andreas Johansson <andjo@...>
Date:Friday, March 28, 2003, 8:37
Quoting Christophe Grandsire <christophe.grandsire@...>:

> En réponse à Andreas Johansson <andjo@...>: > > > > > I'm hearing so much different figures on this that I can only > conclude > > that > > definitions vary wildly. The last bigger thing on this I read > claimed > > that > > something like 1-2% of the world's population was ambidextrous, > 10-20% > > left- > > handed and the rest right-handed. Oh, and it's authors'd probably > > considered "ambidextrous people with more or less inclination toward > > left or > > right" to be contradiction in terms. > > > > That's because the idea that lateralisation is a continuum is not > widely > accepted.
[snip]
> > How strongly right/left-handed count as "fully" to get your numbers? > > Quite strongly actually. > > > Would the > > fact that I can operate my mobile phone with my left hand make me > > ambidextrous > > by your definition? > > No. > > Infact, I can probably make most things I can with > > my > > right hand with my left one, except writing and doing things > requiring > > my full > > right-handed strength, only like ten times slower and more > > inefficiently; I've > > never met anyone who's thought that make me anything but perfectly > > right- > > handed. > > > > And I think they are right. Still, when you take this definition, you > get my > figures, not anybody else's. Ambidextry is more pervasive than it > seems, > because it's usually invisible.
So where to draw the line between ambidextrous with a preference for the right (left) hand and right-(left-)handed? BTW, the article I refered to defined ambidextrous as equally proefficent with either hand. It did speak of degrees of right-(left-)handedness, so it'd didn't deny the existence of a continuum; it merely restricted the term ambidextrous to the very middle point. Andreas