评论
打印
In 1901, David Hanig published a paper that forever changed our understanding of taste.
1901年，大卫·哈尼格发表的一篇论文永远地改变了我们对味觉的理解。
His research led to what we know today as the taste map: an illustration that divides the tongue into four separate areas.
从他的研究中诞生了我们现在所谓的“味觉图”：一张把舌头划分为四个独立区域的示意图。
According to this map, receptors at the tip of our tongues capture sweetness,
根据这张示意图，舌尖的受体捕捉甜味，
bitterness is detected at the tongue's base, and along the sides, receptors capture salty and sour sensations.
舌根检测苦味，舌头两侧的受体则捕捉咸味和酸味。
Since its invention, the taste map has been published in textbooks and newspapers.
自发明以来，味觉图被陆续刊登在了各类教科书和报纸上。
The only problem with this map, is that it's wrong. In fact, it's not even an accurate representation of what Hanig originally discovered.
这张图唯一的问题是——它是错误的。事实上，它甚至没有准确地代表哈尼格原本的发现。
The tongue map is a common misconception -- something widely believed but largely incorrect.
味觉图是个常见的错误观念--虽然广为人信，大体上却是不准确的。
So where do misconceptions like this come from, and what makes a fake fact so easy to believe?
那么，像这样的错误观念是从哪来的，虚假信息又为什么能让人如此轻易地信以为真？
It's true that the tongue map's journey begins with David Hanig.
的确，味觉图的旅程是从大卫·哈尼格开始的。
As part of his dissertation at Leipzig University, Hanig analyzed taste sensitivities across the tongue for the four basic flavors.
哈尼格在莱比锡大学的学位论文中分析了舌头各部位对四种基本味道的敏感度。
Using sucrose for sweet, quinine sulfate for bitter, hydrochloric acid for sour, and salt for salty,
他用蔗糖测甜味，用硫酸奎宁测苦味，用盐酸测酸味，用盐测咸味。
Hanig applied these stimuli to compare differences in taste thresholds across a subject's tongue.
哈尼格用这些刺激来比较被试者舌头各处的味觉阈值的差异。
He hoped to better understand the physiological mechanisms that affected these four flavors,
他希望能更好地理解影响这四种味觉的生理机制，
and his data suggested that sensitivity for each taste did in fact vary across the tongue.
而他的数据显示，舌头各部位对每种味道的敏感度确实存在差异。
The maximum sensation for sweet was located at the tongue's tip; bitter flavors were strongest at the back;
对甜味最敏感的是舌尖；对苦味最敏感的是舌根；
salt was strongest in this area, and sour at the middle of the tongue's sides.
咸味在这个区域最强，而酸味则在舌头两侧的中间。
But Hanig was careful to note that every sensation could also be tasted across the tongue,
但是哈尼格谨慎地指出了，舌头的各个部位都能尝出所有的味道，
and that the areas he identified offered very small variations in intensity.
而且他所划分出的区域之间敏感度差异非常小。
Like so many misconceptions, the tongue map represents a distortion of its original source, however the nature of that distortion can vary.
就如其它很多错误观念一样，味觉图是最初来源的一种曲解，然而这种曲解的性质可能存在差异。
Some misconceptions are comprised of disinformation -- false information intentionally designed to mislead people.
有些错误观念是由谣言组成的--刻意设计出来以误导人们的虚假信息。
But many misconceptions, including the tongue map, center on misinformation -- false or misleading information that results from unintentional inaccuracy.
但包括味觉图在内的很多错误观念围绕的是错误信息--因无意的失实导致的错误或误导性信息。
Misinformation is most often shaped by mistakes and human error, but the specific mistakes that lead to a misconception can be surprisingly varied.
最常见的错误信息是由差错和人为失误造成的，但是导致错误观念的具体错误可以有惊人的多样性。
In the case of the tongue map, Hanig's dissertation was written in German,
在味觉图的例子里，哈尼格的学位论文是用德语写的，
meaning the paper could only be understood by readers fluent in German and well versed in Hanig's small corner of academia.
意味着能真正读懂这篇文章的只有精通德语、且熟知哈尼格的学术细分领域的人。
This kicked off a game of telephone that re-shaped Haing's research every time it was shared with outside parties.
这开启了一场传话游戏，每次和外行人士分享时，哈尼格的研究都会改头换面。
Less than a decade after his dissertation, newspapers were falsely insisting that experiments could prove sweetness was imperceptible on the back of the tongue.
他的学位论文发表后不到十年，报纸已经在错误地坚称，实验能够证明舌根完全感受不到甜味。
The second culprit behind the tongue map's spread were the images that Hanig's work inspired.
导致味觉图广为流传的第二个罪魁祸首是被哈尼格的研究启发的图像。
In 1912, a rough version of the map appeared in a newspaper article that cautiously described some of the mysteries behind taste and smell research.
1912年，一张简略版的味觉图出现在了报纸上，报道小心翼翼地描述了味觉和嗅觉研究背后的一些奥秘。
Featuring clear labels across the tongue, the article's illustration simplified Hanig's more-complicated original diagrams.
这篇报道的插图在舌头上标注了明确标签，简化了哈尼格更加复杂的原始图解。
Variations of this approachable image became repeatedly cited, often without credit or nuanced consideration for Hanig's work.
这幅平易近人的图像的变体被反复引用，但往往没有注明来源，也没有对哈尼格的研究有些微斟酌。
Eventually this image spread to textbooks and classrooms as a purported truth of how we experience taste.
最终，这幅图像传到了教科书和教室里，被当成我们如何体验味觉的真相。
But perhaps the factor that most contributed to this misconception was its narrative simplicity.
但也许对这个错误观念贡献最大的因素是它叙事的简单性。
In many ways, the map complements our desire for clear stories about the world around us
在很多方面，味觉图满足了我们对用明晰的故事讲述身边世界的渴望，
a quality not always present in the sometimes-messy fields of science.
然而这一特质在时而繁杂的科学领域中却时有缺失。
For example, even the number of tastes we have is more complicated than Hanig's work suggests.
举个例子，甚至连味觉的种类也比哈尼格所提到的更加复杂。
Umami -- also known as savory -- is now considered the fifth basic taste,
旨味--又称鲜味--如今被认为是第五种基本味道，
and many still debate the existence of tastes like fatty, alkaline, metallic, and water-like.
还有很多人仍在辩论其他味道是否存在：比如脂肪味、碱味、金属味、水味等。
Once we hear a good story, it can be difficult to change how we see that information, even in the face of new evidence.
一旦我们听到一个好故事，想要改变看待它的方式是很难的，哪怕有新的证据摆在面前。
So, next time you see a convenient chart or read a surprising anecdote, try to maintain a healthy skepticism
所以下次看见一张简便图表，或读了一个惊人轶事时，请尝试保持一个健康的怀疑态度，
because misconceptions can leave a bitter taste on every part of your tongue.
因为错误观念会在你舌头上的每个角落留下一种苦涩的味道。
