Speaking in Tongues?

[MaxPC]

My wife says I speak in tongues whenever I drop a tool on my foot.

Do you as a individual believe in this as a gift of the Holy Spirit?

If you do, do you believe that there needs to be an interpreter present?

[Neto]

....
If you [believe that speaking in tongues is a gift of the Holy Spirit], do you believe that there needs to be an interpreter present?

I do believe it was a gift given by the Holy Spirit, and I also believe that the Holy Spirit is still "in the business" of giving gifts. My understanding is that if spoken out loud in a gathering of believers, there must be an interpreter. Otherwise the person should speak quietly within themselves, as to God in prayers of praise & petition.)

[Sudsy]

My wife says I speak in tongues whenever I drop a tool on my foot.

I sometimes bite my tongue when this happens.

Do you as a individual believe in this as a gift of the Holy Spirit?

Yes and according to 1 Cor 14:1 we are to 'earnestly pursue love' and also 'eagerly desire spiritual gifts'.

If you do, do you believe that there needs to be an interpreter present?

In the church out loud - yes - I Cor 14:27,28 - If anyone speaks in a tongue, two, or at most three, should speak in turn, and someone must interpret. But if there is no interpreter, he should remain silent in the church and speak only to himself and God

In private prayer - no - 1 Cor 14:2 - For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit in the spirit he speaketh mysteries.

I grew up in a tongues speaking church and only once did I hear a pastor insist that 1 Cor 14:27,28 be obeyed. Often one person would speak in tongues and then follow that up with their interpretation. And often many people spoke out loud at the same time with no interpreter. I question this according to Paul's guidance. Scripture speaks of freedom where the Spirit of the Lord is but that freedom is not to ignore scriptures that show when things are to be done in order.

[Neto]

It wasn't in this thread, possibly a "bunny trail" in the "Was it Worth Dividing the Church?" thread (which was really about infant baptism, not speaking in tongues), but several weeks ago I started through the Book of the Acts of the Holy Spirit again, and when I came to the passage about Pentecost, I thought of a discussion here (someplace) about the apparent fact that most people who speak in tongues today do not use phonemes that are not also used in their own mother tongue. The thing that struck me this time reading through chapter 2 is where those who heard them speaking in their own languages asked "How is it that they are speaking our languages, when they are are all Galileans?" How did they conclude that the speakers, whom they did not know personally, were "Galileans"? Was it because of their clothing styles? Or was it possibly that they were speaking in tongues with a Galilean accent? (We know for other Scriptural contexts that the Galilean accent was well known. We also know, linguistically, that most second language speakers, even if they have reached an appreciable level of "fluency", still speak with an accent. I would not have expected this to be true in the case where the Holy Spirit "gave the utterance", but it is perhaps possible.)

[MaxPC]

It wasn't in this thread, possibly a "bunny trail" in the "Was it Worth Dividing the Church?" thread (which was really about infant baptism, not speaking in tongues), but several weeks ago I started through the Book of the Acts of the Holy Spirit again, and when I came to the passage about Pentecost, I thought of a discussion here (someplace) about the apparent fact that most people who speak in tongues today do not use phonemes that are not also used in their own mother tongue. The thing that struck me this time reading through chapter 2 is where those who heard them speaking in their own languages asked "How is it that they are speaking our languages, when they are are all Galileans?" How did they conclude that the speakers, whom they did not know personally, were "Galileans"? Was it because of their clothing styles? Or was it possibly that they were speaking in tongues with a Galilean accent? (We know for other Scriptural contexts that the Galilean accent was well known. We also know, linguistically, that most second language speakers, even if they have reached an appreciable level of "fluency", still speak with an accent. I would not have expected this to be true in the case where the Holy Spirit "gave the utterance", but it is perhaps possible.)

Some of my very random thoughts on your excellent query:
Accents, clothing styles, hairstyles, body language and facial expressions are all used either consciously or unconsciously by the human mind to identify the person's origins. I agree with you that accents never fully go away no matter the fluency in another language. We have those moments in conversations when we are distracted due to concentrating more on formulating a concept than upon the intentional correct pronunciation. Ask any Spaniard from "Ibifa".