Absolutely not. Talk with second generation immigrants.
In the US, the “Irish accent” (scare quotes because there is of course no single accent of Ireland) is fairly well known (that is, watching American TV and movies, you encounter Irish native English speakers more than, say, South African English speakers). And in TFA it says the patient in question lives in England, where of course there is even more exposure to Irish accents.
There must be, I posit, some circuitry that can interpret the phonemes of differently accented English and translate them into whatever latent representation of words or concepts is used for thought and speech production; so it’s interesting to wonder whether what is happening is the wires are getting crossed, as it were, and receptive circuits start connecting to productive circuits that control the speech organs to produce different sounds. What’s more, TFA doesn’t say if it was a good or accurate or even geographically consistent and coherent accent.
It’s clearly wrong as second generation immigrants don’t share their parents accent.
Your accent is entirely depend on your ability to distinguish and form sounds something which kids naturally pick from their environment but become harder as you lose plasticity.
If you work out a lot you will have larger muscles and be stronger. And if you worked out a lot in the past, you'll likely be able to put on muscle stronger.
A lot of things that we experience change our bodies and brains. The question is, do they do it in a consistent way that we can pinpoint? Like finding a little structure that is more developed in people who learned Mandarin as their first language vs English, and that lets you distinguish tones better.
I thought we were considering the idea that structures helping develop an accent rather than other might be inherited as sort of extension to Chomsky theory of language. Which would be an idea somewhat worth considering but easily disprovable.