click below
click below
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Language and Thought
Midterm
| Question | Answer |
|---|---|
| father of psycholinguistics. brought focus to spoken language as opposed to written language | deSaussure |
| What is happening now | Synchronic |
| What has happened over time | Diachronic |
| Linguistic units have meaning only in relation to each other | Structural Approach |
| Where words can go in a sentence | Syntagmatic |
| words are given meaning also by the words that could have replaced them (as in gallon vs quart) | paradigmatic |
| Used introspection as method; father of psychology | Wundt |
| Took psychology one step closer to behaviorism by researching how people learn new things, remember things | Ebbinghaus |
| Brought behaviorism to the forefront of psychology - - anti-introspection | Watson |
| Conditioning can explain everything. Stimulus-response method. | Skinner |
| Psycholinguist. Opposed Skinner. Language cannot be learned just by hearing it. Universal grammar. | Chomsky |
| communication is the transmission of information, whether intentional or not | Harley |
| Animal has communicated when it influences the behavior or nervous system state of another animal | Dawkins |
| Transmission of information from which the sender benefits in some way from the response | Slater |
| Studied bee communication | Karl Von Frisch |
| Believed human and animal communication differed in the presence or absence of universal grammar | Chomsky |
| Language is used for doing things | Clark |
| Laid out design features of human language (all necessary for it to qualify) | Hockett |
| Syntax and semantics operate separately. Sentences can be syntactically correct but make no sense. They can be semantically correct but make no sense grammatically. | Chomsky's Autonomy of Syntax Hypothesis |
| Chinese reading room | Searle |
| Click Migration Task - does grammar influence comprehension | Garrett |
| Replicated click migration with methodology changes: phrases same length and text in front of participants | Reber & Anderson |
| Proposed the theory of modularity | Fodor |
| Modular process that outputs a shallow linguistic representation | Input System |
| non-mandatory, makes deeper meaning from shallow linguistic representations | Central Processing |
| Phoneme restoration effect (against modularity) | Warren 1970 |
| Perverse sentences: people understand them as they would usually be meant. Against modularity. 1978 | Fillenbaum |
| Spliced cough in beginning of the word, showing processing can't be totally bottom-up. Phoneme restoration extension. Against modularity. | Warren and Warren 1970 |
| Uninterpreted Sentences. People good at paraphrasing pragmatic sentences than non-pragmatic sentences | Wason 1979 |
| Normal Prose, Syntactic Prose, Random Word Order Prose. Word monitoring task. Hardest to notice the target word in random word order sentence. Against Modularity bc if it were bottom-up, all sentences would be understood sound-first. | Marslen-Wilson & Tyler, 1980 |
| Cohort Model of Word Recognition. A number of possible words, narrow it down as sound progresses. | Marslen-Wilson and Tyler, 1980 |
| Phonetic restoration appears to be the result of what our top down expectation is, combined with the acoustic sound confirming our expectation. | Samuel 1981 |
| Multiple access. Both meanings of ambiguous word accessed in processing. Held for 700 ms. | Swinney 1979 |
| Does visual system influence language processing? Apple on towel. Is language system modular? NO | Tanenhaus 1995 |
| Does visual system influence language processing? Pour egg in bowl. Is language system modular? NO - - A subtle detail in what you hear can influence where you look. | Chambers 2004 |
| High span, medium span, and low span readers. High span working memory allows readers to keep multiple meanings in mind for longer periods. - Individual differences in modularity | Miyake 1996 |
| pro-modular. “The evidence examined by” and “The defendant examined by” - - examined holds two meanings. Participants reading either sentence were slowing at the "by", though, showing that both meanings were picked up in both sentences | Ferreira & Clifton 1986 |
| requires participants to press a button to get the next word in a sentence, allowing researchers to time how long it takes participants to understand each word. | Moving Window Paradigm |
| Construction: what is being said; Utilization: how we interpret based on context | Clark & Clark |
| Direct Comprehension (author?) | Clark & Clark |
| act of speaking; intention: to have an effect | speech act |
| unit of meaning within the utterance that reflects the speaker’s intentions. | propositional content |
| given info and new info. What is known and what is being added. | thematic content |
| speech acts theory | Austin (1962); Searle (1967) |
| - Phonetic Act: making a sound (words) - Illocutionary Act: Speaker’s intentions - Perlocutionary Act: What is the effect that is intended on the listener; addressee’s subsequent action | Speech Acts Theory |
| conditions that say how, where and by whom speech acts can be performed | felicity conditions |
| Maxims (when, who) | Grice 1975 |
| implications of a speaker’s utterance that the listener must construct in order to use the utterance as intended. | conversational implicatures |
| Indirect Speech Acts (who?) | Searle |
| Categories of indirect speech acts | Gibbs |
| sarcastic expressions study | Gibbs 1986 |
| most common speech error: pause; 5-65% of speech time; faster speakers just pause less | Goldman-Eisler |
| Number of word choices affects pausing; college professors in different departments | Schachter |
| uh and um are words. people use them just as they would any conventional word | Clark & Fox Tree |
| Production Steps theory | Garrett 1975 |
| Ordinal Conflict Technique for generating speech errors AND phonemic bias technique | Baars |
| Speech error experiment: sex and shock | Motley 1985 |
| Slips that make real words | Lexical Bias |
| Slips related to what's happening currently | Semantic bias |