5 found
Sort by:
  1. Irene Appelbaum (2004). Two Conceptions of the Emergence of Phonemic Structure. Foundations of Science 9 (4):415-435.
    . Björn Lindbloms account of the emergence of phonemic structure is a central reference point in contemporary discussions of the emergence of language. I argue that there are two distinct, and largely orthogonal conceptions of emergence implicit in Lindbloms account. According to one conception (causal emergence), the process by which minimal pairs are generated is crucial to the claim that phonemic structure is emergent; according to the other conception (analytic emergence), the fact that segments are an abstraction from the physical (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Irene Appelbaum (2000). Merging Information Versus Speech Recognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (3):325-326.
    Norris, McQueen & Cutler claim that all known speech recognition data can be accounted for with their autonomous model, “Merge.” But this claim is doubly misleading. (1) Although speech recognition is autonomous in their view, the Merge model is not. (2) The body of data which the Merge model accounts for, is not, in their view, speech recognition data. Footnotes1 Author is also affiliated with the Center for the Study of Language and Information, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, irenea@csli.stanford.edu.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Irene Appelbaum (1999). The Dogma of Isomorphism: A Case Study From Speech Perception. Philosophy of Science 66 (3):S250-S259.
    In this paper I provide a metatheoretical analysis of speech perception research. I argue that the central turning point in the history of speech perception research has not been well understood. While it is widely thought to mark a decisive break with what I call "the alphabetic conception of speech," I argue that it instead marks the entrenchment of this conception of speech. In addition, I argue that the alphabetic conception of speech continues to underwrite speech perception research today and (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Irene Appelbaum (1998). Analytic Isomorphism and Speech Perception. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (6):748-749.
    The suggestion that analytic isomorphism should be rejected applies especially to the domain of speech perception because (1) the guiding assumption that solving the lack of invariance problem is the key to explaining speech perception is a form of analytic isomorphism, and (2) after nearly half a century of research there is virtually no empirical evidence of isomorphism between perceptual experience and lower-level processing units.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Irene Appelbaum (1998). Fodor, Modularity, and Speech Perception. Philosophical Psychology 11 (3):317-330.
    Fodor argues that speech perception is accomplished by a module. Typically, modular processing is taken to be bottom-up processing. Yet there is ubiquitous empirical evidence that speech perception is influenced by top-down processing. Fodor attempts to resolve this conflict by denying that modular processing must be exclusively bottom-up. It is argued, however, that Fodor's attempt to reconcile top-down and modular processing fails, because: (i) it undermines Fodor's own conception of modular processing; and (ii) it cannot account for the contextually varying (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation