Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1110-1111 (2001)
Bloom makes a strong case that word meaning acquisition does not require a dedicated word learning system. This conclusion, however, does not argue against a dedicated language acquisition system for syntax, morphology, and aspects of semantics. Critical questions are raised as to why word meaning should be so different from other aspects of language in the course of acquisition.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Malapropisms and Davidson's Theories of Literal Meaning.John Michael McGuire - 2007 - The Proceedings of the Twenty-First World Congress of Philosophy 6:93-97.
Hebb's Other Postulate at Work on Words.Fuster JoaquÍ & M. N. - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (2):288-289.
Précis of How Children Learn the Meanings of Words.Paul Bloom - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1095-1103.
Intentions and Compositionality.Steffen Borge - 2009 - SATS: Northern European Journal of Philosophy 10 (1):100-106.
The Other Way to Learn the Meaning of a Word.Sam Scott - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1117-1118.
Controversies in the Study of Word Learning.Paul Bloom - 2001 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1124-1130.
A Probabilistic Computational Model of Cross-Situational Word Learning.Afsaneh Fazly, Afra Alishahi & Suzanne Stevenson - 2010 - Cognitive Science 34 (6):1017-1063.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #346,751 of 2,152,240 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #399,478 of 2,152,240 )
How can I increase my downloads?