Recent research has demonstrated an asymmetry between the origins and endpoints of motion events, with preferential attention given to endpoints rather than beginnings of motion in both language and memory. Two experiments explore this asymmetry further and test its implications for languageproduction and comprehension. Experiment 1 shows that both adults and 4-year-old children detect fewer within-category changes in source than goal objects when tested for memory of motion events; furthermore, these groups produce fewer references to source (...) than goal objects when describing the same motion events. Experiment 2 asks whether the specificity of encoding source/goal relations differs in both spatial memory and the comprehension of novel spatial vocabulary. Results show that endpoint configuration changes are detected more accurately than source configuration changes by both adults and young children. Furthermore, when interpreting novel motion verbs, both age groups expect more fine-grained lexical distinctions in the domain of endpoint configurations compared to that of source configurations. These studies demonstrate that a cognitive-attentional bias in spatial representation and memory affects both the detail of linguistic encoding during the use of spatial language and the specificity of hypotheses about spatial referents that learners build during the acquisition of the spatial lexicon. (shrink)
Normal 0 21 false false false ES-CO X-NONE X-NONE MicrosoftInternetExplorer4 My aim in this paper is first to develop the question raised by Habermas concerning the possibilities of a history of philosophy oriented to praxis. This line of analysis will let see the internal connection between theory and praxis within the framework of a materialistic understanding of philosophy. Secondly, I will show how this question becomes a reconstruction of historical materialism in the context of an analysis of the processes which (...) characterise social transformations. With this background Habermas moves from the paradigm of production to that of language seeking a foundation Theory of Communicative Action. Reconstruction, historical materialism,systemic interaction, social interaction, production paradigm, language paradigm. (shrink)
Pickering & Garrod (P&G) put forward the interesting idea that languageproduction relies on forward modeling operating at multiple processing levels. The evidence currently available to substantiate this idea mostly concerns sensorimotor processes and not more abstract linguistic levels (e.g., syntax, semantics, phonology). The predictions that follow from the claim seem too general, in their current form, to guide specific empirical tests.
The integration of languageproduction and comprehension processes may be more specific in terms of developmental timing than Pickering & Garrod (P&G) discuss in their target article. Developmental studies do reveal links between production and comprehension, but also demonstrate that the integration of these skills changes over time. Production-comprehension links occur within specific language skills and specific time windows.
Natural language processing involves a tight coupling between action (the production of language) and perception (the comprehension of language). We argue that similar theoretical principles apply to language processing as to action/perception in general. Languageproduction is not driven solely by the speaker's intentions; language comprehension is not only input-driven; production and perception use common representations. We will relate recent findings from our languageproduction lab to the Theory of (...) Event Coding (TEC)'s principle of feature binding. (shrink)
The neurocognitive evidence that Pickering & Garrod (P&G) cite in favor of positing forward models in speech production is not compelling. The data to which they appeal either cannot be explained by forward models, or can be explained by a more parsimonious model.
: I argue that Irigaray's linguistic research is not merely supplementary to her theoretical writing, but, in its depiction of sexed linguistic "styles," illuminates Irigaray's call for a new syntax. I show the effect of this research on her analysis of the unconscious meaning of interrogative expressions. I address the question of Irigaray's standing as a social scientist and argue that attention to her method reveals her positive program in this domain.
I argue that Irigaray's linguistic research is not merely supplementary to her theoretical writing, but, in its depiction of sexed linguistic "styles," illuminates Irigaray's call for a new syntax. I show the effect of this research on her analysis of the unconscious meaning of interrogative expressions. I address the question of Irigaray's standing as a social scientist and argue that attention to her method reveals her positive program in this domain.