1 / 58

Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics

Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics . Helena H. Gao Graduate Institute of Linguistics Fu-Jen University 2005. Lecture 2; 5 Oct. 2005 Required readings:

psyche
Télécharger la présentation

Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Introduction to Cognitive Linguistics Helena H. Gao Graduate Institute of Linguistics Fu-Jen University 2005

  2. Lecture 2; 5 Oct. 2005 Required readings: • Whorf, B. L. (1956) Language, mind, and reality. In: J.B. Carroll (ed.), Language, thought and reality. selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, Massachusetts: the MIT Press. pp. 246-270. • Fodor, J. (1990). Defending the “language of thought”. In W. G. Lycan (ed.), Mind and congnition. A reader. Basil Blackwell. pp. 282-310 • Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution. Oxford University Press. Chapter 2: Language as a Mental Phenomenon. pp. 19-37 Recommended readings: • Whorf, B. L. (1956) The Relation of Habitual Thought and Behavior to Language. In: J.B. Carroll (ed.), Language, thought and reality. selected writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, Massachusetts: the MIT Press. pp. 134-159. • Shapiro, K., & Caramazza, A. (2003). The representation of grammatical categories in the brain. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7(5), 201-206.

  3. Lecture 2 5 Oct., 2005 Language, Mind, and Thought

  4. What is Thought • Thought or thinking is a mental process which allows beings to model the world, and so to deal with it effectively according to their goals, plans, ends and desires. Concepts akin to thought are sentience, consciousness, idea, and imagination. (Wikipedia Encyclopedia) The meanings of Thought revealed in its use in language: • “The thought never entered my mind." • “Thinking always made him frown."; “She paused for thought." • "19th century thought"; "Darwinian thought" • “My opinion differs from yours"; “What are your thoughts on this proposal?"

  5. What is Mind • The mind is the term most commonly used to describe the higher functions of the human brain, particularly those of which humans are subjectively conscious, such as personality, thought, reason, memory, intelligence and emotion. (Wikipedia Encyclopedia)

  6. Understanding Mind by its use in Language • His mind wandered. • The idea came to mind. • Follow your mind, not your heart. • I don't mind your behavior. • She changed her mind. • The great minds of the 20th century • Don't pay him any mind. • He had in mind to see his old teacher. • He reads to improve his mind. • Things to keep in mind when preparing a talk.

  7. Different Theories • Mind is a device that operates according to strict rules concerning the manipulation of symbols • The mind is some sort of digital processor that runs on the highly parallel neural structure of the brain • Since about the mid-1980s researchers have increasingly challenged the idea that the mind is a computational device.

  8. Three dominant theories in the past hundreds of years • The blank slate (John Locke: 1632-1704 ) • compares mind to white paper inscribed gradually by experience • The noble savage (Jean Jacques Rouseau:1712-1778) • “nothing could be more gentle than [man] in his primitive state” (Translated by G.D. Cole, 1913, p. 207) • The ghost in machine (Rene Descarte: 1596 - 1650) • belief in the division of soul and body

  9. Challenges to the trilogy of theories • Modern sciences – particularly cognitive understanding, evolutionary psychology, and neurology • “There have to be some innate mechanisms to do the learning, to achieve the socializing, to create and transmit the culture” upon which experiences are based (Pinker, August, 2005).

  10. Innate Mechanisms (Pinker, 2005) • From a cognitive perspective, such mechanisms include • a sense of spatial representation • the ability to grasp the thoughts of others • a language instinct • decision rules that govern behavior • Other human drives can only be understood within the context of evolution.

  11. Different Theories - The modularity hypothesis of language The Mind/Brain { Language General Cognition Big Modularity } Lexicon ‘irregulars’ Rule System ‘regulars’ Little Modularity

  12. Different Theories – “Mentalese” • The medium of thought is an innate, behind-the-scenes language known as mentalese. (e.g., Fodor, 1975; Pinker, 1994) • "Mentalese" is supposed to be an inner language that contains all of the conceptual resources necessary for any of the propositions that humans can grasp, think or express--in short, the basis of thought and meaning.  • Natural language would not in itself shape the human mind in any fundamental way, although the internal mentalese thoughts being represented by the natural language sentences would.

  13. Fodor's Language of Thought (LOT) Hypothesis • Including five components: • (1) Representational Realism: Thinkers have explicit representational systems; to think a thought with a given content is to be appropriately related to a representation with the right meaning, e.g., to have the belief that capitalism breeds greed is to have a representational token with the content "capitalism breeds greed" in one's belief box. 

  14. Fodor's Language of Thought (LOT) Hypothesis • Including five components: • (2) Linguistic Thought: The (main) representational system that underlies human thought, and perhaps that underlies thought in other species too, is semantically and syntactically language-like, i.e., it is similar to spoken human languages. Specifically, this representational system consists of syntactic tokens that are capable of expressing propositional meanings in virtue of the semantic compositionalilty of the syntactic elements. E.g., there are mental words that express concepts (and the like) that can be formed into true or false mental sentences. 

  15. Fodor's Language of Thought (LOT) Hypothesis • Including five components: • (3) Distinctness: The language of thought is not identical to any spoken language.  • (4) Nativism: There is a single genetically determined mental language possessed by humans, and perhaps (at least partially possessed) by all other thinking species.  • (5) Semantic Completeness: This language is expressively semantically complete--any predicate that we are able to semantically comprehend is expressible in this language. 

  16. Jackendoff, R. (2002) Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution • If UG is not learned, how does the child acquire it? The only alternative is through the structure of the brain, which is determined through a combination of genetic inheritance and the biological processes resulting from expression of the genes, the latter in turn determined by some combination of inherent structure and environmental input.

  17. Jackendoff, R. (2002) Foundations of Language: Brain, Meaning, Grammar, Evolution • Generative grammar was mistaken to assume • the syntactic component is the sole course of combinatoriality, and everything else is "interpretive.“ • The proper approach is a parallel architecture, in which phonology, syntax, and semantics are autonomous generative systems, linked by interface components. • The parallel architecture leads to an integration within linguistics, and to a far better integration with the rest of cognitive neuroscience

  18. Sapir Whorf Hypothesis • Actually, thinking is most mysterious, and by far the greatest light upon it that we have is thrown by the study of language. This study shows that the forms of a person's thoughts are controlled by inexorable laws of pattern of which he is-unconscious. These patterns are the unperceived intricate systematizations of his own language--shown readily enough by a candid comparison and contrast with other languages, especially those of a different linguistic family. … every language is a vast pattern-system, different from others, in which are culturally ordained the forms and categories by which the personality not only communicates, but also analyzes nature, notices or neglects types of relationship and phenomena, channels his reasoning, and builds the house of his consciousness. (whorf, 1956. p. 252)

  19. Different Theories • The other theory states that a person's language of thought is their native natural language -- for example, English for English speakers, French for French speakers, or Japanese for Japanese speakers.

  20. Different Theories – Sapir and Whorf Hypothesis • Our thoughts are constructed from sentences of natural language. (e.g., Sapir and Whorf on linguistic determinism; Wittgenstein's work on meaning and representation)

  21. Sapir Whorf Hypothesis • The structure of one’s language influences the manner in which one perceives and understands the world • Therefore, speakers of different languages will perceive the world differently

  22. Whorf , B. (1939). The Relation of Habitual Thought & Behavior to Language • Are our own concepts of time, space, and matter given in substantially the same form by experience to all men, or are they in part conditioned by the structure of particular languages? • Are there traceable affinities between (a) cultural and behavioral norms and (b) large-scale linguistic patterns?

  23. Degrees of Whorfianism • Linguistic Determinism (strong Whorfianism) = Language determines our perception of the world • Linguistic Relativism (weak Whorfianism) = Language biases our perception of the world

  24. Different Whorfian Questions(Gentner & Goldin-Meadow, 2003) • Language as a Category Maker: Does the language we acquire influence where we make our category distinctions? • Language as a Lens: Do grammatical characteristics of a language shape speakers’ perceptions of the world? • Language as a Toolkit: Does language augment our capacity for reasoning and representation? • Gentner, Dedre and Susan Goldin-Meadow. 2003. Whither Whorf? In Gentner & Goldin-Meadow (eds.) Language in Mind. MIT Press.

  25. Different Whorfian Questions(Gentner & Goldin-Meadow, 2003) • Language as a Category Maker: • Does the language we acquire influence where we make our category distinctions? • Sound inventory of a language and perception of speech sounds in native & foreign languages • Color terms and color perception

  26. Different Whorfian Questions(Gentner & Goldin-Meadow, 2003) • Language as a Lens: • Do grammatical characteristics of a language shape speakers’ perceptions of the world? • Spatial Frames of Reference (relative vs. absolute) • Motion Events (manner encoded in verb or PP) • Language for Spatial Location Relationships

  27. Different Whorfian Questions(Gentner & Goldin-Meadow, 2003) • Language as a Toolkit: • Does language augment our capacity for reasoning and representation? • Navigation (combining core knowledge systems info [geometric & color]) • Number (combining core knowledge systems info [small, exact numbers & large, approximate numbers]) • Theory of Mind (realizing that someone can have a different point of view than you - when does this realization come, and how?)

  28. Children’s developing theory of mind • 2 y-olds: Starting to use terms referring to mental states. • 3-4 y-olds: starting to acquire an understanding that others can hold false beliefs • 6 y-olds: starting to understand that others can have knowledge through inference

  29. Wimmer and Perner (1983) • False-Belief task • Can a child understand that someone else can have a different belief (a false belief) despite the child possessing the correct belief? • Allows researchers to separate the beliefs of the research participant from the beliefs of the model.

  30. The False-Belief Task

  31. The False-Belief Task

  32. The False-Belief Task

  33. The False-Belief Task

  34. The False-Belief Task

  35. The False-Belief Task

  36. The False-Belief Task

  37. The False-Belief Task

  38. The False-Belief Task Where will bunny look for her toy?

  39. The False-Belief Task Wherewill bunny look for her toy? • To succeed, child must separate their own beliefs (the true belief) and attribute a false-belief to Bunny.

  40. The False-Belief Task Where will bunny look for her toy? • To succeed, child must separate their own beliefs (the true belief) and attribute a false-belief to Bunny. 4-year-olds

  41. The False-Belief Task Where will bunny look for her toy? • To succeed, child must separate their own beliefs (the true belief) and attribute a false-belief to Bunny. 4-year-olds 3-year-olds

  42. False-belief task • Why do 3-year-olds fail the task? • (1) Age-related conceptual difficulties

  43. False-belief task • Why do 3-year-olds fail the task? • (1) Age-related conceptual difficulties 3-year-olds have difficulty coordinating two different representations of a single situation

  44. False-belief task • Why do 3-year-olds fail the task? • (1) Age-related conceptual difficulties Smarties task

  45. False-belief task • Why do 3-year-olds fail the task? • (1) Age-related conceptual difficulties Smarties task

  46. False-belief task • Why do 3-year-olds fail the task? • (1) Age-related conceptual difficulties Smarties task E: What do you think is in the box? C: Smarties

  47. False-belief task • Why do 3-year-olds fail the task? • (1) Age-related conceptual difficulties Smarties task E: What’s really in the box? C: Ribbons. E: What did you think was in the box before?

  48. False-belief task • Why do 3-year-olds fail the task? • (1) Age-related conceptual difficulties Smarties task E: What’s really in the box? C: Ribbons. E: What did you think was in the box before? 3-year-olds say ribbons

  49. False-belief task • Why do 3-year-olds fail the task? • (1) Age-related conceptual difficulties Appearance-Reality Task

More Related