Displaying 1 - 100 of 133
-
Ameka, F. K. (2001). Ideophones and the nature of the adjective word class in Ewe. In F. K. E. Voeltz, & C. Kilian-Hatz (
Eds. ), Ideophones (pp. 25-48). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Ameka, F. K. (2001). Ewe. In J. Garry, & C. Rubino (
Eds. ), Facts about the world’s languages: An encyclopedia of the world's major languages past and present (pp. 207-213). New York: H.W. Wilson Press. -
Ameka, F. K. (2013). Possessive constructions in Likpe (Sɛkpɛlé). In A. Aikhenvald, & R. Dixon (
Eds. ), Possession and ownership: A crosslinguistic typology (pp. 224-242). Oxford: Oxford University Press. -
Bauer, B. L. M. (2013). Impersonal verbs. In G. K. Giannakis (
Ed. ), Encyclopedia of Ancient Greek Language and Linguistics Online (pp. 197-198). Leiden: Brill. doi:10.1163/2214-448X_eagll_SIM_00000481.Abstract
Impersonal verbs in Greek ‒ as in the other Indo-European languages ‒ exclusively feature 3rd person singular finite forms and convey one of three types of meaning: (a) meteorological conditions; (b) emotional and physical state/experience; (c) modality. In Greek, impersonal verbs predominantly convey meteorological conditions and modality.
Impersonal verbs in Greek, as in the other Indo-European languages, exclusively feature 3rd person singular finite forms and convey one of three types of me…Files private
Request files -
Bohnemeyer, J. (2001). Motionland films version 2: Referential communication task with motionland stimulus. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 97-99). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874623.Abstract
How do languages express ideas of movement, and how do they package different components of moving, such as manner and path? This task supports detailed investigation of motion descriptions. The specific study goals are: (a) the coding of “via” grounds (i.e., ground objects which the figure moves along, over, around, through, past, etc.); (b) the coding of direction changes; (c) the spontaneous segmentation of complex motion scenarios; and (d) the gestural representation of motion paths. The stimulus set is 5 simple 3D animations (7-17 seconds long) that show a ball rolling through a landscape. The task is a director-matcher task for two participants. The director describes the path of the ball in each clip to the matcher, who is asked to trace the path with a pen in a 2D picture.Additional information
2001_Motionland_films_v2.zip -
Bohnemeyer, J., Eisenbeiss, S., & Narasimhan, B. (2001). Event triads. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 100-114). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874630.Abstract
Judgments we make about how similar or different events are to each other can reveal the features we find useful in classifying the world. This task is designed to investigate how speakers of different languages classify events, and to examine how linguistic and gestural encoding relates to non-linguistic classification. Specifically, the task investigates whether speakers judge two events to be similar on the basis of (a) the path versus manner of motion, (b) sub-events versus larger complex events, (c) participant identity versus event identity, and (d) different participant roles. In the task, participants are asked to make similarity judgments concerning sets of 2D animation clips. -
Bohnemeyer, J. (2001). A questionnaire on event integration. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 177-184). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Bohnemeyer, J., Bowerman, M., & Brown, P. (2001). Cut and break clips. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 90-96). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874626.Abstract
How do different languages treat a particular semantic domain? It has already been established that languages have widely varied words for talking about “cutting” and “breaking” things: for example, English has a very general verb break, but K’iche’ Maya has many different ‘break’ verbs that are used for different kinds of objects (e.g., brittle, flexible, long). The aim of this task is to map out cross-linguistic lexicalisation patterns in the cutting/breaking domain. The stimuli comprise 61 short video clips that show one or two actors breaking various objects (sticks, carrots, pieces of cloth or string, etc.) using various instruments (a knife, a hammer, an axe, their hands, etc.), or situations in which various kinds of objects break spontaneously. The clips are used to elicit descriptions of actors’ actions and the state changes that the objects undergo.Additional information
2001_Cut_and_break_clips.zip -
Bohnemeyer, J. (2001). Toponym questionnaire. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 55-61). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874620.Abstract
Place-names (toponyms) are at the intersection of spatial language, culture, and cognition. This questionnaire prepares the researcher to answer three overarching questions: how to formally identify place-names in the research language (i.e. according to morphological and syntactic criteria); what places place-names are employed to refer to (e.g. human settlements, landscape sites); and how places are semantically construed for this purpose. The questionnaire can in principle be answered using an existing database. However, additional elicitation with language consultants is recommended. -
Bosker, H. R. (2013). Juncture (prosodic). In G. Khan (
Ed. ), Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics (pp. 432-434). Leiden: Brill.Abstract
Prosodic juncture concerns the compartmentalization and partitioning of syntactic entities in spoken discourse by means of prosody. It has been argued that the Intonation Unit, defined by internal criteria and prosodic boundary phenomena (e.g., final lengthening, pitch reset, pauses), encapsulates the basic structural unit of spoken Modern Hebrew. -
Bosker, H. R. (2013). Sibilant consonants. In G. Khan (
Ed. ), Encyclopedia of Hebrew Language and Linguistics (pp. 557-561). Leiden: Brill.Abstract
Fricative consonants in Hebrew can be divided into bgdkpt and sibilants (ז, ס, צ, שׁ, שׂ). Hebrew sibilants have been argued to stem from Proto-Semitic affricates, laterals, interdentals and /s/. In standard Israeli Hebrew the sibilants are pronounced as [s] (ס and שׂ), [ʃ] (שׁ), [z] (ז), [ʦ] (צ). -
Bowerman, M. (1982). Reorganizational processes in lexical and syntactic development. In E. Wanner, & L. Gleitman (
Eds. ), Language acquisition: The state of the art (pp. 319-346). New York: Academic Press. -
Bowerman, M., & Choi, S. (2001). Shaping meanings for language: Universal and language-specific in the acquisition of semantic categories. In M. Bowerman, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 475-511). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Bowerman, M. (1982). Starting to talk worse: Clues to language acquisition from children's late speech errors. In S. Strauss (
Ed. ), U shaped behavioral growth (pp. 101-145). New York: Academic Press. -
Brown, P. (2013). La estructura conversacional y la adquisición del lenguaje: El papel de la repetición en el habla de los adultos y niños tzeltales. In L. de León Pasquel (
Ed. ), Nuevos senderos en el studio de la adquisición de lenguas mesoamericanas: Estructura, narrativa y socialización (pp. 35-82). Mexico: CIESAS-UNAM.Abstract
This is a translation of the Brown 1998 article in Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 'Conversational structure and language acquisition: The role of repetition in Tzeltal adult and child speech'.Files private
Request files -
Brown, P. (2001). Learning to talk about motion UP and DOWN in Tzeltal: Is there a language-specific bias for verb learning? In M. Bowerman, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 512-543). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Abstract
The spatial vocabulary of the Mayan language Tzeltal is dominated by an Absolute system of spatial reckoning, whereby an "uphill/downhill" coordinate abstracted from the lay of the land is used to reckon spatial relationships on the horizontal in both small-scale and long distance space. This system is used in lieu of a Front/Back/Left/Right system which does not exist in this language. The spatial vocabulary dedicated to this system (which I refer to in general as the UP/DOWN vocabulary) includes intransitive motion verbs (roughly translatable as "ascend"/"descend"), their transitivized counterparts ("make it ascend/descend"), directional adverbs ("uphillwards"/"downhillwards"), and possessed relational nouns ("uphill/downhill in relation to it"). This same vocabulary applies to spatial relations on the vertical axis. Two seemingly contradictory observations about children's early meanings for the spatial verbs dedicated to this system motivate the proposal put forward in this paper. On the one hand, Tzeltal children's UP/DOWN vocabulary shows very early sensitivity to the semantic structure of the language they are learning: the meanings for these verbs are from the first usages attached to the slope of the land, and to particular places; there is no evidence of an initial preference for the vertical meaning. On the other hand, children's meanings remain for a long time too specific, and errors of interpretation/production (using the verbs to mean 'local slope of land' rather than 'overall N/S slope of land direction) are evident in verbal productions of some children as late as age 7 or 8. The proposal is made that the highly specific nature of Tzeltal verbs at the basic level influences the children's hypotheses about what kinds of meanings verbs can have. -
Brown, P. (2001). Repetition. In K. Duranti (
Ed. ), Key terms in language and culture (pp. 219-222). Oxford: Blackwell.Abstract
This is a reprint of the Brown 1999 article. -
Brown, P., Pfeiler, B., de León, L., & Pye, C. (2013). The acquisition of agreement in four Mayan languages. In E. Bavin, & S. Stoll (
Eds. ), The acquisition of ergativity (pp. 271-306). Amsterdam: Benjamins.Abstract
This paper presents results of a comparative project documenting the development of verbal agreement inflections in children learning four different Mayan languages: K’iche’, Tzeltal, Tzotzil, and Yukatek. These languages have similar inflectional paradigms: they have a generally agglutinative morphology, with transitive verbs obligatorily marked with separate cross-referencing inflections for the two core arguments (‘ergative’ and ‘absolutive’). Verbs are also inflected for aspect and mood, and they carry a ‘status suffix’ which generally marks verb transitivity and mood. At a more detailed level, the four languages differ strikingly in the realization of cross-reference marking. For each language, we examined longitudinal language production data from two children at around 2;0, 2;6, 3;0, and 3;6 years of age. We relate differences in the acquisition patterns of verbal morphology in the languages to 1) the placement of affixes, 2) phonological and prosodic prominence, 3) language-specific constraints on the various forms of the affixes, and 4) consistent vs. split ergativity, and conclude that prosodic salience accounts provide th ebest explanation for the acquisition patterns in these four languages.Files private
Request files -
Brown, P. (2001). Politeness and language. In N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (
Eds. ), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp. 11620-11624). Oxford: Elsevier Sciences.Abstract
This is an encyclopedia entry surveying research and theoretical approaches to politeness phenomena in language usage. -
Clifton, C. J., Meyer, A. S., Wurm, L. H., & Treiman, R. (2013). Language comprehension and production. In A. F. Healy, & R. W. Proctor (
Eds. ), Handbook of Psychology, Volume 4, Experimental Psychology. 2nd Edition (pp. 523-547). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Abstract
In this chapter, we survey the processes of recognizing and producing words and of understanding and creating sentences. Theory and research on these topics have been shaped by debates about how various sources of information are integrated in these processes, and about the role of language structure, as analyzed in the discipline of linguistics. In this chapter, we describe current views of fluent language users' comprehension of spoken and written language and their production of spoken language. We review what we consider to be the most important findings and theories in psycholinguistics, returning again and again to the questions of modularity and the importance of linguistic knowledge. Although we acknowledge the importance of social factors in language use, our focus is on core processes such as parsing and word retrieval that are not necessarily affected by such factors. We do not have space to say much about the important fields of developmental psycholinguistics, which deals with the acquisition of language by children, or applied psycholinguistics, which encompasses such topics as language disorders and language teaching. Although we recognize that there is burgeoning interest in the measurement of brain activity during language processing and how language is represented in the brain, space permits only occasional pointers to work in neuropsychology and the cognitive neuroscience of language. For treatment of these topics, and others, the interested reader could begin with two recent handbooks of psycholinguistics (Gaskell, 2007; Traxler & Gemsbacher, 2006) and a handbook of cognitive neuroscience (Gazzaniga, 2004). -
Cutler, A. (2001). Entries on: Acquisition of language by non-human primates; bilingualism; compound (linguistic); development of language-specific phonology; gender (linguistic); grammar; infant speech perception; language; lexicon; morphology; motor theory of speech perception; perception of second languages; phoneme; phonological store; phonology; prosody; sign language; slips of the tongue; speech perception; speech production; stress (linguistic); syntax; word recognition; words. In P. Winn (
Ed. ), Dictionary of biological psychology. London: Routledge. -
Cutler, A. (1982). Prosody and sentence perception in English. In J. Mehler, E. C. Walker, & M. Garrett (
Eds. ), Perspectives on mental representation: Experimental and theoretical studies of cognitive processes and capacities (pp. 201-216). Hillsdale, N.J: Erlbaum. -
Cutler, A., McQueen, J. M., Norris, D., & Somejuan, A. (2001). The roll of the silly ball. In E. Dupoux (
Ed. ), Language, brain and cognitive development: Essays in honor of Jacques Mehler (pp. 181-194). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. -
Dediu, D., Cysouw, M., Levinson, S. C., Baronchelli, A., Christiansen, M. H., Croft, W., Evans, N., Garrod, S., Gray, R., Kandler, A., & Lieven, E. (2013). Cultural evolution of language. In P. J. Richerson, & M. H. Christiansen (
Eds. ), Cultural evolution: Society, technology, language, and religion. Strüngmann Forum Reports, vol. 12 (pp. 303-332). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Abstract
This chapter argues that an evolutionary cultural approach to language not only has already proven fruitful, but it probably holds the key to understand many puzzling aspects of language, its change and origins. The chapter begins by highlighting several still common misconceptions about language that might seem to call into question a cultural evolutionary approach. It explores the antiquity of language and sketches a general evolutionary approach discussing the aspects of function, fi tness, replication, and selection, as well the relevant units of linguistic evolution. In this context, the chapter looks at some fundamental aspects of linguistic diversity such as the nature of the design space, the mechanisms generating it, and the shape and fabric of language. Given that biology is another evolutionary system, its complex coevolution with language needs to be understood in order to have a proper theory of language. Throughout the chapter, various challenges are identifi ed and discussed, sketching promising directions for future research. The chapter ends by listing the necessary data, methods, and theoretical developments required for a grounded evolutionary approach to language. -
Dediu, D. (2013). Genes: Interactions with language on three levels — Inter-individual variation, historical correlations and genetic biasing. In P.-M. Binder, & K. Smith (
Eds. ), The language phenomenon: Human communication from milliseconds to millennia (pp. 139-161). Berlin: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-36086-2_7.Abstract
The complex inter-relationships between genetics and linguistics encompass all four scales highlighted by the contributions to this book and, together with cultural transmission, the genetics of language holds the promise to offer a unitary understanding of this fascinating phenomenon. There are inter-individual differences in genetic makeup which contribute to the obvious fact that we are not identical in the way we understand and use language and, by studying them, we will be able to both better treat and enhance ourselves. There are correlations between the genetic configuration of human groups and their languages, reflecting the historical processes shaping them, and there also seem to exist genes which can influence some characteristics of language, biasing it towards or against certain states by altering the way language is transmitted across generations. Besides the joys of pure knowledge, the understanding of these three aspects of genetics relevant to language will potentially trigger advances in medicine, linguistics, psychology or the understanding of our own past and, last but not least, a profound change in the way we regard one of the emblems of being human: our capacity for language. -
Dingemanse, M. (2013). Wie wir mit Sprache malen - How to paint with language. Forschungsbericht 2013 - Max-Planck-Institut für Psycholinguistik. In Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Jahrbuch 2013. München: Max Planck Society for the Advancement of Science. Retrieved from http://www.mpg.de/6683977/Psycholinguistik_JB_2013.
Abstract
Words evolve not as blobs of ink on paper but in face to face interaction. The nature of language as fundamentally interactive and multimodal is shown by the study of ideophones, vivid sensory words that thrive in conversations around the world. The ways in which these Lautbilder enable precise communication about sensory knowledge has for the first time been studied in detail. It turns out that we can paint with language, and that the onomatopoeia we sometimes classify as childish might be a subset of a much richer toolkit for depiction in speech, available to us all. -
Enfield, N. J., Levinson, S. C., & Meira, S. (2001). Recognitional deixis. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 78-81). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874641.Abstract
“Recognitional” words and constructions enshrine our systematic reliance on shared knowledge in dedicated morphological forms and usage patterns. For example, English has a large range of terms for use when a speaker cannot locate the word or name for something or someone (e.g., whatsit, what’s-his-name), but thinks that the interlocutor knows, or can easily work out, what the speaker is talking about. This task aims to identify and investigate these kinds of expressions in the research language, including their grammaticalised status, meaning, distribution, and productivity. The task consists of a questionnaire with examples of relevant hypothetical scenarios that can be used in eliciting the relevant terms. The researcher is then encouraged to pursue further questions in regard to these items. -
Enfield, N. J. (2001). Body. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 62-77). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874633.Abstract
This task investigates the extensional meaning of body part terms, in particular the terms for the upper and lower limbs. Two questions are addressed, namely (i) are the boundaries of these body parts universal, guided by proposed universals of object recognition? (ii) How can we compare the extensional meanings of body part terms within and across different systems of nomenclature? Consultants receive booklets with line drawings of a body and are asked to colour in specific parts of the body.Additional information
http://fieldmanuals.mpi.nl/volumes/2001/body/ -
Enfield, N. J. (2013). Doing fieldwork on the body, language, and communication. In C. Müller, E. Fricke, S. Ladewig, A. Cienki, D. McNeill, & S. Teßendorf (
Eds. ), Handbook Body – Language – Communication. Volume 1 (pp. 974-981). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Enfield, N. J. (2013). A ‘Composite Utterances’ approach to meaning. In C. Müller, E. Fricke, S. Ladewig, A. Cienki, D. McNeill, & S. Teßendorf (
Eds. ), Handbook Body – Language – Communication. Volume 1 (pp. 689-706). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Enfield, N. J., Dingemanse, M., Baranova, J., Blythe, J., Brown, P., Dirksmeyer, T., Drew, P., Floyd, S., Gipper, S., Gisladottir, R. S., Hoymann, G., Kendrick, K. H., Levinson, S. C., Magyari, L., Manrique, E., Rossi, G., San Roque, L., & Torreira, F. (2013). Huh? What? – A first survey in 21 languages. In M. Hayashi, G. Raymond, & J. Sidnell (
Eds. ), Conversational repair and human understanding (pp. 343-380). New York: Cambridge University Press.Abstract
Introduction
A comparison of conversation in twenty-one languages from around the world reveals commonalities and differences in the way that people do open-class other-initiation of repair (Schegloff, Jefferson, and Sacks, 1977; Drew, 1997). We find that speakers of all of the spoken languages in the sample make use of a primary interjection strategy (in English it is Huh?), where the phonetic form of the interjection is strikingly similar across the languages: a monosyllable featuring an open non-back vowel [a, æ, ə, ʌ], often nasalized, usually with rising intonation and sometimes an [h-] onset. We also find that most of the languages have another strategy for open-class other-initiation of repair, namely the use of a question word (usually “what”). Here we find significantly more variation across the languages. The phonetic form of the question word involved is completely different from language to language: e.g., English [wɑt] versus Cha'palaa [ti] versus Duna [aki]. Furthermore, the grammatical structure in which the repair-initiating question word can or must be expressed varies within and across languages. In this chapter we present data on these two strategies – primary interjections like Huh? and question words like What? – with discussion of possible reasons for the similarities and differences across the languages. We explore some implications for the notion of repair as a system, in the context of research on the typology of language use.
The general outline of this chapter is as follows. We first discuss repair as a system across languages and then introduce the focus of the chapter: open-class other-initiation of repair. A discussion of the main findings follows, where we identify two alternative strategies in the data: an interjection strategy (Huh?) and a question word strategy (What?). Formal features and possible motivations are discussed for the interjection strategy and the question word strategy in order. A final section discusses bodily behavior including posture, eyebrow movements and eye gaze, both in spoken languages and in a sign language.
-
Enfield, N. J., & Bohnemeyer, J. (2001). Hidden colour-chips task: Demonstratives, attention, and interaction. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 21-28). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874636.Abstract
Demonstratives are typically described as encoding degrees of physical distance between the object referred to, and the speaker or addressee. For example, this in English is used to talk about things that are physically near the speaker, and that for things that are not. But is this how speakers really choose between these words in actual talk? This task aims to generate spontaneous language data concerning deixis, gesture, and demonstratives, and to investigate the significance of different factors (e.g., physical distance, attention) in demonstrative selection. In the presence of one consultant (the “memoriser”), sixteen colour chips are hidden under objects in a specified array. Another consultant enters the area and asks the memoriser to recount the locations of the chips. The task is designed to create a situation where the speaker genuinely attempts to manipulate the addressee’s attention on objects in the immediate physical space. -
Enfield, N. J. (2013). Hippie, interrupted. In J. Barker, & J. Lindquist (
Eds. ), Figures of Southeast Asian modernity (pp. 101-103). Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. -
Enfield, N. J. (2001). Linguistic evidence for a Lao perspective on facial expression of emotion. In J. Harkins, & A. Wierzbicka (
Eds. ), Emotions in crosslinguistic perspective (pp. 149-166). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Enfield, N. J. (2001). On genetic and areal linguistics in Mainland South-East Asia: Parallel polyfunctionality of ‘acquire’. In A. Y. Aikhenvald, & R. M. Dixon (
Eds. ), Areal diffusion and genetic inheritance: Problems in comparative linguistics (pp. 255-290). Oxford University Press. -
Enfield, N. J. (2013). Reference in conversation. In J. Sidnell, & T. Stivers (
Eds. ), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 433-454). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781118325001.ch21.Abstract
This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Lexical Selection in Reference: Introductory Examples of Reference to Times Multiple “Preferences” Future Directions Conclusion -
Enfield, N. J., & Dunn, M. (2001). Supplements to the Wilkins 1999 demonstrative questionnaire. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 82-84). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874638. -
Fernald, A., McRoberts, G. W., & Swingley, D. (2001). Infants' developing competence in recognizing and understanding words in fluent speech. In J. Weissenborn, & B. Höhle (
Eds. ), Approaches to Bootstrapping: Phonological, lexical, syntactic and neurophysiological aspects of early language acquisition. Volume 1 (pp. 97-123). Amsterdam: Benjamins. -
Fisher, S. E. (2013). Building bridges between genes, brains and language. In J. J. Bolhuis, & M. Everaert (
Eds. ), Birdsong, speech and language: Exploring the evolution of mind and brain (pp. 425-454). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. -
Fisher, S. E., & Smith, S. (2001). Progress towards the identification of genes influencing developmental dyslexia. In A. Fawcett (
Ed. ), Dyslexia: Theory and good practice (pp. 39-64). London: Whurr. -
Floyd, S. (2013). Semantic transparency and cultural calquing in the Northwest Amazon. In P. Epps, & K. Stenzel (
Eds. ), Upper Rio Negro: Cultural and linguistic interaction in northwestern Amazonia (pp. 271-308). Rio de Janiero: Museu do Indio. Retrieved from http://www.museunacional.ufrj.br/ppgas/livros_ele.html.Abstract
The ethnographic literature has sometimes described parts of the northwest Amazon as areas of shared culture across linguistic groups. This paper illustrates how a principle of semantic transparency across languages is a key means of establishing elements of a common regional culture through practices like the calquing of ethnonyms and toponyms so that they are semantically, but not phonologically, equivalent across languages. It places the upper Rio Negro area of the northwest Amazon in a general discussion of cross-linguistic naming practices in South America and considers the extent to which a preference for semantic transparency can be linked to cases of widespread cultural ‘calquing’, in which culturally-important meanings are kept similar across different linguistic systems. It also addresses the principle of semantic transparency beyond specific referential phrases and into larger discourse structures. It concludes that an attention to semiotic practices in multilingual settings can provide new and more complex ways of thinking about the idea of shared culture. -
Gullberg, M., & Holmqvist, K. (2001). Eye tracking and the perception of gestures in face-to-face interaction vs on screen. In C. Cavé, I. Guaïtella, & S. Santi (
Eds. ), Oralité et gestualité (2001) (pp. 381-384). Paris, France: Editions Harmattan. -
Hagoort, P., & Ramsey, N. (2001). De gereedschapskist van de cognitieve neurowetenschap. In F. Wijnen, & F. Verstraten (
Eds. ), Het brein te kijk (pp. 39-67). Lisse: Swets & Zeitlinger. -
Hagoort, P. (2001). De verbeelding aan de macht: Hoe het menselijk taalvermogen zichtbaar wordt in de (beeld) analyse van hersenactiviteit. In J. Joosse (
Ed. ), Biologie en psychologie: Naar vruchtbare kruisbestuivingen (pp. 41-60). Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen. -
Hagoort, P., & Poeppel, D. (2013). The infrastructure of the language-ready brain. In M. A. Arbib (
Ed. ), Language, music, and the brain: A mysterious relationship (pp. 233-255). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Abstract
This chapter sketches in very general terms the cognitive architecture of both language comprehension and production, as well as the neurobiological infrastructure that makes the human brain ready for language. Focus is on spoken language, since that compares most directly to processing music. It is worth bearing in mind that humans can also interface with language as a cognitive system using sign and text (visual) as well as Braille (tactile); that is to say, the system can connect with input/output processes in any sensory modality. Language processing consists of a complex and nested set of subroutines to get from sound to meaning (in comprehension) or meaning to sound (in production), with remarkable speed and accuracy. The fi rst section outlines a selection of the major constituent operations, from fractionating the input into manageable units to combining and unifying information in the construction of meaning. The next section addresses the neurobiological infrastructure hypothesized to form the basis for language processing. Principal insights are summarized by building on the notion of “brain networks” for speech–sound processing, syntactic processing, and the construction of meaning, bearing in mind that such a neat three-way subdivision overlooks important overlap and shared mechanisms in the neural architecture subserving language processing. Finally, in keeping with the spirit of the volume, some possible relations are highlighted between language and music that arise from the infrastructure developed here. Our characterization of language and its neurobiological foundations is necessarily selective and brief. Our aim is to identify for the reader critical questions that require an answer to have a plausible cognitive neuroscience of language processing. -
Hammarström, H., & O'Connor, L. (2013). Dependency sensitive typological distance. In L. Borin, & A. Saxena (
Eds. ), Approaches to measuring linguistic differences (pp. 337-360). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Hammarström, H. (2013). Noun class parallels in Kordofanian and Niger-Congo: Evidence of genealogical inheritance? In T. C. Schadeberg, & R. M. Blench (
Eds. ), Nuba Mountain Language Studies (pp. 549-570). Köln: Köppe. -
Haun, D. B. M., & Over, H. (2013). Like me: A homophily-based account of human culture. In P. J. Richerson, & M. H. Christiansen (
Eds. ), Cultural Evolution: Society, technology, language, and religion (pp. 75-85). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. -
Hayano, K. (2013). Question design in conversation. In J. Sidnell, & T. Stivers (
Eds. ), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 395-414). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781118325001.ch19.Abstract
This chapter contains sections titled: Introduction Questions Questioning and the Epistemic Gradient Presuppositions, Agenda Setting and Preferences Social Actions Implemented by Questions Questions as Building Blocks of Institutional Activities Future Directions -
Hellwig, F. M., & Lüpke, F. (2001). Caused positions. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 126-128). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874644.Abstract
What kinds of resources to languages have for describing location and position? For some languages, verbs have an important role to play in describing different kinds of situations (e.g., whether a bottle is standing or lying on the table). This task is designed to examine the use of positional verbs in locative constructions, with respect to the presence or absence of a human “positioner”. Participants are asked to describe video clips showing locative states that occur spontaneously, or because of active interference from a person. The task follows on from two earlier tools for the elicitation of static locative descriptions (BowPed and the Ameka picture book task). A number of additional variables (e.g. canonical v. non-canonical orientation of the figure) are also targeted in the stimuli set.Additional information
2001_Caused_positions.zip -
Hofmeister, P., & Norcliffe, E. (2013). Does resumption facilitate sentence comprehension? In P. Hofmeister, & E. Norcliffe (
Eds. ), The core and the periphery: Data-driven perspectives on syntax inspired by Ivan A. Sag (pp. 225-246). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications. -
Huettig, F. (2013). Young children’s use of color information during language-vision mapping. In B. R. Kar (
Ed. ), Cognition and brain development: Converging evidence from various methodologies (pp. 368-391). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association Press. -
Jordan, F. M., van Schaik, C. P., Francois, P., Gintis, H., Haun, D. B. M., Hruschka, D. H., Janssen, M. A., Kitts, J. A., Lehmann, L., Mathew, S., Richerson, P. J., Turchin, P., & Wiessner, P. (2013). Cultural evolution of the structure of human groups. In P. J. Richerson, & M. H. Christiansen (
Eds. ), Cultural Evolution: Society, technology, language, and religion (pp. 87-116). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. -
Jordan, F. (2013). Comparative phylogenetic methods and the study of pattern and process in kinship. In P. McConvell, I. Keen, & R. Hendery (
Eds. ), Kinship systems: Change and reconstruction (pp. 43-58). Salt Lake City, UT: University of Utah Press.Abstract
Anthropology began by comparing aspects of kinship across cultures, while linguists interested in semantic domains such as kinship necessarily compare across languages. In this chapter I show how phylogenetic comparative methods from evolutionary biology can be used to study evolutionary processes relating to kinship and kinship terminologies across language and culture. -
Jordens, P. (2013). Dummies and auxiliaries in the acquisition of L1 and L2 Dutch. In E. Blom, I. Van de Craats, & J. Verhagen (
Eds. ), Dummy Auxiliaries in First and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 341-368). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Kallmeyer, L., Osswald, R., & Van Valin Jr., R. D. (2013). Tree wrapping for Role and Reference Grammar. In G. Morrill, & M.-J. Nederhof (
Eds. ), Formal grammar: 17th and 18th International Conferences, FG 2012/2013, Opole, Poland, August 2012: revised Selected Papers, Düsseldorf, Germany, August 2013: proceedings (pp. 175-190). Heidelberg: Springer. -
Kidd, E., Bavin, S. L., & Brandt, S. (2013). The role of the lexicon in the development of the language processor. In D. Bittner, & N. Ruhlig (
Eds. ), Lexical bootstrapping: The role of lexis and semantics in child language development (pp. 217-244). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. -
Kita, S., Danziger, E., & Stolz, C. (2001). Cultural specificity of spatial schemas, as manifested in spontaneous gestures. In M. Gattis (
Ed. ), Spatial Schemas and Abstract Thought (pp. 115-146). Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press. -
Kita, S. (2001). Locally-anchored spatial gestures, version 2: Historical description of the local environment as a gesture elicitation task. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 132-135). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874647.Abstract
Gesture is an integral part of face-to-face communication, and provides a rich area for cross-cultural comparison. “Locally-anchored spatial gestures” are gestures that are roughly oriented to the actual geographical direction of referents. For example, such gestures may point to a location or a thing, trace the shape of a path, or indicate the direction of a particular area. The goal of this task is to elicit locally-anchored spatial gestures across different cultures. The task follows an interview format, where one participant prompts another to talk in detail about a specific area that the main speaker knows well. The data can be used for additional purposes such as the investigation of demonstratives. -
Kita, S. (2001). Recording recommendations for gesture studies. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 130-131). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Klein, W. (2013). Basic variety. In P. Robinson (
Ed. ), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp. 64-65). New York: Routledge. -
Klein, W. (2001). Das Ende vor Augen: Deutsch als Wissenschaftssprache. In F. Debus, F. Kollmann, & U. Pörken (
Eds. ), Deutsch als Wissenschaftssprache im 20. Jahrhundert (pp. 289-293). Mainz: Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur. -
Klein, W. (2001). Deiktische Orientierung. In M. Haspelmath, E. König, W. Oesterreicher, & W. Raible (
Eds. ), Sprachtypologie und sprachliche Universalien: Vol. 1/1 (pp. 575-590). Berlin: de Gruyter. -
Klein, W. (2001). Elementary forms of linguistic organisation. In S. Ward, & J. Trabant (
Eds. ), The origins of language (pp. 81-102). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. -
Klein, W. (2001). Die Linguistik ist anders geworden. In S. Anschütz, S. Kanngießer, & G. Rickheit (
Eds. ), A Festschrift for Manfred Briegel: Spektren der Linguistik (pp. 51-72). Wiesbaden: Deutscher Universitätsverlag. -
Klein, W. (2001). Lexicology and lexicography. In N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (
Eds. ), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences: Vol. 13 (pp. 8764-8768). Amsterdam: Elsevier Science. -
Klein, W. (1982). Local deixis in route directions. In R. Jarvella, & W. Klein (
Eds. ), Speech, place, and action: Studies in deixis and related topics (pp. 161-182). New York: Wiley. -
Klein, W. (2013). European Science Foundation (ESF) Project. In P. Robinson (
Ed. ), The Routledge encyclopedia of second language acquisition (pp. 220-221). New York: Routledge. -
Klein, W. (2001). Second language acquisition. In N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (
Eds. ), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences: Vol. 20 (pp. 13768-13771). Amsterdam: Elsevier science. -
Klein, W., & Extra, G. (1982). Second language acquisition by adult immigrants: A European Science Foundation project. In R. E. V. Stuip, & W. Zwanenburg (
Eds. ), Handelingen van het zevenendertigste Nederlandse Filologencongres (pp. 127-136). Amsterdam: APA-Holland Universiteitspers. -
Klein, W. (2001). Time and again. In C. Féry, & W. Sternefeld (
Eds. ), Audiatur vox sapientiae: A festschrift for Arnim von Stechow (pp. 267-286). Berlin: Akademie Verlag. -
Klein, W. (2001). Typen und Konzepte des Spracherwerbs. In L. Götze, G. Helbig, G. Henrici, & H. Krumm (
Eds. ), Deutsch als Fremdsprache (pp. 604-616). Berlin: de Gruyter. -
Klein, W. (2013). Von Reichtum und Armut des deutschen Wortschatzes. In Deutsche Akademie für Sprache und Dichtung, & Union der deutschen Akademien der Wissenschaften (
Eds. ), Reichtum und Armut der deutschen Sprache (pp. 15-55). Boston: de Gruyter. -
Kristoffersen, J. H., Troelsgard, T., & Zwitserlood, I. (2013). Issues in sign language lexicography. In H. Jackson (
Ed. ), The Bloomsbury companion to lexicography (pp. 259-283). London: Bloomsbury. -
Ladd, D. R., & Dediu, D. (2013). Genes and linguistic tone. In H. Pashler (
Ed. ), Encyclopedia of the mind (pp. 372-373). London: Sage Publications.Abstract
It is usually assumed that the language spoken by a human community is independent of the community's genetic makeup, an assumption supported by an overwhelming amount of evidence. However, the possibility that language is influenced by its speakers' genes cannot be ruled out a priori, and a recently discovered correlation between the geographic distribution of tone languages and two human genes seems to point to a genetically influenced bias affecting language. This entry describes this specific correlation and highlights its major implications. Voice pitch has a variety of communicative functions. Some of these are probably universal, such as conveying information about the speaker's sex, age, and emotional state. In many languages, including the European languages, voice pitch also conveys certain sentence-level meanings such as signaling that an utterance is a question or an exclamation; these uses of pitch are known as intonation. Some languages, however, known as tone languages, nian ... -
Lausberg, H., & Sloetjes, H. (2013). NEUROGES in combination with the annotation tool ELAN. In H. Lausberg (
Ed. ), Understanding body movement: A guide to empirical research on nonverbal behaviour with an introduction to the NEUROGES coding system (pp. 199-200). Frankfurt a/M: Lang. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (2001). The architecture of normal spoken language use. In G. Gupta (
Ed. ), Cognitive science: Issues and perspectives (pp. 457-473). New Delhi: Icon Publications. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1982). Cognitive styles in the use of spatial direction terms. In R. Jarvella, & W. Klein (
Eds. ), Speech, place, and action: Studies in deixis and related topics (pp. 251-268). Chichester: Wiley. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (1982). Linearization in describing spatial networks. In S. Peters, & E. Saarinen (
Eds. ), Processes, beliefs, and questions (pp. 199-220). Dordrecht - Holland: D. Reidel.Abstract
The topic of this paper is the way in which speakers order information in discourse. I will refer to this issue with the term "linearization", and will begin with two types of general remarks. The first one concerns the scope and relevance of the problem with reference to some existing literature. The second set of general remarks will be about the place of linearization in a theory of the speaker. The following, and main part of this paper, will be a summary report of research of linearization in a limited, but well-defined domain of discourse, namely the description of spatial networks. -
Levelt, W. J. M. (2001). Relations between speech production and speech perception: Some behavioral and neurological observations. In E. Dupoux (
Ed. ), Language, brain and cognitive development: Essays in honour of Jacques Mehler (pp. 241-256). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Motion Verb Stimulus (Moverb) version 2. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 9-13). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.3513706.Abstract
How do languages express ideas of movement, and how do they package different components of this domain, such as manner and path of motion? This task uses one large set of stimuli to gain knowledge of certain key aspects of motion verb meanings in the target language, and expands the investigation beyond simple verbs (e.g., go) to include the semantics of motion predications complete with adjuncts (e.g., go across something). Consultants are asked to view and briefly describe 96 animations of a few seconds each. The task is designed to get linguistic elicitations of motion predications under contrastive comparison with other animations in the same set. Unlike earlier tasks, the stimuli focus on inanimate moving items or “figures” (in this case, a ball).Additional information
2001_Motion_verb_stimulus_version_2.zip -
Levinson, S. C. (1982). Caste rank and verbal interaction in Western Tamilnadu. In D. B. McGilvray (
Ed. ), Caste ideology and interaction (pp. 98-203). Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2013). Action formation and ascription. In T. Stivers, & J. Sidnell (
Eds. ), The handbook of conversation analysis (pp. 103-130). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781118325001.ch6.Abstract
Since the core matrix for language use is interaction, the main job of language
is not to express propositions or abstract meanings, but to deliver actions.
For in order to respond in interaction we have to ascribe to the prior turn
a primary ‘action’ – variously thought of as an ‘illocution’, ‘speech act’, ‘move’,
etc. – to which we then respond. The analysis of interaction also relies heavily
on attributing actions to turns, so that, e.g., sequences can be characterized in
terms of actions and responses. Yet the process of action ascription remains way
understudied. We don’t know much about how it is done, when it is done, nor even
what kind of inventory of possible actions might exist, or the degree to which they
are culturally variable.
The study of action ascription remains perhaps the primary unfulfilled task in
the study of language use, and it needs to be tackled from conversationanalytic,
psycholinguistic, cross-linguistic and anthropological perspectives.
In this talk I try to take stock of what we know, and derive a set of goals for and
constraints on an adequate theory. Such a theory is likely to employ, I will suggest,
a top-down plus bottom-up account of action perception, and a multi-level notion
of action which may resolve some of the puzzles that have repeatedly arisen. -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Covariation between spatial language and cognition. In M. Bowerman, & S. C. Levinson (
Eds. ), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 566-588). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2013). Cross-cultural universals and communication structures. In M. A. Arbib (
Ed. ), Language, music, and the brain: A mysterious relationship (pp. 67-80). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Abstract
Given the diversity of languages, it is unlikely that the human capacity for language resides in rich universal syntactic machinery. More likely, it resides centrally in the capacity for vocal learning combined with a distinctive ethology for communicative interaction, which together (no doubt with other capacities) make diverse languages learnable. This chapter focuses on face-to-face communication, which is characterized by the mapping of sounds and multimodal signals onto speech acts and which can be deeply recursively embedded in interaction structure, suggesting an interactive origin for complex syntax. These actions are recognized through Gricean intention recognition, which is a kind of “ mirroring” or simulation distinct from the classic mirror neuron system. The multimodality of conversational interaction makes evident the involvement of body, hand, and mouth, where the burden on these can be shifted, as in the use of speech and gesture, or hands and face in sign languages. Such shifts having taken place during the course of human evolution. All this suggests a slightly different approach to the mystery of music, whose origins should also be sought in joint action, albeit with a shift from turn-taking to simultaneous expression, and with an affective quality that may tap ancient sources residual in primate vocalization. The deep connection of language to music can best be seen in the only universal form of music, namely song. -
Levinson, S. C., Kita, S., & Ozyurek, A. (2001). Demonstratives in context: Comparative handicrafts. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 52-54). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874663.Abstract
Demonstratives (e.g., words such as this and that in English) pivot on relationships between the item being talked about, and features of the speech act situation (e.g., where the speaker and addressee are standing or looking). However, they are only rarely investigated multi-modally, in natural language contexts. This task is designed to build a video corpus of cross-linguistically comparable discourse data for the study of “deixis in action”, while simultaneously supporting the investigation of joint attention as a factor in speaker selection of demonstratives. In the task, two or more speakers are asked to discuss and evaluate a group of similar items (e.g., examples of local handicrafts, tools, produce) that are placed within a relatively defined space (e.g., on a table). The task can additionally provide material for comparison of pointing gesture practices. -
Levinson, S. C., Bohnemeyer, J., & Enfield, N. J. (2001). “Time and space” questionnaire for “space in thinking” subproject. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 14-20). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics.Abstract
This entry contains: 1. An invitation to think about to what extent the grammar of space and time share lexical and morphosyntactic resources − the suggestions here are only prompts, since it would take a long questionnaire to fully explore this; 2. A suggestion about how to collect gestural data that might show us to what extent the spatial and temporal domains, have a psychological continuity. This is really the goal − but you need to do the linguistic work first or in addition. The goal of this task is to explore the extent to which time is conceptualised on a spatial basis.Additional information
http://fieldmanuals.mpi.nl/volumes/2001/time-and-space-questionnaire-2/ -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Maxim. In S. Duranti (
Ed. ), Key terms in language and culture (pp. 139-142). Oxford: Blackwell. -
Levinson, S. C., Enfield, N. J., & Senft, G. (2001). Kinship domain for 'space in thinking' subproject. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 85-88). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874655. -
Levinson, S. C., & Wittenburg, P. (2001). Language as cultural heritage - Promoting research and public awareness on the Internet. In J. Renn (
Ed. ), ECHO - An Infrastructure to Bring European Cultural Heritage Online (pp. 104-111). Berlin: Max Planck Institute for the History of Science.Abstract
The ECHO proposal aims to bring to life the cultural heritage of Europe, through internet technology that encourages collaboration across the Humanities disciplines which interpret it – at the same time making all this scholarship accessible to the citizens of Europe. An essential part of the cultural heritage of Europe is the diverse set of languages used on the continent, in their historical, literary and spoken forms. Amongst these are the ‘hidden languages’ used by minorities but of wide interest to the general public. We take the 18 Sign Languages of the EEC – the natural languages of the deaf - as an example. Little comparative information about these is available, despite their special scientific importance, the widespread public interest and the policy implications. We propose a research project on these languages based on placing fully annotated digitized moving images of each of these languages on the internet. This requires significant development of multi-media technology which would allow distributed annotation of a central corpus, together with the development of special search techniques. The technology would have widespread application to all cultural performances recorded as sound plus moving images. Such a project captures in microcosm the essence of the ECHO proposal: cultural heritage is nothing without the humanities research which contextualizes and gives it comparative assessment; by marrying information technology to humanities research, we can bring these materials to a wider public while simultaneously boosting Europe as a research area. -
Levinson, S. C., Kita, S., & Enfield, N. J. (2001). Locally-anchored narrative. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 147). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874660.Abstract
As for 'Locally-anchored spatial gestures task, version 2', a major goal of this task is to elicit locally-anchored spatial gestures across different cultures. “Locally-anchored spatial gestures” are gestures that are roughly oriented to the actual geographical direction of referents. Rather than set up an interview situation, this task involves recording informal, animated narrative delivered to a native-speaker interlocutor. Locally-anchored gestures produced in such narrative are roughly comparable to those collected in the interview task. The data collected can also be used to investigate a wide range of other topics. -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Space: Linguistic expression. In N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (
Eds. ), International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences: Vol. 22 (pp. 14749-14752). Oxford: Pergamon. -
Levinson, S. C. (1982). Speech act theory: The state of the art. In V. Kinsella (
Ed. ), Surveys 2. Eight state-of-the-art articles on key areas in language teaching. Cambridge University Press. -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Place and space in the sculpture of Anthony Gormley - An anthropological perspective. In S. D. McElroy (
Ed. ), Some of the facts (pp. 68-109). St Ives: Tate Gallery. -
Levinson, S. C. (2001). Pragmatics. In N. Smelser, & P. Baltes (
Eds. ), International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences: Vol. 17 (pp. 11948-11954). Oxford: Pergamon. -
Levinson, S. C., & Enfield, N. J. (2001). Preface and priorities. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 3). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. -
Levinson, S. C., & Dediu, D. (2013). The interplay of genetic and cultural factors in ongoing language evolution. In P. J. Richerson, & M. H. Christiansen (
Eds. ), Cultural evolution: Society, technology, language, and religion. Strüngmann Forum Reports, vol. 12 (pp. 219-232). Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press. -
Majid, A. (2013). Psycholinguistics. In J. L. Jackson (
Ed. ), Oxford Bibliographies Online: Anthropology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. -
Meira, S., & Levinson, S. C. (2001). Topological tasks: General introduction. In S. C. Levinson, & N. J. Enfield (
Eds. ), Manual for the field season 2001 (pp. 29-51). Nijmegen: Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics. doi:10.17617/2.874665. -
Mishra, R. K., Olivers, C. N. L., & Huettig, F. (2013). Spoken language and the decision to move the eyes: To what extent are language-mediated eye movements automatic? In V. S. C. Pammi, & N. Srinivasan (
Eds. ), Progress in Brain Research: Decision making: Neural and behavioural approaches (pp. 135-149). New York: Elsevier.Abstract
Recent eye-tracking research has revealed that spoken language can guide eye gaze very rapidly (and closely time-locked to the unfolding speech) toward referents in the visual world. We discuss whether, and to what extent, such language-mediated eye movements are automatic rather than subject to conscious and controlled decision-making. We consider whether language-mediated eye movements adhere to four main criteria of automatic behavior, namely, whether they are fast and efficient, unintentional, unconscious, and overlearned (i.e., arrived at through extensive practice). Current evidence indicates that language-driven oculomotor behavior is fast but not necessarily always efficient. It seems largely unintentional though there is also some evidence that participants can actively use the information in working memory to avoid distraction in search. Language-mediated eye movements appear to be for the most part unconscious and have all the hallmarks of an overlearned behavior. These data are suggestive of automatic mechanisms linking language to potentially referred-to visual objects, but more comprehensive and rigorous testing of this hypothesis is needed.
Share this page