Midterm 2 Flashcards

Question

Norm Chomspky's view

Answer 1

- emphasizes the creative and productive aspect of language, meaning that using a finite set of rules and words, humans can produce an infinite number of sentences (Limited words + rules = unlimited possible sentences) - Syntax is unique to human language - The LAD (Language Acquisition device) is a theoretical construct explains how humans have the innate ability to acquire language.

Answer 2

- Washoe: The Gardners worked with Washoe chimpanzee, teaching her a modified version of ASL. Washoe learned over 100 signs and reportedly combined them in novel ways, such as "water bird" to supposedly describe a swan. - Koko: Patterson worked with Koko the gorilla, who learned over 1000 signs and used signs to communicate complex ideas and emotions. - Nim Chimpsky: Terrace's project with Nim aimed to see if the chimp could learn to construct sentences using ASL. While Nim learned many signs, Terrace concluded that Nim's communications were often repetitive and lacked spontaneous syntactical structure. - weren't recording all the occurrences - focuses on split word view: teaching words (their label) and not the meaning behind it (more than knowing the name i.e. understanding the function of an item) - going based on the assumption that by teaching them labels they understand the meaning behind it

Answer 3

Second round focused more on comprehension rather than just production of language: Kanzi: Savage-Rumbaugh's work with Kanzi, a bonobo, used a lexigram board to communicate. Unlike previous studies, Kanzi was exposed to the lexigram board and spoken English from a young age without formal training. Kanzi demonstrated a strong understanding of spoken English and could follow complex instructions. This approach suggested that language comprehension and the use of symbolic communication could emerge from immersive and interactive environments, challenging the idea that syntax is the only hallmark of language capability in apes.

Answer 4

- Lack of Spontaneous Syntax: He argued that apes, including his own subject Nim Chimpsky, did not spontaneously use syntax in a way that resembled human language, indicating that the ability to form grammatical structures might be unique to humans. - Cueing by Experimenters: Terrace pointed out that experimenters might unintentionally cue apes to use certain signs, casting doubt on the authenticity of the apes' understanding and use of signs. - Imitation Rather Than Understanding: He suggested that much of what was interpreted as linguistic ability could instead be mimicry or the result of operant conditioning, rather than a genuine understanding of language.

Answer 5

- Challenge to the uniqueness of human language: If animals can learn aspects of language, it suggests that human language may not be as unique as previously thought. - Rethinking language evolution: Understanding animal communication could offer insights into how human language evolved. - Innateness debate: Animal communication research could impact the debate on whether language is an innate human ability or whether it develops from more general cognitive capabilities.

Answer 6

- Constraints are necessary for children to learn the meanings of new words because these constraints help manage the inherent complexity and ambiguity in language learning. - The "indeterminacy of translation" or the "Gavagai" problem illustrates this challenge: a child might hear a new word and have to figure out its meaning from potentially infinite possibilities of interpretations. - Constraints simplify this process by limiting the range of possible meanings a new word can have.

Answer 7

- Whole Object Assumption: Children assume that a new word refers to the whole object rather than its parts or properties. This helps children learn the names of objects but requires additional constraints to decide to which objects a new word applies. - Taxonomic Assumption: This constraint means children assume that words refer to objects of the same kind rather than to objects that are merely related thematically. This aids in categorization and the learning of category names. - Mutual Exclusivity Bias: Children tend to assume that each object has only one label. This bias is useful for learning new words for both entirely new objects and for differentiating parts or features of known objects. It necessitates the integration with other constraints like the whole object assumption to effectively learn about parts of objects.

Answer 8

- its primary focus is on the learning of object labels. The approach is less effective in explaining how children learn words that are not directly linked to concrete objects, such as verbs, abstract nouns, and function words like "please" or "think". This limitation suggests that while constraints may be helpful for a subset of vocabulary acquisition, they do not fully account for the diversity and complexity of language learning. - presupposes a certain order of word learning that may not always reflect actual developmental patterns. For instance, it assumes that children learn the names of whole objects before learning the names of their parts. However, there can be instances where a child learns a part name ("tail") before learning the name of the whole object ("dog"), challenging the universality of constraints like the whole object assumption. - It does not account for the social context of language learning. Children rely on social and pragmatic cues from their caregivers and the environment to navigate word meanings, suggesting that word learning is also a socially mediated process. This interplay between constraints and social cues indicates that language acquisition is not solely a product of innate biases but is also significantly influenced by the child's social environment.

Answer 9

- Core principle: argues that word learning is not about mapping words to objects in a one-to-one correspondence (as suggested by the constraints approach). Instead, it's about understanding what the speaker intends the listener to focus on within a given situation. - Words are used to invite others to share a particular experience or understanding of something, which means there is no static relationship between an object and a word. For example, the word "dog" can refer to the animal in various ways depending on the context and the speaker's intent, such as "pet," "Rover," "burden," "animal," or "stray." - Evidence Supporting the Approach: Tomasello conducted experiments showing that children use their understanding of the social situation to infer the meanings of words. For instance, 24-month-old children were exposed to either object-biasing or action-biasing conditions. When later asked to identify a "modi" (a made-up word) in a comprehension test, their interpretation of "modi" as either an object or an action depended on the context they were previously exposed to. This demonstrates that children rely on social cues and their understanding of the context to learn words, rather than purely on innate constraints.