Lecture: Psycholinguistics Professor Dr. Neal R. Norrick _____________________________________

1
Lecture Psycholinguistics Professor Dr. Neal R.
Norrick_____________________________________

• Psycholinguistics

• Universität des Saarlandes
• Dept. 4.3 English Linguistics
• SS 2009

2

• Organization
• website script, bibliography, PowerPoint
  presentations
• attendance, quiz, certificates/credits

3
1. Introduction

• Psycholinguistics the study of language
  and mind
• mind versus brain
• mind as understanding, senses, spirit, psyche
• mind as total of cognitive capacities
• myth of the ghost in the machine

4

• language as communication
• versus
• language as thought
• thought as silent, internal speech
• language as representation of underlying thought

5

• Psycholinguistics is
• either - study of underlying language system (in
  memory)
• or - study of language production comprehension
• reflecting distinction of
• competence versus performance
• Psycholinguistics versus neighbor disciplines
• Sociolinguistics, Neurolinguistics,
• Cognitive Linguistics

6

• 2. Biological foundations of speech
• 2.1 Organs of speech
• humans have no specific organs of speech,
• but we find specialization for speech in
• many parts of system

7

• evolution of human physiology (phylogenesis)
• development of children from birth (ontogenesis)
• result in contemporary adult human speech
• system

8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10

• erect posture frees hands to develop fine motor
  skills
• fine motor skills in tool-making lead to brain
  development
• brain development enables symbolic representation
• erect posture lowers epiglottis and larynx
• larger mouth and lower tongue expand range of
  sounds

11

• 2.2 Nervous system
• central versus peripheral
• descending, versus ascending,
• motor sensory
• but both systems function together in
• complex activity, so that brain gets
• feedback on effects
• nerve development from birth to two years
• reflects growth in motor and language skills

12
newborn baby
six-month old
13
fifteen-month old
twenty-four-month old
14

• special areas of brain for language skills
• organization of perception, language
• and articulation in the brain

15
motor cortex
16

• 2.3 Brain Lateralization
• specialization of function in left and right
• hemispheres as part of evolutionary
• development in brain
• still, corpus callosum connects the two
• hemispheres

17

• lateralization of language functions in brain
• contralateral organization and handedness
• dominance of left-brain in language ability

18
Dichotic Listening
Dichotic listening tests have shown a right ear
advantage in recognizing linguistic sounds, while
non-verbal sounds received through the left ear
are processed faster.
19

• 3. Linguistics and mental entities
• 3.1 Words and concepts
• word meaning as mental image
• words as signs of concepts, labels for concepts
• concepts might be figures, images, models etc
• concepts include perceptual and functional
• information

20
Miller Johnson-Laird's concept
21

• 3.2 Sounds and phonemes
• phonemes as psychologically real entities
• abstract phoneme /p/
• versus positionally variant allophones
• aspirated ph word-initial, as in pill
• preglottalized ?p word-final, as in lip
• unaspirated p- after initial s, as in spill

22

• these allophones are predictable variants
• they don't distinguish meanings
• ability to distinguish meanings defines
• phonemes
• hence minimal pair test
• pill - bill

23

• but experiments show
• words are recognized faster than phonemes
• we recognize the letter b and the sound /b/
• faster in the word bat than in isolation
• words are more salient than phonemes
• suprasegmental features are also
• psychologically salient

24

• intonation distinguishes statements
• and questions
• Sally's here. versus Sally's here?
• stress focuses on any constituent in questions
• Sally gave the new car to Judy today?
• can question whether it was Sally (not Suzy),
• whether she gave (not loaned) the car,
• whether it was the new (not the old) car etc

25

• other salient suprasegmentals are volume
• and speed,
• they signal speaker attitudes
• and emotional states.

26

• 3.3 Sentences and propositions
• sentences as grammatical representations
• of underlying meaning in the form of (logical)
• propositions
• ? propositions in language of thought clarify
  (logical) relations between words
• and sentences, represent entailments,
• inferences etc

27

• versus
• ? sentences following the rules of some
• natural language
• grammar rules transform underlying
• meanings into grammatical sentences of
• natural language
• so a single underlying logical proposition
• has multiple possible representations in any
• given natural language, e.g.

28

• the cat is on the mat, the cat is on
• top of the mat
• the mat is under the cat, the mat is
• beneath the cat etc

29

• But where would such a logical language
• of propositions come from if not from
• communication in a natural language?
• But if our language of thought is some acquired
• natural language, then the specific
• characteristics of that language determine our
• patterns of thinking - and this leads to the
• Sapir Whorf Hypothesis.

30

• 3.4 Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis
• Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis sees language and
• human cognition as related in non-arbitrary
• ways
• Sapir 1921, 1929, 1949, Whorf 1950, 1956
• proposed a relationship between language,
• meaning, culture, and personality, generally
• called the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis

31

• The strong version of the hypothesis says
• our language determines our perception. We
• see the things and processes our language
• has names for and ignore or cannot see
• what our language doesn't name.
• The weak version of the hypothesis says our
• language influences our perception. We attend
• to the things and processes our language has
• names for and tend to ignore or find it difficult
  to
• attend to what our language doesn't name, e.g.

32

• English speakers with only a single word wall
• find it difficult to understand and make the
• distinctions necessary for choosing Wand
• versus Mauer in German.
• German and English speakers group together
• all kinds of spherical objects with the single
• word ball, they would not normally distinguish
• the objects categorized in French as ball from
• those called ballon.

33

• In French, speakers must attend to
• differences in size and determine whether
• an object is inflated or not to categorize it as
• ball versus ballon.
• Also, the grammar of the language we're
• speaking at any given time (be it our native
• language or not) forces us to think in certain
• ways.

34

• Slobin's thinking for speaking notes that any
• language system enforces certain choices in
• grammar and lexis, no matter how our
• underlying thought patterns work,
• e.g. because of the tense/aspect system of
• English, all the following questions are relevant
  
• in talking about an event

35

• When did the action take place?
• present versus past tense
• Is it completed?
• perfective versus simple aspect
• Was it an ongoing process or a momentary
  activity?
• progressive versus simple aspect
• Did it only happen once or does it always
• happen?
• progressive versus simple aspect

36

• But in various languages, the questions below
• are important for determining grammatical
• forms (word order, cases)
• Did I (as speaker) see the event or just hear
  about it?
• Is this statement a fact or just my opinion?
• What kinds of words are typically subjects? And
  what kinds objects?

37

• Compare
• I like it, mir gefällt es,
• mi piace, I'm cold,
• mich friert, mir ist kalt,
• isch hann kalt, j'ai frois
• If we must always attend to certain distinctions
• and ignore others, in speaking and thinking,
• shouldn't that influence the way we think?

38

• Nevertheless, we manage to translate
• between languages and to learn other
• languages, so apparently our thought
• patterns can extend and adapt.
• We can grasp and learn to use words from
• other languages, even if they have no
• counterpart in our native language, e.g.
• Schadenfreude blind date