Psy1302 Psychology of Language Language and Thought I.

Psy1302 Psy1302 Psychology of Psychology of LanguageLanguage

Language and Thought ILanguage and Thought I

FHC: “What is language for?”

Communication & Private Speech “the private uses of language are equally

varied and important, including functions like problem-solving, enhancing social intelligence by rehearsing the thoughts of others, memory aids, focusing attention, etc. They seem to extend into almost every domain of thought.”

PJ: “we are inclined to think that if anything is a by-product (or “spandrel”) here, it is inner speech. The primary adaptation is communication, with enhanced thought as an additional benefit.

Segue (seminar readings)

Language and ThoughtLanguage and Thought

Qs regarding the role Qs regarding the role of language in our of language in our thinking.thinking.

If we grant that we use language (inner or private) for If we grant that we use language (inner or private) for thinking, how much do we rely on it in our daily life for thinking, how much do we rely on it in our daily life for thinking?thinking?

Are there thoughts that we can only entertain through Are there thoughts that we can only entertain through language?language?

Discussion Questions




Could learning the lexicon and grammars of one’s language Could learning the lexicon and grammars of one’s language lead to the development of new concepts? If so, how?lead to the development of new concepts? If so, how?






Does the specific language we speak influence our Does the specific language we speak influence our thinking? If so, how?thinking? If so, how?


Cognitive Psychology Cognitive Psychology ExperimentsExperiments

Language Influence on:Language Influence on: Problem SolvingProblem Solving Memory and AssociationsMemory and Associations CategorizationCategorization

Symbolic SystemsSymbolic Systems

What’s the answer to:What’s the answer to:– Twenty three times five hundred Twenty three times five hundred

seventy-one.seventy-one.

How did you solve the math How did you solve the math problem?problem?

Language and Problem Solving

Symbolic SystemSymbolic System

Buses 1, 2, and 3 make one trip each day, Buses 1, 2, and 3 make one trip each day, and they are the only ones that riders A, B, C, and they are the only ones that riders A, B, C, D, E, F, and G take to work. D, E, F, and G take to work. – Neither E nor G takes bus 1 on a day when B does.Neither E nor G takes bus 1 on a day when B does.– G does not take bus 2 on a day when D does.G does not take bus 2 on a day when D does.– When A and F take the same bus, it is always bus 3.When A and F take the same bus, it is always bus 3.– C always takes bus 3.C always takes bus 3.

Traveling together to work, B, C, and G could Traveling together to work, B, C, and G could take which of the same buses on a given day?take which of the same buses on a given day?

How did you solve this problem?How did you solve this problem?


Language is a symbolic Language is a symbolic systemsystem Cognitive off-loadingCognitive off-loading


Baddeley (1986) Slave Baddeley (1986) Slave SystemsSystems

CentralExecutive

VisuospatialSketchpad

PhonologicalLoop

Language and Problem Solving: Working Memory

Baddeley, Thomson, & Baddeley, Thomson, & Buchanan (1975)Buchanan (1975)

Read a list of 5 countries to Read a list of 5 countries to yourselfyourself

Then try to recall the listThen try to recall the list

We are going to do this twiceWe are going to do this twice


List 1List 1

Chad, Burma, Greece, Cuba, MaltaChad, Burma, Greece, Cuba, Malta


List 2List 2

Czechoslovakia, Somaliland, Czechoslovakia, Somaliland, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Afghanistan, YugoslaviaYugoslavia


Which list was easier?Which list was easier?

Our recall is dependent on the Our recall is dependent on the number of syllables we can say number of syllables we can say quickly (Vallar & Baddeley, 1982).quickly (Vallar & Baddeley, 1982).

Study show: Verbal rehearsing is Study show: Verbal rehearsing is a strategy that we use to a strategy that we use to maintain things in active memorymaintain things in active memory


Vallar & Baddeley Vallar & Baddeley (1986)(1986) Different Types of Lists:Different Types of Lists:

– 1 Syllable Words:1 Syllable Words: ““tan, man, sin, hop, wax”tan, man, sin, hop, wax”

– 2 Syllable Words:2 Syllable Words: ““market, table, lesser, picket, garden”market, table, lesser, picket, garden”

Subjects:Subjects:– Read words aloud a.q.a.p.Read words aloud a.q.a.p.– Recall list of words.Recall list of words.


Vallar & Baddely (1986)Vallar & Baddely (1986)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100%

Cor

rect

0 1 2 3 4 5 6Number of Syllables

%Correct

0.5

0.7

0.9

1.1

1.3

1.5

1.7

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

Rea

ding

Rat

e

0 1 2 3 4 5 6Number of Syllables

Reading Rate

* Reading rate has the same functional relation as % Correct wrt # of syllables!


SummarySummary

Maintaining InformationMaintaining Information

Visually encoded information decays at a Visually encoded information decays at a faster rate than verbally encoded faster rate than verbally encoded information. (estimates 1s vs. 2-4s).information. (estimates 1s vs. 2-4s).

George Miller’s 7George Miller’s 7++2 is likely the result of 2 is likely the result of using verbal encoding rather than visually using verbal encoding rather than visually based encoding. based encoding. (Boutla, Supalla, Newport, & (Boutla, Supalla, Newport, & Bavelier, 2004)Bavelier, 2004)


Loftus & Loftus (1980)Loftus & Loftus (1980) Recommendation – An Interesting Read:Recommendation – An Interesting Read:

– Loftus, E. & Loftus, L. (1980). On the Loftus, E. & Loftus, L. (1980). On the Permanence of Stored Information in the Permanence of Stored Information in the Human Brain. Human Brain. American Psychologist, 35American Psychologist, 35, pp. , pp. 409-420.409-420.

Memories are not permanent. Thus, some Memories are not permanent. Thus, some memories are unrecoverable.memories are unrecoverable.

Memories can be “over-written” or Memories can be “over-written” or “altered”. “altered”.

Language and Memory & Associations

Carmichael, Hogan, & Walter Carmichael, Hogan, & Walter (1932)(1932) Exercise: Exercise:

– You will see a series of picturesYou will see a series of pictures– Remember what you seeRemember what you see– You will be asked to draw what you You will be asked to draw what you

see after seeing the seriessee after seeing the series


Group 1Group 1

Picture 1: Eyeglasses


Group 1Group 1

Picture 2: Hourglass


Group 1Group 1

Picture 3: Seven


Group 1Group 1

Picture 4: Gun


Group 1Group 1

Draw the ItemsDraw the Items


Group 2Group 2

Picture 1: Dumbbell


Group 2Group 2

Picture 2: Table


Group 2Group 2

Picture 3: Four


Group 2Group 2

Picture 4: Broom


Group 2Group 2

Draw the ItemsDraw the Items



Elizabeth Loftus & Retrospective Elizabeth Loftus & Retrospective BiasBias

Exp. 1: How fast was the car going?



Exp. 2 (1 week later): Was there any broken glass?


Correct answer should be “NO”


SummarySummary

Memory is fallible. Memory is fallible. Memory of language used could Memory of language used could

influence a person’s memory.influence a person’s memory.– Language used by another personLanguage used by another person– Language used by oneselfLanguage used by oneself


Godden & Baddeley (1975; Godden & Baddeley (1975; 1980)1980)


Marian & Neisser Marian & Neisser (2000)(2000)Study:Study: Bilingual Cornell College Students emigrated Bilingual Cornell College Students emigrated

from Russia when there were around 14 y.o. from Russia when there were around 14 y.o. (ave)(ave)

Participants told: You are participating in a study Participants told: You are participating in a study to look at story-telling in different languages. to look at story-telling in different languages. Tell brief stories of events in your life. Tell brief stories of events in your life.

Result:Result: Interviewed in English: Interviewed in English:

– Recalled more events in U.S.Recalled more events in U.S. Interviewed in Russian: Interviewed in Russian:

– Recalled more events in Russian.Recalled more events in Russian.


AssociationsAssociationsLanguage and Memory & Associations

AssociationsAssociations

“intricate” Der (masc)

El (fem)

“key”

“jagged”

“key”


GermanGerman

HeavyHeavy

JaggedJagged

MetalMetal

SerratedSerrated

usefuluseful

SpanishSpanish

GoldenGolden

IntricateIntricate

Little Little

LovelyLovely

ShinyShiny

GermanGerman

BeautifulBeautiful

ElegantElegant

FragileFragile

PeacefulPeaceful

PrettyPretty

SlenderSlender

SpanishSpanish

BigBig

DangerousDangerous

LongLong

StrongStrong

SturdySturdy

ToweringTowering


Elaborateness of Elaborateness of ProcessingProcessing(Anderson)(Anderson) Degree of Interconnectivity Degree of Interconnectivity

determines strength of memory determines strength of memory traces.traces.

Craik & Tulving Results:Craik & Tulving Results:– Connection to other knowledge.Connection to other knowledge.

Koler’s Results:Koler’s Results:– Connection to EPISODIC Memories.Connection to EPISODIC Memories.


English:“This is an apple. It is tasty.”

German:“This is an apple. He is tasty.”

Spanish:“This is an apple. She is tasty.”


(slides 43-50 from Lauren Schmidt)

Memory taskMemory task

Used 24 object names (e.g., “apple”) Used 24 object names (e.g., “apple”) that had opposite grammatical that had opposite grammatical genders in Spanish and German (half genders in Spanish and German (half masculine, half feminine)masculine, half feminine)

Spanish and German speakers were Spanish and German speakers were asked to perform in a memory task asked to perform in a memory task in in EnglishEnglish to avoid making them think to avoid making them think explicitly about grammatical genderexplicitly about grammatical gender


German: der Apfel (m)Spanish: la manzana (f)


apple -- Patrick


key -- Erica


cat -- George


Was the apple named Patrick?


Robert Leeper (1935)Robert Leeper (1935)Group 1

Describe this picture:

Group 2 Group 3(no prior picture)

Group 1:94% old woman

Group 2100% young woman

Group 365% young woman

Language and Categorization

Example of prior information influencing how you construe the task.

Bulgelski & Alampay Bulgelski & Alampay (1961)(1961) Exercise: Exercise:

– You will see a series of picturesYou will see a series of pictures– Name the objects you seeName the objects you see


Bulgelski & Alampay Bulgelski & Alampay (1961)(1961)


Bulgelski & Alampay Bulgelski & Alampay (1961)(1961)

Man

Rat


Example of prior information influencing how you construe the task.

Language Influence on Language Influence on CategorizationCategorization Does the way our language carve Does the way our language carve

up the world influence how we up the world influence how we categorize something as categorize something as belonging or not belonging to a belonging or not belonging to a category?category?


Path vs. Manner Path vs. Manner LanguagesLanguages(Malt et al, Papafragou et al)(Malt et al, Papafragou et al)

Many experiments in the literature consists of Many experiments in the literature consists of same-different judgments (e.g., which one does not same-different judgments (e.g., which one does not belong?)belong?)

M: carry, P: exit M: carry, P: enter M: drag, P: exit#1 #2 #3


Finding: No Effect of Language

English vs. KoreanEnglish vs. Korean(Bowerman & Choi, McDonough et (Bowerman & Choi, McDonough et al)al)

Many experiments in the literature consists of Many experiments in the literature consists of same-different judgments (e.g., which one does not same-different judgments (e.g., which one does not belong?)belong?)

#1 #2 #3


Finding: Effect of Language in the case of tight/loose vs. containment/support.Overall, across different comparisons, sometimes experimenters find effect of language, sometimes not. That is, speakers of languages differ in how they categorize.

Analogy to Phoneme Analogy to Phoneme Categorical PerceptionCategorical Perception

Language influences Language influences saliencysaliency of concepts of concepts IIt seems fairly self-evident that the language one happens t seems fairly self-evident that the language one happens

to speak affords, or conversely makes less accessible, to speak affords, or conversely makes less accessible, certain complex concepts. (Levinson, p. 33)certain complex concepts. (Levinson, p. 33)

Analogy drawn to phoneme categorical Analogy drawn to phoneme categorical perceptionperception

Choi et al. have shown that 9-month-old infants have equal Choi et al. have shown that 9-month-old infants have equal facility to make, e.g., English versus Korean spatial facility to make, e.g., English versus Korean spatial distinctions, while by 18 months they are tuned into the distinctions, while by 18 months they are tuned into the local language-specific distinctions. By the time we reach local language-specific distinctions. By the time we reach adulthood, just as we find alien language distinctions hard adulthood, just as we find alien language distinctions hard to hear, so English-speaking adults have lost the ability to to hear, so English-speaking adults have lost the ability to make Korean distinctions even in nonlinguistic implicit make Korean distinctions even in nonlinguistic implicit categorization. (Levinson, p. 27)categorization. (Levinson, p. 27)


• Is it the right analogy??? NEXT LECTURE!Is it the right analogy??? NEXT LECTURE!

1897 1907 1917 1927 1937 1947

Benjamin WhorfBenjamin Whorf

1956

1941 Died at 44.

Born Winthrop, MA

MITChem. E.

FirePreventionEngineer

Interest inLinguistics

First PaperNahuatlNahuatl Aztec

YaleE. Sapir

FieldworkArizona –Arizona –Modern Modern NahuatlNahuatl

Yale: Research FellowshipsLecturer

Introduction to Linguistic Relativity

Linguistic RelativityLinguistic Relativity

Whorf (1956, p. 213): The categories and types

that we isolate from the world of phenomena we do not find there because they stare every observer in the face; on the contrary, the world is presented as a kaleidoscopic flux of impressions which has to be organized by our minds – and this means largely by the linguistic systems in our minds.


Whorf’s ArgumentWhorf’s Argument(Era Before Experiments)(Era Before Experiments)

The argument:– Languages vary in the concepts they

express– Thought is dependent on language– Thus speakers of different languages

think differently.

The evidence: linguistic variation Problem?


Another problem?Another problem?

Suppose it is true that Suppose it is true that Eskimos make fine Eskimos make fine discriminations of snow, and discriminations of snow, and Tahitians do not.Tahitians do not.

Eskimos make fine snow Eskimos make fine snow discriminations BECAUSE discriminations BECAUSE they have lots of snow they have lots of snow words. words.

OROR

Eskimos make fine snow Eskimos make fine snow discriminations AND SO they discriminations AND SO they have lots of snow words.have lots of snow words.


LAST CLASSLAST CLASS

Case studies into the question of Case studies into the question of linguistic relativitylinguistic relativity

DiscussionsDiscussions– Q(&A) on Language and Thought Q(&A) on Language and Thought

relationsrelations– Reflections on the courseReflections on the course

Food!!! For thoughtFood!!! For thought

Next Lecture





Does the specific language we speak influence our Does the specific language we speak influence our thinking? If so, how?thinking? If so, how?


Psy1302 Psychology of Language Language and Thought I.

Documents

Transcript of Psy1302 Psychology of Language Language and Thought I.