Provide an example of a mental state which Is warranted but undesirable. Provide an example…
Final Exam Guide
Fictive verb, that requires what is known to be true unit 2: First part of Pinker Chapter 2 How children learn a language: Chomsky universal Grammar – If children Just imitate their parents they should not be able to say things that they have never heard. Children imitate but they also generalize, however children never overgrazing – NOAA Chomsky: Children are born with some type of genetically coded grammar Locative Verbs: Container vs..
Content-locative verbs Verbs: Intransitive: only require a subject, Translates: require a subject and direct object – Locative Constructions: Content-locative construction: “Hal loaded hay Into the wagon” – Direct object of the sentence is the content that is moved Container-locative construction: “Hal loaded the wagon with hay” – Direction object of the sentence Is the container where something is placed Gestalt Shift: Cause-to-change vs. cause-to-move The way we view them from a different perspective.
In other words it is a deferent construal of the same event. “Hal loaded hay into the wagon” = Loaded a few pitchforks “Hal loaded the wagon with hay’ = Loaded the wagon full of hay Holism (Slightly Different Generalization) Direct object position is reserved for those entities that are substantially changed in the manner specified by the verb Ex. “Mound drank the glass of beer” – Glass was emptied, it underwent a substantial change Ex. Mound drank from the glass of beer” – “glass of beer” is oblique object – glass might not be emptied – glass does not undergo a substantial (holistic) change of state Unit 3: Second part of Pinker Chapter 2 Restrictions on locative rule (“smear” vs.. “pour” and “spray” vs. “spit”) – Causing (Smearing) vs.. Letting (Pouring) Both types of verbs refer to ways of getting a substance onto a surface
Irregular (“white”) Regular (“good”) Unconventional – The problem: Some words seem to have too many meanings for us to be able to list Some of them are unpredictable and learned (break, broke, breaker) Some are regular and follow a pattern Some are real innovations by speakers in specific situations Irregular: but conventional (polymers that is shared by their community) Regular: systematic polymers that is somehow coded in the language Unconventional: real innovations by speakers Irregular: “white” – Depends on the situation Skin color can be white/race but also can be based on color white In conclusion white has 2 different meanings that have to be learned Regular: “good” – adjectives “good” can mean different things: “good knife” “good road” “good book” – Common meaning and use Unit 5: Second part of Pinker Chapter 3 Linguistic determinism – Language and thought are not different – Language affects the way we think – Also known as the Sapid/Whorl Hypothesis – Main Idea: – Language influences thought – The language we speak somehow determines the way we think – The language we speak is the language of thought Different version of the linguistic determinism – Language Determines Thought
Evidence for and against linguistic determinism – Eskimo words for snow – Allegedly, Eskimo has more words for snow than English – Since they have more words for snow they can perceive snow differently – Turns out that Eskimo doesn’t have more words for snow – Infants have trouble keeping track of objects – They grow out of the stage at the same time they develop language – However, babies won’t be able to learn names for object until they are able to identify them. There is a correlation, but it does not mean causation – Number systems – Peter Gordon studied the Piranha, they only have 1, 2, and many for numbers Whoring interpretation: because they don’t have numbers their thought process for counting is affected. – Non-workflow interpretation: Children don’t learn basics of counting because they don’t need it.
Correlation but Not causation – Spatial Terms – Mudpack, have number words up to five but can’t even count accurately to five – Goes against Whoring view, if they have the number words they should be able to use them accurately – Proves that cultural environment that is preventing people from developing accurate counting abilities not lack of number words – Others – Spatial terms in Teasel: Stephen Leviers studied speakers of Teasel They have no words for left and right – Directions based on slope, up-the slope, down-the-slope, across-the-slope – Teasel and Dutch speakers behaved differently in certain cognitive tasks – Whoring Hypothesis: The dif. In behavior was due to fact that Dutch has terms for left and right but Teasel does not – Non-Hoffman interpretation: supports weak version – Even though Teasel speakers do not have terms for left and right they can perform tasks that rely on the concepts of right and left – Overall if strong linguistic determinism was true we could never talk about anything new that we didn’t know about.