Language and cognitive science

Language and cognitive science
Linguistics lecture #1
October 26, 2006
1
Overview
• Linguistics and cognitive science
• Linguistic cognition
• The cognition of linguists
2
Linguistics
and cognitive science
• Linguistics is the scientific study of
language, not of the mind in general
MIND
LANGUAGE
vision
etc
linguistic
cognition
history
etc
3
Why is linguistics important
to cognitive science?
• Language is cool
• Language is easy to study
4
Language is cool
• Almost all humans have language
(Not little babies, not some brain-damaged people)
- Every culture on earth, even isolated islands
- Geniuses, stupid people
- Hearing people, deaf people
- People can’t stop talking, can’t stop understanding
5
Language is cool
• Language lets you read other people’s
minds
- Thought can be translated into physical form
- Physical forms can be translated into thought
6
Language is cool
• Language gives you power
- You can boss people around
- You can tell somebody how to make something
- You can talk to yourself and write things down
when you’re trying to figure out something
- Having a natural language helps you invent
artificial language tools (logic, math, computer
programs, etc)
7
Language is cool
• Babies are smarter than adults and
computers
- Babies begin to master language long before
going to school
- Adults suffer a lot learning a new language
- Computers are still very stupid at using language,
and even stupider at learning it
8
Language is cool
• Language makes us special
- Other animals are probably conscious
- Other animals have vision
- Other animals walk on two legs, make tools, etc
- No other animal has human-style language:
words + rules
9
Language is easy to study
• Language is “out there” in the world
- Other aspects of the mind seem “hidden”
(memories, consciousness)
- Language can be heard and seen
- Observable language patterns seem to
correspond with actual mental patterns
10
Language is easy to study
• Linguistics fits well with philosophical
functionalism
- Key metaphor: The brain is a computer, the
mind is a program (or system of programs)
- The math-like language of computers is inspired
by natural human language, so natural language
seems easy to analyze within this metaphor
11
Linguistic cognition
• The mind operates by information
processing
- One kind of information is translated into another
kind of information within the mind
- Information can also be transduced into or out of
physical forms
12
Linguistic information processing
• Thoughts are translated into sentence syntax
(句法)
• Syntactic structures are filled in with words
• Word structure is morphology (構詞)
• Sentences and words are prepared for
transduction into physical forms by
phonology (音韻)
13
A key concept: GRAMMAR
• Syntax, morphology, and phonology are all
part of grammar (語法)
• Linguists actually study grammar, not really
language itself
14
Linguistic structure
• One of the first to emphasize that grammar
can open a window into the mind was
American linguist Noam Chomsky
• His 1957 book Syntactic Structures gave a
“computer-like” theory of syntax
• His 1959 review of Skinner’s linguistic
theories helped to kill Behaviorism
• Still very active and influential today
15
Noam Chomsky
1960s
Today
16
Generative grammar
• Chomsky invented it, and it’s still the
dominant concept in linguistics today
- A grammar is generative if it can “generate” a
language in an abstract sense, that is, if it can
describe a language explicitly and completely.
- Chomsky’s “generative” does NOT mean
“generate speech” when actually using language!
17
Grammar and language
• Languages are infinite, grammars are finite
Language:
他來了。
他說他來了。
他說他說他來了。
他說他說他說他來了。
…
Grammar: 他說 + sentence = sentence
18
Unconscious knowledge
• Since the mind/brain is finite, “knowing a
language” is really “knowing a grammar”
• But this is mostly unconscious knowledge:
you don’t know what you know
- For example, if you know Southern Min (閩南),
how do you say these words?
「詩文」「時間」「寺」
19
Unconscious knowledge
詩
時
死
四
寺
色
熟
詩文
時間
死人
四點
寺僧
色彩
熟茶
20
Knowing vs. using
• Grammar is knowledge, not language use
(“I know English” vs. 「我會說英文」)
• Grammar = linguistic competence
• Language use = linguistic performance
Language: ...他說他說他收他說他來了…
Grammar: 他收 + sentence = sentence??!!
No! Speech errors are performance, not competence
21
Competence vs. performance
(1) Those two little mice were very frightened.
(2) Those two little mice [the cat chased] were very
frightened.
(3) Those two little mice [the cat [I hate] chased]
were very frightened.
(4) The mouse [the cat [the dog bit] chased] ran.
• Sentence (4) must be grammatical, but it is
hard to process (performance problems)
22
Linguistic universals
• If human grammar is in the mind, and
human minds are all identically “human”,
we expect linguistic universals: aspects of
grammar shared by all languages
• Chomsky’s Martian would think that all
human languages are the same
23
Linguistic universals
• Some universals are obvious:
Syntax always distinguishes nouns and verbs
Phonology always uses syllables (音節)
• Others are less obvious:
Some word orders are “more popular” than others:
boy eat apple boy apple eat eat boy apple
 eat apple boy  apple boy eat apple eat boy
24
Linguistic universals
• Chinese and English are unrelated languages
with many differences
• Yet they also share many similarities:
- Both have nouns, verbs, etc
- They share sounds, including weird ones like [l]
- Word order is really not extremely different
- Order inside words too: bookstore = 書店
- Meanings often match: “should” = 「應該」
25
Linguistic universals
• Even sign languages (手語) are not weird
• Every sign language has its own grammar
(e.g. American Sign Language, Taiwan Sign
Language, etc)
- Many, many different words
- Syntax and morphology
- Even phonology: knowledge of linguistic
transduction (patterns in physical forms)
26
The cognition of linguists
• Linguistics belongs in cognitive science, but
are linguists scientists? Two answers….
• Yes: They try to find general laws
governing observed patterns
• No: They ignore causal relationships (as
noted by psychologist George Miller):
for them, “explanation” = simple description
27
Formalism
• Chomsky, like most linguists, believes in
linguistic formalism: linguistic theories
should refer only to the form of language
Language:「買馬」 sounds like 「埋馬」
Formal analysis: ˇ + ˇ  ˊ + ˇ
Not formal: “ˇˇ is too hard to say, so you have to
change it to ˊˇ”
28
Advantages of formalism
• Theories are more precise and explicit
• Formalism often seems to describe the way
the mind really works
(6) Colorless green ideas sleep furiously (Chomsky 1957)
Sentence (6) has no meaning, and you would
never use it in real life, but it still seems
grammatical (it fits with English competence)
29
Functionalism
• However, other linguists believe in linguistic
functionalism: the form of language may be
explained by language use and non-linguistic
cognition
OK:
Bad:
我從圖書館走到宿舍
我到宿舍走從圖書館
- Here, word order matches “real” order (Tai 1985)
30
Where do universals come from?
• Formalist answer:
Innate linguistic knowledge: basic
concepts like “syllable” are in your DNA.
• Functionalist answer:
Universal needs (e.g. communication)
31
Summary
• Linguistics belongs in cognitive science, but
it may be “less scientific” than psychology
• Grammar = knowledge of language =
linguistic competence ( performance)
• Generative grammar = 100% explicit
• Grammars have universal properties
• Linguistic formalism vs. linguistic
functionalism: are both necessary?
32

Download Report