心理学导论transcript06.docx

1、心理学导论transcript06Introduction to Psychology: Lecture 6 TranscriptFebruary 5, 2007 backProfessor Paul Bloom: This class today is about language. And language is, to a large extent, where the action is. The study of human language has been the battleground over different theories of human nature. So,

2、every philosopher or psychologist or humanist or neuroscientist who has ever thought about people has had to make some claim about the nature of language and how it works. Im including here people like Aristotle and Plato, Hume, Locke, Freud and Skinner. Im also including modern-day approaches to co

3、mputational theory, cognitive neuroscience, evolutionary theory and cultural psychology. If you hope to make it with a theory of what people are and how people work, you have to explain and talk about language. In fact, language is sufficiently interesting that, unlike most other things Ill talk abo

4、ut in this class, there is an entire field devoted to its study, the field of linguistics that is entirely devoted to studying the nuances and structures of different languages.Now, Ill first, before getting into details, make a definitional point. When Im talking about language Im meaning systems l

5、ike English and Dutch and Warlpiri and Italian and Turkish and Urdu and what weve seen and heard right now in class in the demonstration that preceded the formal lecture. Before class started, Professor Bloom had several bilingual students give demonstrations of non-English speech. Now, you could us

6、e language in a different sense. You could use the term language to describe what dogs do, or what chimpanzees do, or birds. You could use language to describe music, talk about the-a musical language or art, or any communicative system, and theres actually nothing wrong with that. Theres no rule ab

7、out how youre supposed to use the word language. But the problem is if you use the word language impossibly, incredibly broadly, then from a scientific point of view it becomes useless to ask interesting questions about it. If language can refer to just about everything from English to traffic signa

8、ls, then were not going to be able to find interesting generalizations or do good science about it.So, what I want to do is, I want to discuss the scientific notion of language, at first restricting myself to systems like English and Dutch and American sign language and Navajo and so on. Once weve m

9、ade some generalizations about language in this narrow sense, we could then ask, and we will ask, to what extent do other systems such as animal communication systems relate to this narrower definition. So we could ask, in this narrow sense, what properties do languages have and then go on to ask, i

10、n a broader sense, what other communicative systems also possess those properties.Well, some things are obvious about language so here are some; here are the questions we will ask. This will frame our discussion today. Well first go over some basic facts about language. Well talk about what language

11、s share, well talk about how language develops, and well talk about language and communication in nonhumans.I began this class with a demonstration of-that illustrates two very important facts about language. One is that languages all share some deep and intricate universals. In particular, all lang

12、uages, at minimum, are powerful enough to convey an abstract notion like this; abstract in the sense that it talks about thoughts and it talks about a proposition and spatial relations in objects. Theres no language in the world that you just cannot talk about abstract things with. Every language ca

13、n do this. But the demonstration before class also illustrated another fact about language, which is how different languages are. They sound different. If you know one language, you dont necessarily know another. Its not merely that you cant understand it. It could sound strange or look unusual in t

14、he case of a sign language. And so, any adequate theory of language has to allow for both the commonalities and the differences across languages. And this is the puzzle faced by the psychology and cognitive science of language.Well, lets start with an interesting claim about language made by Charles

15、 Darwin. So, Darwin writes, Man has an instinctive tendency to speak, as we see in the babble of our young children, while no child has an instinctive tendency to bake, brew or write. And what Darwin is claiming here, and its a controversial and interesting claim, is that language is special in that

16、 theres some sort of propensity or capacity or instinct for language unlike the other examples he gives. Not everything comes natural to us but Darwin suggests that language does.Well, why should we believe this? Well, there are some basic facts that support Darwins claim. For one thing, every norma

17、l-every human society has language. In the course of traveling, cultures encounter other cultures and they often encounter cultures that are very different from their own. But through the course of human history, nobody has ever encountered another group of humans that did not have a language. Does

18、this show that its built in? Well, not necessarily. It could be a cultural innovation. It could be, for instance, that language is such a good idea that every culture comes across it and develops it. Just about every culture uses some sort of utensils to eat food with, a knife and a fork, chopsticks

19、, a spoon. This probably is not because use of eating utensils is human nature, but rather, its because its just a very useful thing that cultures discover over and over again. Well, we know that this probably is not true with regard to language. And one reason we know this is because of the demonst

20、rated case studies where a language is created within a single generation. And these case studies have happened over history.The standard example is people involved in the slave trade. The slave trade revolving around tobacco or cotton or coffee or sugar would tend to mix slaves and laborers from di

21、fferent language backgrounds, in part deliberately, so as to avoid the possibility of revolt. What would happen is these people who were enslaved from different cultures would develop a makeshift communication system so they could talk to one another. And this is called a pidgin, p-i-d-g-i-n, a pidg

22、in. And this pidgin was how they would talk. And this pidgin was not a language. It was strings of words borrowed from the different languages around them and put together in sort of haphazard ways.The question is what happens to the children who are raised in this society. And you might expect it t

23、hat they would come to speak a pidgin, but they dont. What happens is, in the course of a single generation, they develop their own language. They create a language with rich syntax and morphology and phonology, terms that well understand in a few minutes. And this language that they create is calle

24、d a creole. And languages that we know now as creoles, the word refers back to their history. That means that they were developed from pidgins. And this is interesting because this suggests that to some extent the ability to use and understand and learn language is part of human nature. It doesnt re

25、quire an extensive cultural history. Rather, just about any normal child, even when not exposed to a full-fledged language, can create a language.And more recently, theres been case studies of children who acquire sign language. Theres a wonderful case in Nicaragua in sign language where they acquir

26、e sign language from adults who themselves are not versed in sign language. Theyre sort of second-language learners struggling along. What you might have expected would be the children would then use whatever system their adults use, but they dont. They creolized it. They take this makeshift communi

27、cation system developed by adults and, again, they turn it into a full-blown language, suggesting that to some extent its part of our human nature to create languages.Also, every normal human has language. Not everybody in this room can ride a bicycle. Not everybody in this room can play chess. But

28、everybody possesses at least one language. And everybody started to possess at least one language when they were a child. There are exceptions, but the exceptions come about due to some sort of brain damage. Any neurologically normal human will come to possess a language.What else do we know? Well,

29、the claim that language is part of human nature is supported by neurological studies, some of which were referred to in the chapters on the brain that you read earlier that talk about dedicated parts of the brain that work for language. And if parts of these brains-if parts-if these parts of the bra

30、in are damaged you get language deficits or aphasias where you might lose the ability to understand or create language. More speculatively, there has been some fairly recent work studying the genetic basis of language, looking at the genes that are directly responsible for the capacity to learn and

31、use language. And one bit of evidence that these genes are implicated is that some unfortunate people have point mutations in these genes. And such people are unable to learn and use language.So, in general, there is some support, at least at a very broad level, for the claim that language is in som

32、e sense part of human nature. Well, what do we mean by language? What are we talking about when we talk about language? We dont want to restrict ourselves, for instance, to English or French. What do all languages share? Well, all languages are creative and this means a couple of things.One meaning

33、is the meaning emphasized by Rene Descartes. When Rene Descartes argued that we are more than merely machines, his best piece of evidence for him was the human capacity for language. No machine could do this because our capacity for language is unbounded and free. We could say anything we choose to s