Psycholinguistics
Psycholinguistics or psychology of language is the study of the psychological and neurobiological factors that enable humans to acquire, use, comprehend and
produce language. Initial forays into
psycholinguistics were largely philosophical or educational schools of thought,
due mainly to their location in departments other than applied sciences (e.g.,
cohesive data on how the human brain functioned). Modern research makes use of biology, neuroscience, cognitive science, linguistics, and information science to study how the brain processes
language, and less so the known processes of social sciences, human
development, communication theories and infant development,
among others. There are a number of subdisciplines with non-invasive techniques
for studying the neurological workings of the brain; for example, neurolinguistics has become a field in its own right.
Psycholinguistics has roots in
education and philosophy, and covers the "cognitive processes" that
make it possible to generate a grammatical and meaningful sentence out of vocabulary and grammatical structures, as well as the
processes that make it possible to understand utterances, words, text, etc. Developmental psycholinguistics
studies children's ability to learn language
The
term psycholinguistics was coined in 1936 by Jacob Robert Kantor in
his book An Objective Psychology of Grammar and started being
used among his team at Indiana University,
but its use finally became frequent thanks to the 1946 article "Language
and psycholinguistics: a review", by his student Nicholas Henry Pronko,[1] where
it was used for the first time to talk about an interdisciplinary science
"that could be coherent",[2] as
well as in the title of Psycholinguistics: A Survey of Theory and
Research Problems, a 1954 book by Charles E. Osgood and Thomas A. Sebeok.[3]
Areas
of study[
Psycholinguistics
is an interdisciplinary field. Hence, it is studied by researchers from a
variety of different backgrounds, such as psychology, cognitive science, linguistics, andspeech and
language pathology. Psycholinguists study many different topics, but
these topics can generally be divided into answering the following questions:
(1) how do children acquire language (language
acquisition)?; (2) how do people process and comprehend language
(language comprehension)?; (3) how do people produce language (language
production)?; and (4) how do people acquire a new language (second
language acquisition)?
Subdivisions
in psycholinguistics are also made based on the different components that make
up human language.
Linguistics-related
areas:
·
Phonetics and phonology are concerned with the study
of speech sounds. Within psycholinguistics, research focuses on how the brain
processes and understands these sounds.
·
Morphology is
the study of word structures, especially the relationships between related
words (such as dog and dogs) and the formation of
words based on rules (such as plural formation).
·
Syntax is the study of the patterns
which dictate how words are combined to form sentences.
·
Semantics deals with the meaning of
words and sentences. Where syntax is concerned with the formal structure of
sentences, semantics deals with the actual meaning of sentences.
·
Pragmatics is concerned with the role
of context in
the interpretation of meaning.
A
researcher interested in language comprehension may study word recognition
during reading to
examine the processes involved in the extraction of orthographic,morphological, phonological, and semantic information from patterns in
printed text. A researcher interested in language production might study how
words are prepared to be spoken starting from the conceptual or semantic level.
Developmental psycholinguists study infants' and children's ability to learn
and process language.[4]
In
this section, some influential theories are discussed for each of the
fundamental questions listed in the section above.
Main article: Language
acquisition
There
are essentially two schools of thought as to how children acquire or learn
language, and there is still much debate as to which theory is the correct one.
The first theory states that all language must be learned by the child. The
second view states that the abstract system of language cannot be learned, but
that humans possess an innate language faculty, or an access to what has been
called universal grammar.
The view that language must be learned was especially popular before 1960 and
is well represented by the mentalistic theories
of Jean Piaget and the empiricist Rudolf Carnap. Likewise, the school of
psychology known as behaviorism (see Verbal Behavior (1957) by B.F. Skinner) puts forth the point of view
that language is a behavior shaped by conditioned response, hence it is
learned.
The
innatist perspective began with Noam Chomsky's highly critical review of
Skinner's book in 1959.[5] This
review helped to start what has been termed "the cognitive
revolution" in psychology. Chomsky posited humans possess a
special, innate ability for language and that complex syntactic features, such
as recursion, are "hard-wired" in
the brain. These abilities are thought to be beyond the grasp of the most
intelligent and social non-humans. According to Chomsky, children acquiring a
language have a vast search space to explore among all possible human grammars,
yet at the time there was no evidence that children receive sufficient input to
learn all the rules of their language (see poverty of the
stimulus). Hence, there must be some other innate mechanism that
endows a language ability to humans. Such a language faculty is, according to
the innateness
hypothesis, what defines human language and makes it different from
even the most sophisticated forms of animal communication.
The
field of linguistics and psycholinguistics since then has been defined by
reactions to Chomsky, pro and con. The pro view still holds that the human
ability to use language (specifically the ability to use recursion) is
qualitatively different from any sort of animal ability.[6] This
ability may have resulted from a favorable mutation or from an adaptation of
skills evolved for other purposes. The view that language can be learned has
had a recent resurgence inspired by emergentism. This view challenges the
"innate" view as scientifically unfalsifiable; that is to say, it
can't be tested. With the amount of computer power increasing since the 1980s,
researchers have been able to simulate language acquisition using neural
network models.[7] These
models provide evidence that there may, in fact, be sufficient information
contained in the input to learn language, even syntax. If this is true, then an
innate mechanism is no longer necessary to explain language acquisition.
Main article: Language
comprehension
One
question in the realm of language comprehension is how people understand
sentences as they read (also known as sentence processing).
Experimental research has spawned a number of theories about the architecture
and mechanisms of sentence comprehension. Typically these theories are
concerned with what types of information contained in the sentence the reader
can use to build meaning, and at what point in reading does that information
become available to the reader. Issues such as "modular"
versus "interactive" processing have been theoretical divides in the
field.
A
modular view of sentence processing assumes that the stages involved in reading
a sentence function independently in separate modules. These modulates have
limited interaction with one another. For example, one influential theory of
sentence processing, the garden-path theory,[8] states
that syntactic analysis takes place first. Under this theory as the reader is
reading a sentence, he or she creates the simplest structure possible in order
to minimize effort and cognitive load. This is done without any input from
semantic analysis or context-dependent information. Hence, in the sentence "The
evidence examined by the lawyer turned out to be unreliable," by the time
the reader gets to the word "examined" he or she has committed to a
reading of the sentence in which the evidence is examining something because it
is the simplest parse. This commitment is made despite the fact that it results
in an implausible situation; we know from experience that evidence can rarely
if ever examine something. Under this "syntax first" theory, semantic
information is processed at a later stage. It is only later that the reader
will recognize that he or she needs to revise the initial parse into one in
which "the evidence" is being examined. In this example, readers
typically recognize their misparse by the time they reach "by the
lawyer" and must go back and re-parse the sentence.[9] This
reanalysis is costly and contributes to slower reading times.
In
contrast to a modular account, an interactive theory of sentence processing,
such as a constraint-based lexical
approach[10] assumes
that all available information contained within a sentence can be processed at
any time. Under an interactive account, for example, the semantics of a
sentence (such as plausibility) can come into play early on in order to help
determine the structure of a sentence. Hence, in the sentence above, the reader
would be able to make use of plausibility information in order to assume that
"the evidence" is being examined instead of doing the examining.
There are data to support both modular and interactive accounts; which account
is the correct one is still up for debate.
Main article: Language production
Language
production concerns how people produce language, either in written or spoken
form, in a way that conveys meanings comprehensible to others. One of the most
effective ways to explain the way people represent meanings using rule-governed
languages is by observing and analyzing instances of speech errors. They include speech
dysfluencies like false starts, repetition, reformulation and constant pauses
in between words or sentences; also, slips of tongue, like blendings,
substitutions, exchanges (e.g.Spoonerism), and
various pronunciation errors. These speech errors yield significant implication
on language production, in that they reflect that:
1.
Speech is planned in advance: speech
errors like substitution and exchanges show that one does not plan his/her
entire sentence before s/he speaks. Rather, their language faculty is
constantly tapped during the speech production process. This is accounted for
by the limitation of the working memory. In particular, errors involving
exchanges imply that one plans ahead in their sentence but only about
significant ideas (e.g. the words that constitute the core meaning) and only to
a certain extent of the sentence.
2.
Lexicon is organized semantically
and phonologically: substitution and pronunciation errors show that lexicon is
organized not only by its meaning, but also its form.
3.
Morphologically complex words are
assembled: errors involving blending within a word reflect that there seems to
be a rule governing the construction of words in production (and also likely in
mental lexicon). In other words, speakers generate the morphologically complex
words by merging morphemes rather than retrieving them as chunks.
For
models of speech production, see Psycholinguistics/Models of Speech Production.
Many
of the experiments conducted in psycholinguistics, especially earlier on, are
behavioral in nature. In these types of studies, subjects are presented with
linguistic stimuli and asked to perform an action. For example, they may be
asked to make a judgment about a word (lexical decision),
reproduce the stimulus, or name a visually presented word aloud. Reaction times
to respond to the stimuli (usually on the order of milliseconds) and proportion
of correct responses are the most often employed measures of performance in behavioral
tasks. Such experiments often take advantage of priming effects,
whereby a "priming" word or phrase appearing in the experiment can
speed up the lexical decision for a related "target" word later.[11]
As
an example of how behavioral methods can be used in psycholinguistics research,
Fischler (1977) investigated word encoding using the lexical decision task. He
asked participants to make decisions about whether two strings of letters were
English words. Sometimes the strings would be actual English words requiring a
"yes" response, and other times they would be nonwords requiring a
"no" response. A subset of the licit words were related semantically
(e.g., cat-dog) while others were unrelated (e.g., bread-stem). Fischler found
that related word pairs were responded to faster when compared to unrelated
word pairs. This facilitation suggests that semantic relatedness can facilitate
word encoding.[12]
Recently, eye tracking has been used to study
online language processing. Beginning with Rayner (1978)[13] the
importance and informativity of eye-movements during reading was established.
Later, Tanenhaus et al. (1995)[14] used
the visual-world paradigm to study the cognitive processes related to spoken
language. Assuming that eye movements are closely linked to the current focus
of attention, language processing can be studied by monitoring eye movements
while a subject is presented auditorily with linguistic input.
Main article: Speech error
The analysis of
systematic errors in speech,
writing and typing of
language as it is produced can provide evidence of the process which has
generated it. Errors of speech, in particular, grant insight into how the mind
processes language production while a speaker is in the midst of an utterance.
Speech errors tend to occur in the lexical, morpheme, and phoneme encoding steps of language
production, as seen by the ways errors can manifest.[15] The
types of speech errors, and some examples, are:[15][16][17]
·
Substitutions (phoneme and lexical)
– replacing a sound with an unrelated sound, or a word with an antonym, and
saying "verbal outfit" instead of
"verbal output", or "He rode his bike tomorrow"
instead of "...yesterday", respectively,
·
Blends – mixing two synonyms
together and saying "my stummy hurts" in place of
either "stomach" or "tummy",
·
Exchanges (phoneme [a.k.a. Spoonerisms] and morpheme) – swapping two
onset sounds or two root words, and saying "You hissed
my mystery lectures" instead of "You missed
my history lectures", or "They're Turking talkish"
instead of "They're talking Turkish", respectively,
·
Morpheme shifts – moving a function
morpheme such as "-ly" or "-ed" to a different word and
saying "easy enoughly" instead of
"easily enough",
·
Perseveration – continuing to start
a word with a sound that was in the utterance previously and saying
"John gave the goy a ball" instead of
"John gave the boy a ball", and
·
Anticipation – replacing a sound
with one that is coming up later in the utterance and saying "She drank
a cot cup of tea" instead of "She drank
a hot cup of tea."
Speech
errors will usually occur in the stages that involve lexical, morpheme, or
phoneme encoding, and usually not the first step of semantic encoding.[18] This
can be credited to how a speaker is still conjuring the idea of what to say,
and unless he changes his mind, can not be mistaken in what he wanted to say.
Main article: Neurolinguistics
Until
the recent advent of non-invasive medical
techniques, brain surgery was the preferred way for language researchers to discover
how language works in the brain. For example, severing the corpus callosum (the bundle of nerves
that connects the two hemispheres of the brain) was at one time a treatment for
some forms of epilepsy. Researchers
could then study the ways in which the comprehension and production of language
were affected by such drastic surgery. Where an illness made brain surgery
necessary, language researchers had an opportunity to pursue their research.
Newer,
non-invasive techniques now include brain imaging by positron
emission tomography (PET); functional
magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI); event-related
potentials (ERPs) in electroencephalography (EEG)
and magnetoencephalography (MEG);
and transcranial
magnetic stimulation (TMS). Brain imaging techniques vary in
their spatial and temporal resolutions (fMRI has a resolution of a few thousand
neurons per pixel, and ERP has millisecond accuracy). Each type of methodology
presents a set of advantages and disadvantages for studying a particular
problem in psycholinguistics.
Computational
modeling, such as the DRC
model of reading and word recognition proposed by Max Coltheart and colleagues,[19] is
another methodology and refers to the practice of setting up cognitive models
in the form of executable computer programs. Such programs are useful because
they require theorists to be explicit in their hypotheses and because they can
be used to generate accurate predictions for theoretical models that are so
complex that they render discursive
analysis unreliable. Another example of computational modeling
is McClelland and Elman's TRACE model
of speech perception.[20]
Psycholinguistics
is concerned with the nature of the computations and processes that the brain
undergoes to comprehend and produce language. For example, the cohort modelseeks to describe how words are
retrieved from the mental lexicon when
an individual hears or sees linguistic input.[11][21]
Recent
research using new non-invasive imaging
techniques seeks to shed light on just where certain language processes occur
in the brain.
There
are a number of unanswered questions in psycholinguistics, such as whether the
human ability to use syntax is based on innate mental structures or emerges
from interaction with other humans, and whether some animals can be taught the
syntax of human language.
Two
other major subfields of psycholinguistics investigate first
language acquisition, the process by which infants acquire language,
and second
language acquisition. In addition, it is much more difficult for
adults to acquire second languages than
it is for infants to learn their first language (bilingual infants are able to
learn both of their native languages easily). Thus, sensitive periods may exist during
which language can be learned readily.[22] A
great deal of research in psycholinguistics focuses on how this ability
develops and diminishes over time. It also seems to be the case that the more
languages one knows, the easier it is to learn more.[23]
The
field of aphasiology deals
with language deficits that arise because of brain damage. Studies in
aphasiology can both offer advances in therapy for individuals suffering from
aphasia, and further insight into how the brain processes language.
Areas
of study[
Make your background interesting to see it, thanks :)
BalasHapusYour article very short and polos
BalasHapusYour written kinds cakar ayam seperti kyk kw cakar ayam nya
BalasHapusPunya kamu bagus tetapi pendek setidak nya kamu tambahin lagi
BalasHapusHai anton, is this the result you wrote? Understand what you make? Do not just copy paste input to blog?! big body so must be appropriate!! if you can more your knowledge, Okee
BalasHapusBad writing I have ever met and not tidy. Just as your body is never tidy
BalasHapuswowwww.
BalasHapusyour article very innocent, just like your face. not attractive.wkwkwkkk