Language Allows Us To Communicate A Tremendous Amount Of Information, In- Cluding Such Theoretical And Complex Concepts As “Threat,” “Retaliation,” And “Hijack.” In The First Section Of This Chapter You’Ll Learn That The Human Brain Is So Finely Adapted To Learn Language That Babies Pick It Up Effortlessly, And That Parts Of The Brain Are Specialized To Understand Or Produce Language. The Marvel Of How Our Minds Readily Categorize And Process Information Is Covered In Section 10.2. You’Ll Learn About The Concept Of Attention, Which Is Vital To Information Processing. We Will Discuss How Attention Is A Limited Resource, So Directing It To One Activity Can Make Us Blind To Other Events. In The Final Section We’Ll Consider The Process Of How We Make Judgments And Use Them To Make Decisions. We’Ll See That We Are Not Very Good At Making Certain Kinds Of Decisions And Are Sus- Ceptible To Several Kinds Of Bias In Our Judgments. 10.1 Language One Of The Most Amazing Things About Human Speech Is Something Most People Take For Granted: Virtually Every Baby Learns A Language With No Formal Teaching Whatsoever. Just By Being Around People Who Talk, Babies Learn The Language (Or Languages) Spoken Around Them. If You’Ve Ever Tried To Learn A New Language As An Adult, You Will Appreciate How Remarkable It Is That Babies Master Not Only Words But Syntax Within A Relatively Short Period Of Time. In This Section We’Ll Review Evidence That The Human Brain Is Especially Good At Acquiring Languages Before We Reach The Age Of 12 Or So, But Not Thereafter (Maddeningly, The Precise Age When Many School Systems Begin Teaching A Second Language!). We’Ll Consider The Special Skill Of Reading And The Fascinating Question Of Why Some Children Who Are Clearly Very Intelligent Nevertheless Have A Hard Time Learning To Read. We’Ll Conclude This Section By Discussing Evidence Indicating That The Language We Learn, And The Culture We Learn It In, Has An Impact On The Way We Think. What Are The Components Of Human Language? There Are An Estimated 7,000 Languages In The World Today, About 1,000 Of Which Have Been Studied By Linguists (Wuethrich, 2000), Scientists Who Study Language. Their Analyses Reveal That All These Languages Share Similar Basic Characteristics. For Example, All Spoken Languages Are Composed Of A Set Of Sounds And Symbols That Have Distinct Meanings. Those Sounds And Symbols Are Arranged According To Rules That Are Characteristic Of The Particular Lan- Guage. Each Language Has Basic Speech Sounds, Or Phonemes. English Con- Sists Of About 50 Different Phonemes (Exactly How Many Depends On The Dialect Of English), Which Include Both Vowels And Consonants. Some Languages Have Over 100 Phonemes, Others Have As Few As 11 (Crystal, 2010), But Because There Are Estimated To Be Over 800 Phonemes Used In One Language Or Another (Gibbs, 2002), It Is Rare For Any Two Languages To Use The Exact Same Subset Of Phonemes. If You’Ve Tried To Learn Another Language, Such As French Or Chinese, You’Ve Faced The Challenge Of Making A Sound That You Had Never Tried To Make Before, As You Try To Reproduce A New Phoneme. In Each Language, Phonemes Are Assembled Into Simple Units Of Meaning Called Morphemes, And These Morphemes Are Assembled Into Words. The Word Unfathomable, For Example, Consists Of The Morphemes Un, Fathom, And Able ••Components Of Language ••Evolutionary Beginnings Of Language ••Teaching Language To Animals ••Human Language Acquisition ••Language Function Is In The Left Cortex ••Language Influences On Thinking Linguists Scientists Who Study Language. Phonemes The Basic Speech Sounds That Make Up Languages. Morphemes The Basic Units Of Meaning In A Language. They Are Composed Of Phonemes. Semantics The Study Of The Meanings Of Words. Syntax The Rules For Constructing Phrases And Sentences In A Language. Generative Term Used To Describe The Capacity Of A Language To Produce An Infinite Number Of Sentences. Surface Structure The Particular String Of Words That Are Put Together In A Sentence. Deep Structure The Particular Meaning Beneath The Surface Structure Of A Sentence. (Figure 10.1). Words Have Meaning, And The Study Of Those Meanings Is The Field Of Semantics. Words, In Turn, Are As- Sembled Into Meaningful Strings, Which May Be Complete Sentences Or Just Phrases. For Each Language, There Are Rules For Constructing Phrases And Sentences, And Those Rules Are The Language’S Syntax. You Might Think Of The Rules For Constructing Sentences And Phrases As Grammar, But Grammar Typically Refers To A Set Of Rules About How You Ought To Structure Your Sentences. Syntax Is Con- Cerned With How Native Speakers Actually Assemble Sen- Tences To Communicate With One Another. Anyone Who Knows The Phonemes (Sounds) And Syntax (Rules) Of A Par- Ticular Language Can Speak Sentences That Convey Infor- Mation To Others Who Have Similar Knowledge Of The Lan- Guage. A Speaker Who Also Knows The Symbols Used To Depict The Phonemes, In Our Case The Alphabet, Can Write Sentences That Convey Information. One Powerful Characteristic Of All Languages Is That Their Words Can Be Rearranged To Produce Many Different Sen- Tences, With Vastly Different Meanings. The Number Of English Words Is Estimated At 1 Million And Growing (Michel Et Al., 2011), But Probably No One Could Define Them All Without Consulting A Dictionary (Figure 10.2). The Average American High School Graduate Is Thought To Know 50,000 To 60,000 Words (Pinker, 1994). Knowing That Many Words Means That, In Practical Terms, There Are An Infinite Number Of Different Sentences A Speaker Might Construct. Because Language Has This Vast Capacity To Produce So Many Differ- Ent Sentences, It Is Said To Be Generative (While Not Used Often, This English Word Means “Capable Of Producing Lots Of Offspring”). I Love Listening To Young Children Speak, Be- Cause In Their Beginning Efforts They Often Put Words To- Gether In A Way That Sounds Utterly Fresh. “The Ladybugs Are Having A Race On The Window!” I Doubt I’D Ever Heard Anyone Say That Before. This Ability Of Even Beginning Speakers To Produce New Sentences Illustrates Both The Generative Capacity Of Language And The Fact That A Speak- Er Is Trying To Represent A Particular Meaning, Even If He Or She Doesn’T Yet Have The Vocabulary Or The Proper Syntax To Express It Very Clearly. The Meaning, Or Semantic Content, Of Language Brings Up A Distinction About How We Use Language. The Famous Linguist Noam Chomsky (1957) Proposed That Every Sen- Tence Has Two Layers Of Representation. The Surface Structure Is The Particular String Of Words That Are Put To- Gether In A Sentence. The Deep Structure Is The Particular Meaning (Semantic Relations) Beneath The Surface Struc- Ture. If Two Girls Are Skipping Rope On The Sidewalk, There Are Many Different Sentences We Could Put Together To De- Scribe That. Each Sentence Would Have A Distinct Surface Structure, But They Would All Share The Same Deep Struc- Ture—The Underlying Meaning. Linguists Have Noted This Distinction Between Surface Structure And Deep Structure To Suggest That All Human Languages May Share A Common Figure 10.1 Breedlove Intro Psych 1e 06/30/14 Language And Cognition 399 Phonemes Make Morphemes That Make Words Words Are Strung Together According To The Rules Of A Language, The Syntax, To Communicate Meaning To Others. (Note: Linguists Use A Very Specific Notation To Identify Phonemes, Which We Are Not Using Here.) 1m 800 600 400 200 0 1900 Fig. 10.01, #1001 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 Year Figure 10.2 Number Of English Words Note The Rapid Ad- Dragonfly Media Group Dition Of Words Since 1950. The Figures For The Dictionaries For 2001 Are For The Number Of Entries, But Many Entries Include Variations Of Words (For Example, The Entry “Blend” Covers “Blending,” “Blends,” And “Blender”). (After Michel Et Al., 2011.) Unfathomable Morpheme Fathom (“Understand”) Morpheme Able (“Capable Of”) Morpheme Un (“Not”) Two Phonemes: “U,” “N” Five Phonemes: “F,” “A,” “Th,” “O,” “M” Four Phonemes: “A,” “B,” “U,” “L” Number Of Entries In: Oxford English Dictionary Webster’S Third New In Ternational Dictionary Number Of Words In English (Thousands) 400 Chapter 10 Born To Talk Noam Chomsky Believes The Human Brain Has Evolved To Acquire Language. Deep Structure. That Issue Is Well Beyond Our Scope, But The Distinction Between Surface Structure And Deep Structure Also Emphasizes How Human Language Is Filled With Meaning. When We Speak, We Are Symbolically Representing How The World Is, Was, Or Should Be. I’Ve Emphasized The Generative Capacity Of Language And The Semantic Con- Tent Of Language Because These Issues Will Arise When We Ask Whether Other Ani- Mals Can Also Use Language, As We’Ll Do Next. Animal Communication Reveals The Evolutionary Roots Of Language Do Animals Use Language? You Might Think That Is A Straightforward Question, But In Fact There Is No Easy Answer. For Example, Scholars Have Suggested That Speech And Language Originally Developed From Gestures Of The Face And Hands (Corballis, 2002; Hewes, 1973). Even Today, Hand Movements Facilitate Speech: People Who Are Prevented From Gesturing Make More Slips And Have More Pauses In Their Speech (Krauss, 1998). Furthermore, People Who Have Been Blind From Birth, And So Have Never Seen The Hand Gestures Of Others, Make Hand Gestures While They Speak (Iverson & Goldin-Meadow, 1998). Deaf Children Raised Without Access To An Established Sign Language May Invent One Of Their Own, Complete With Structural Features That Characterize Other Spoken And Sign Languages (Goldin-Meadow, 2006). These Observations Suggest That Gestures Represent At Least The Beginnings Of Language. Lots Of Other Species Use Gestures To Communicate: Many Birds Display Elaborate Courtship Behaviors To Attract A Mate, Chimpanzees Shake Their Arms To Signal Threat, And Dogs And Wolves Freeze And Stare To Alert Other Members Of The Pack (Or The Dog’S Owner) To The Location Of A Potential Prey. The Gestures That Other Species Use To Com- Municate May Well Reflect The Earliest Beginnings Of Human Language. Plenty Of Non-Human Animals Vocalize As Well As Gesture—Producing Chirps, Barks, Meows, And Songs, Among Other Sounds. Whales Sing And May Imitate Songs That They Hear From Distant Oceans (Noad Et Al., 2000), And Some Seal Mothers Recognize Their Pups’ Vocalizations Even After 4 Years Of Separation (Insley, 2000). In Fact, Many Species—From Elephants To Bats To Birds To Dol- Phins—Are Capable Of Vocal Learning And Use Their Vocalizations To Help Form Social Bonds And Identify One Another (Poole Et Al., 2005; Tyack, 2003). Rats And Mice Produce Complex Ultrasonic Vocalizations, Which We Cannot Hear, That May Communicate Emotional Information (Panksepp, 2005). Although No One Would Suggest That It Is An Evolutionary Precursor To Hu- Man Speech, Birdsong Offers Intriguing Analogies To Human Language (Marler, 1970). Many Birds, Such As Chickens And Doves, Produce Only Simple Calls With Limited Communicative Functions, But Songbirds Like Canaries, Zebra Finch- Es, And Sparrows Produce Complex Vocalizations That Are Crucial For Social Behaviors And Reproductive Success. In These Songbirds, Only Males Of The Species Sing, And The Song Is Learned—In Much The Same Way That Humans Learn Language (Devoogd, 1994; See Figure 8.26). Another Striking Similarity Between Birdsong And Human Language Involves The Different Contributions Of The Left And Right Cerebral Hemispheres. We’Ll See Later In This Chapter That In Humans The Left Hemisphere Plays A Crucial Role In Language—Left-Hemisphere Damage Is Far More Likely To Disrupt Language Than Right-Hemisphere Dam- Age—And The Same Is True In Some Songbirds: Only Left-Hemisphere Lesions Of The Brain Impair Singing (Nottebohm, 1980). One Might Dismiss The Fact That Birds Control Song With Their Left Hemisphere While We Control Language With Our Left Hemisphere As Mere Coincidence. But Is It? Take Into Consideration That If The Hemisphere That Evolved To Control An Activ- Ity (Such As Language) Were Determined By Chance, There Would Be A 50% Chance That It Would Be The Same In Two Species. On The Other Hand, Several Observations Provide Evidence That The Left Hemisphere May Play A Special Role In Ape Communication, Just As It Does In People (Meguerditchian & Vauclair, 2006; Taglialatela Et Al., 2006). Several Brain Regions Related To Language Are Larger In The Left Hemisphere Than In The Right In Humans, And Those Same Regions Are Also Larger In The Left Hemisphere In Apes. Furthermore, Apes Tend To Favor Gesturing With The Right Hand, Which Is Controlled By The Left Side Of The Brain. Was The Left Hemisphere Specialized To Control Communication In The Common Ancestor Of Other Apes And Humans, Or Even In The Common Ancestor Of Birds And Humans? Genetic Studies Support The Idea That Brain Systems Controlling Language Evolved From Communication Systems Like Those Found In Other Animals. Analysis Of A British Family With A Rare Heritable Language Disorder Led To The Identification Of A Gene That Appears To Be Important For Human Language. Children With A Specific Mutation Of This Gene, Foxp2, Take A Long Time To Learn To Speak (Lai Et Al., 2001), And They Display Long-Lasting Difficulties With Some Specific Language Tasks, Such As Learning Verb Tenses (Nudel & Newbury, 2013). The Pattern Of Brain Activation In These Individuals During Performance Of A Language Task Is Dif- Ferent From That Seen In Typical Speakers—They Show Underactivation Of Broca’S Area (Figure 10.3), A Brain Region Important In Language, Which We Will Discuss Later (LiéGeois Et Al., 2003). The Foxp2 Gene In The Other Great Apes Is Different From That Of Humans (Enard Et Al., 2002), Suggesting That This Gene Has Been Evolving Rapidly In Humans, Presumably Because Language Is So Adaptive In Our Species That, Once Begun, It Became Ever More Elaborate In A Short Time (In Evo- Lutionary Terms, Within The Past 1 Million Years). Yet The Basic Function Of Foxp2 May Have Always Been To Support Communi- Cation, Because This Same Gene Is Also Important For Communication In Other Species. The Ultrasonic Vocalizations In Rats And Mice That We Mentioned Earlier Are Disrupted By Mutations In The Foxp2 Gene (French & Fisher, 2014; Shu Et Al., 2005). What’S More, When Researchers Selectively Silenced Foxp2 Expression In The Songbird Brain, Adolescent Males Failed To Properly Learn Their Song (Haesler Et Al., 2007). Because This Same Gene Normally Contributes To Brain Communica- Tion Systems In Both Humans And Other Animals, It Seems Likely That Human Lan- Guage Evolved From A Preexisting Brain System That Was Already Involved In Com- Munication. In That Case, These Animal Communication Systems Really Do Represent The Evolutionary Beginnings Of Human Language. In Natural Settings, Monkeys Combine Certain Vocalizations Into More Com- Plex Calls, Suggesting The Rudiments Of Both Syntax And Semantic Meaning (Ar- Nold & ZuberbüHler, 2006; Ouattara Et Al., 2009), But Nothing Like That Seen In Every Human Language. Even If We Regard These Monkey Vocalizations As Mor- Phemes—Combinations Of Sounds That Convey Particular Meanings, Like “Hawk” Unaffected Group Affected Group Rlrl Broca’S Area Figure 10.3 An Inherited Language Disorder Family Members Of The British Fam- Ily Affected By The Foxp2 Gene Show Underactivation Of Broca’S Area When Carrying Out A Language Task. Instead, The Affected Individuals Seem To Activate A Scattering Of Brain Regions, Mostly In The Right Hemisphere. (After Fisher & Marcus, 2005.) Acquiring Song Male Zebra Finches Learn Their Song From Their Father. Language And Cognition 401 402 Chapter 10 Communication Between Species Service Dogs Learn To Communicate With Their Human Comrades. Versus “Snake”—There Are Too Few To Be Considered A Full-Blown Language. Nor Is There Evidence That Animal Vocalizations Follow Particular Rules About How To String More Than Two Sounds Together To Convey A Particular Meaning. In Other Words, We’Ve Yet To Discern Genuine Syntax In Any Animal Communication Sys- Tem In The Wild. But If No Other Species In Nature Uses A Full-Blown Language, Do Any Species Have Enough Rudiments Of Brain Communication Systems That They Could Be Taught A Language? Can Other Animals Acquire Language With Training? People Have Long Tried To Communicate With Animals, Sometimes Quite Success- Fully: Anyone Who Has Watched A Service Dog At Work, Responding To Commands From Its Owner, Has To Acknowledge That The Human Is Transmitting Lots Of Infor- Mation To A Highly Intelligent Companion. Instilling Language In A Non-Human Is A Different Matter, However. Every Day, You Utter Sentences That You Have Never Said Before, Yet The Meaning Is Clear To Both You And Your Listener Because You Both Understand The Speech Sounds And Syntax Involved. Animals Generally Are Incapable Of Similar Feats, Instead Requiring Extensive Training With Each Specific Utterance (E.G., Each Voice Command To The Sheepdog) In Order For Communica- Tion To Occur At All. In Other Words, Most Animals Appear To Lack An Understanding Of The Meaning Of Individual Words (Semantics) Or The Rules About Putting Words To- Gether To Convey A Particular Message (Syntax)—Although, In Fairness, We Are Ask- Ing Them To Learn Our Semantics And Syntax When We Know Very Little About Theirs. One Strategy For Teaching Language To An Animal Is To Choose A Species As Much Like Ourselves As Possible, In Other Words, One Of The Other Great Apes. Because The Vocal Tracts Of The Other Apes Are Very Different From Those Of Hu- Mans, Scientists Have Given Up Attempting To Train These Animals To Produce Human Speech. But Can Non-Human Primates Be Taught Other Forms Of Com- Munication That Have Features Similar To Those Of Human Language, Including The Ability To Represent Objects With Symbols And To Manipulate Those Symbols Ac- Cording To Rules Of Order? Our Nearest Primate Relatives, Chimpanzees, Are Capable Of Learning Many Of The Hand Gestures Of American Sign Language (Asl), The Standardized Sign Language Used By Some Deaf People In North America. Chimps Trained In Asl Have Been Reported To Use Signs Spontaneously, And In Novel Sequences (Gard- Ner & Gardner, 1969, 1984). Gorillas Apparently Also Can Learn Hundreds Of Asl Signs (Patterson & Linden, 1981) (Figure 10.4a). An Alternative Language System Involves The Use Of Assorted Colored Chips (Symbols) That Can Be Arranged On A Magnetic Board. After Extensive Training With This System, Chimps Reportedly Organize The Chips In Ways That Seem To Reflect An Acquired Ability To Form Short Sentences And To Note Various Logical Classifications (Premack, 1971). A Third Language System Uses Computerized Keys To Represent Concepts; Again, Apes Show Some Ability To Acquire Words In This Language, Which They Appear To String Together Into Novel, Meaningful Chains (Lyn Et Al., 2011; Rumbaugh, 1977). The Idea That Apes Can Acquire And Use Rudiments Of Language Remains Con- Troversial. According To Many Linguists, Syntax Is The Essence Of Language, So Investigators Look For The Ability Of Chimps To Generate Meaningful And Novel Sequences Of Signs That Follow Syntactical Rules. The Work Of Gardner And Gard- Ner (1969, 1984), Premack (1971), And Others Suggested That Chimps Do Make Distinctive Series Of Signs, Including Categories And Negatives, Just As Though They Were Using Words In A Sentence. However, Other Researchers Argued That These Sequences May Simply Be Subtle Forms Of Imitation (Terrace, 1979), Per- Haps Unconsciously Cued By The Experimenter Who Is Providing The Training. Native Asl Users Dispute The Linguistic Validity Of The Signs Generated By Apes; And Pinker (1994) Insists, “Even Putting Aside Vocabulary, Phonology, Morphol- Ogy, And Syntax, What Impresses One The Most About Chimpanzee Signing Is That (A) (B) Language And Cognition 403 Figure 10.4 Communicating With Animals (A) Koko The Gorilla, Shown Here With Trainer Dr. Penny Patterson, Communicates Using American Sign Language. (B) Chim- Panzees Can Learn To Use Arbitrary Signs And Symbols On A Keyboard To Communicate. Fundamentally, Deep Down, Chimps Just Don’T Get It” (P. 349). Indeed, It’S Hard To Imagine How We Could Even Tell If An Animal Understood Words For Complex Con- Cepts Like Retaliation Or Terrorism. Nevertheless, Considering That Apes Can Comprehend Spoken Words, Produce Novel Combinations Of Words, And Respond Appropriately To Sentences Arranged According To A Syntactic Rule, It Seems Likely That The Linguistic Capacity Of Apes Was Underestimated Historically (Savage-Rumbaugh, 1993). For Example, A Bonobo (Pygmy Chimpanzee) Named Kanzi, The Focus Of A Long-Term Research Program (Savage-Rumbaugh & Lewin, 1994), Reportedly Learned Numerous Symbols And Ways To Assemble Them In Novel Combinations, Entirely Through Observational Learning Rather Than The Usual Intensive Training (Figure 10.4b). Kanzi’S Ability To Produce Novel Strings Of Words Suggests That His Is A Generative Language, Like Human Language. So Although The Debate Is Far From Settled, The Linguistic Accom- Plishments Of Primates Have Forced Investigators To Sharpen Their Criteria Of What Constitutes Language. Another Strategy For Teaching Language To Animals Is To Choose A Species That May Not Be Closely Related To Us But Is Adapted For Flexible, Oral Communication, Namely A Parrot. When Irene Pepperberg Purchased A Year-Old African Gray Par- Rot And Named Him Alex, She Soon Became Intrigued By How Quickly Alex, Like Other Parrots, Would Learn New Phrases. She Devised A New Training System That Exploited The Highly Social Nature Of Parrots, Working With Another Person, Encouraging Alex To Imitate The Humans’ Use Of Language. Alex’S Job Was To Outcompete His Rival (The Other Human) For Treats, And For Pep- Perberg’S Approval And Praise. Eventually Alex Learned About 150 Words. He Could Name The Color, Shape, And Type Of Mate- Rial That Made Up An Object, Even One He’D Never Seen Before. He Could Sort Objects By Shape Or Color (Figure 10.5) And Could Count Small Numbers Of Objects (PéRon Et Al., 2014). Most Important, Alex Could Perform These Feats Even For A Stranger, With Pepperberg Out Of The Room. This Meant That Alex Was Not Like “Clever Hans,” The Horse We Learned About In Section 2.1, Breedlove Intro Psych 1e Who Relied On His Trainer’S (Unconscious) Cues To Stamp His Hoof Fig. 10.04 #0000 “You Be Good, See You Tomorrow” The Af- Rican Gray Parrot Alex (1976–2007) Spoke With His Owner, Dr. Irene Pepperberg, And Appeared To Create New, Meaningful The Correct Number Of Times. Alex Appeared To Produce New Sentences From A Vocabulary Of About 150 English Words. 08/19/13 Figure 10.5 404 Chapter 10 Babble Sentences And Even New Words. Shown A Dried Banana Chip, He Called It A “Banacker,” Which Sounds Suspiciously Like A Blending Of Two Words He Already Knew: “Banana” And “Cracker.” As Pepperberg Put Him In His Cage One Night, Alex Said His Typical Bedtime Phrases To Her: “You Be Good, See You Tomorrow. I Love You.” The Next Morning He Was Dead, Apparently Of Natural Causes, At Age 31. Despite Alex’S Accomplishments, One Researcher Still Denied That Alex Was Using Language. As Quoted In The New York Times Obituary For Alex, David Premack Dismissed The Parrot’S Ability As Unlike Human Language Because “There’S No Evidence Of Recursive Logic, And Without That You Can’T Work With Digital Numbers Or More Complex Human Grammar” (Carey, 2007). Personally, It Seems To Me That Every Time An Animal Manages To Accomplish Some Aspect Of Language That Was Previously Thought To Be Uniquely Human, The Bar For What Constitutes True Language Gets Raised. First We Were Told That Ani- Mals Didn’T Understand The Symbolic Aspect Of Language—That A Particular Set Of Sounds Means “Water.” Then When Animals Learned To Use Keyboards With Arbi- Trary Symbols, Or Asl Gestures To Represent Objects, We Were Told They Could Not Produce New Sentences. Then When Animals Were Demonstrated To Have Gener- Ated New Sentences That Seemed To Make Sense, The Objection Was That They Don’T Understand Syntax—They Don’T Follow Strict Rules About The Order Of Words Used In A Sentence. For Goodness Sakes, Alex’S Ability Was Dismissed Because He Couldn’T Work With “Digital Numbers” Or Do “Recursive Logic” (Can You?)! It’S Hard Not To Suspect That Some Researchers Feel Threatened By The Idea That Hu- Mans Are Not Unique In Our Abilities, Or Are Eager To Downplay The Abilities Of In- Dividuals That Are Just “Animals.” The Question Of Whether Other Animals Can Really Learn Language Is Not Likely To Be Settled Anytime Soon. Although We Have Yet To Experience The Miracle Of Being Able To Carry On A Conversation With Another Species, Learning A Language While Growing Up Is Miraculous In Itself. We Start Life Ready To Decode Any Language We Happen To Hear A Child’S Brain Is An Incredible Linguistic Machine, Rapidly Acquiring The Pho- Nemes, Vocabulary, And Syntax Of The Local Language. Language Is Learned With- Out Any Formal Instruction; The Baby Simply Has To Hear The Language Spoken In Order To Learn It. Of Course, The Baby Is Not At All Passive In This Process. One Of The Reasons Babies Learn Language So Rapidly Is Because They Are Intensely Interested In Hearing Speech And In Watching A Talking Face. We’Ll See Shortly That Even Newborns Are Willing To Work In Order To Hear Someone Talk. As They Avidly Attend To Language And Soak It Up, Children Pass Through Behavioral Milestones Of Language Development (Table 10.1). While The Time Line Of When An Individual Child Reaches A Particular Milestone Varies Considerably, The Sequence Is Almost Always The Same. That Finding Indicates That Each Stage Of Language Acquisition Lays The Groundwork To Tackle The Next Stage. Of Course A Child Does Not Begin Speaking In Fully Formed, Grammatically Cor- Rect Sentences. A Newborn Will Fuss, Cry, And Laugh, But By 6 Months Or So Most Babies Babble, Making Meaningless Sounds That Are Strung Together Such That They Resemble Speech. The First Stages Of Babbling Tend To Be Repetitive—“Ba- Ba-Ba-Ba-Ba-Ba-Ba”—While Later The Babbling Sounds Are More Variable. One Of My Favorite Stages In The Development Of My Own Children Was That Point When They Would Wake Up Alone In Their Crib And Begin Babbling In That Variable Way. I Would Hear All The Inflections And Tones Of Human Speech, But The Words Were Pure Nonsense. I Could Almost Imagine The Child Was Speaking Some Exotic For- Eign Language. As The Child Learns To Articulate Specific Words, She Will Use Telegraphic Speech, Providing Only A Few Words, Or Even A Single Word, To Communicate. The Meaningless Sounds Strung Together To Resemble Speech Made By Infants, Typically Before The Age Of 6 Months. Telegraphic Speech Communication Form In Young Children, In Which A Few Words Are Used To Express An Idea. Language And Cognition 405 Table 10.1 Typical Stages Of Childhood Language Development Age Receptive Language Expressive Language Birth–5 Months Reacts To Loud Sounds Turns Head Toward Sounds Watches Faces That Speak Vocalizes Pleasure And Displeasure (Laugh, Cry, Giggle) Makes Noises When Talked To 6–11 Months Understands “No-No” Tries To Repeat Sounds Babbles (“Ba-Ba-Ba, Da-Da-Da”) Gestures 12–17 Months Attends To Book About 2 Minutes Follows Simple Gestures Tries To Imitate Simple Words Points To Objects, People Says 2–3 Words To Label Object 18–23 Months Enjoys Being Read To Follows Simple Commands Points To Body Parts Understands Simple Verbs Says 8–10 Words (Maybe With Unclear Pronunciation) Asks For Foods By Name Starts Combining Words (“More Milk”) 2–3 Years Understands About 50 Words Understands Pronouns Knows Spatial Concepts (“In,”“Out”) Says About 40 Words Uses Pronouns Such As “You,”“I” Uses 2- To 3-Word Phrases 3–4 Years Understands Colors Understands Groupings Of Objects (Foods, Clothes, Toys, Etc.) Is Mostly Understandable By Strangers Expresses Ideas, Feelings 4–5 Years Understands Complex Questions Understands “Behind,”“Next To” Says About 200–300 Words Uses Some Irregular Verb Past Tenses (“Ran,”“Fell”) Engages In Conversation 5 Years Understands > 2,000 Words Understands Sentences > 8 Words Long Can Follow Series Of Three Directions Understands Time Sequences (What Happened First, Second, Last) Uses Complex And Compound Sentences Sources: American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, N.D.; National Institutes Of Health, 2014; Pro-Ed Inc., 1999. “Need Cookie!” Rather Than “I Want A Cookie” Or, Better Yet, “May I Have A Cookie, Please?” Typically, Adults Will Repeat The Child’S Communication, Filling In The Missing Words, So That By 3 Years Of Age Or So, Most Children Speak In Complete Sentences. What’S More, The Child’S Pronunciation Of Words Is Likely To Be Imper- Fect At First. This Means That In The Early Stages, The Child’S Family And Caregivers, Who Have Learned To Understand The Child, May Be The Only Ones Who Effectively Get The Message. As The Child’S Language Skills Improve, She Will Also Be Under- Stood By Strangers. Another Landmark For Children In Modern Times Is Being Able To Understand Speech, And Produce Comprehensible Speech, Over The Tele- Phone, Without Any Visual Cues To Aid Communication. Psychologists Use Behavior To Test Babies’ Language Ability One Of The First Things Babies Must Learn Is How To Tell Different Phonemes Apart When They Hear Them. This Is A More Difficult Task Than You Might Think, Because Some Of The Sounds That, To Our Adult Ears, Sound Very Distinct Are In Fact Physi- Cally Very Similar. For Example, The Syllables Ba And Pa Are A Lot Alike, And Differ Only In Terms Of How Soon We Vocalize (Make A “Hum” In The Back Of Our Throat) After We Pop Our Lips Apart. Yet 4-Month-Old Children Can Tell Them Apart. How Do We Know? In A Pioneering Study, Peter Eimas And Colleagues (1971) Presented Babies Of Different Ages With Different Sounds. The Babies Were Too Little To Talk, But Habituation Response 406 Chapter 10 Habituate To Stop Attending To A Stimulus Because It Is No Longer Novel. The Researchers Found A Way To Know Whether The Babies Could Distinguish Between, For Example, Ba And Pa. Babies Were Rewarded For Sucking On An Artificial Nipple By Being Presented With Brief Speech Sounds. They Must Have Found This Rewarding, Because They Would Suck More Eagerly When Given That Reward. This Finding Alone Tells Us Something Important About Babies—They Are Eager To Hear Language, As We Noted Earlier. Most Important, If We Present The Same Word Over And Over, The Babies Eventually Grow Tired Of Hearing It. We Say That They Have Habituated To The Sound—They Can Still Hear It, But They Stop Attending To It. In A Variation Of The Habituation Technique We Dis- Cussed In Chapter 5 (See Figure 5.13), This Tendency To Habituate To Sounds Can Be Used To Determine If The Babies Can Tell Ba From Pa. If They’Ve Been Hearing Nothing But “Ba” For A While, They Slow Down Their Sucking As They Habituate. If We Now Present “Pa,” Then The Babies Should Regain Interest And Increase Their Sucking, But Only If They Notice The Difference In The Phoneme. Psychologists Have Exploited This Logic To Determine What Babies Can And Cannot Perceive In Spoken Language, As We’Ll See Next (Figure 10.6). Researchers At Work “Reading Babies’ Minds” Figure 10.6 Babies Will Work To Hear New Speech Sounds (After Eimas Et Al., 1971.) Question: Can Babies Distinguish Between Similar Phonemes? Hypothesis: Babies Who Have Habituated To One Phoneme Will Notice The Difference In The Other, Slightly Different Phoneme. Test: Have Babies Suck On A Pacifier For A Chance To Hear Sounds. If They Are Given The Same Sound Repeatedly, They Will Habituate And Suck Less. If They Are Given A New Sound, They Will Renew Their Sucking If They Can Actually Tell That The Phoneme Is New. Results: The Babies Increased Sucking When Presented With A New, Different Phoneme. Two Very Similar Phonemes Two Distinct Phonemes Same Phoneme 45 60 45 30 15 New Phoneme Presented 45 45 60 60 45 45 30 30 15 15 New Phoneme Presented Au/Sa: 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 Time (Min) Time (Min) 2 4 6 8 10 Time (Min) We Extended The Graphs A Little Past 10 So The Divide Screens Would Be The Same Width And Visually Pleasing. Is This Ok? Thanks, Dmg Conclusion: Even Young Babies Can Distinguish Different Phonemes. Later Research Would Use Similar Methods To Show That Young Babies Can Distinguish All The Phonemes That Have Been Found In Any Language. Because The Baby’S Response Increases When The New Phoneme Is Presented, She Must Be Able To Distinguish It From The Previous Phoneme. Average Number Of Sucking Responses (A) 100 80 60 40 20 0 6–8 10–12 Months Months Age Of Infants (B) 100 80 60 40 20 0 Figure 10.7 Sharpening Phoneme Detection Infants Slowly Lose The Ability To Dis- Tinguish Phonemes If They Are Not Exposed To Them. (A) At 6–8 Months Of Age, Ameri- Can And Japanese Infants Are Equally Good At Distinguishing The Sound Of R Versus L. A Few Months Later, American Babies Become Better At Distinguishing The Two Sounds, But Japanese Infants, Having No Exposure To English, Begin To Lose The Capacity To Tell The Two Phonemes Apart. (B) American Babies Can Distinguish Phonemes In Hindi That English-Speaking Adults Cannot. (A After Kuhl Et Al., 2006; B After Werker Et Al., 1981.) Adult Monkeys Can Also Discriminate Between Phonemes (Ramus Et Al., 2000), So This Ability May Reflect A Basic Property Of The Primate Auditory Sys- Tem. But There’S More To The Story About Babies. By Attending To The Pho- Nemes In The Language Spoken Around Them, Human Babies, Who Begin Life Babbling Nearly All The Phonemes Known In All Human Languages, Soon Come To Use Only The Subset Of Phonemes In Use Around Them. Not Only That, But Human Babies Also Get Better And Better At Distinguishing The Phonemes They’Re Exposed To. As They Get More And More Exposure To The Phonemes In Use Around Them, They Slowly Lose The Ability To Distinguish Other Phonemes. For Example, Japanese Newborns Can Distinguish Between The Sounds For R Versus L, But If They Hear Only Japanese While Growing Up, They Will Find It Hard To Tell Those Sounds Apart As Adults (Figure 10.7a; Kuhl Et Al., 2006). As An- Other Example, Native English-Speaking Adults Have A Very Difficult Time Distin- Guishing Some Of The Phonemes In Hindi, One Of The Official Languages Of India. Yet 6- To 8-Month-Old Babies From English-Speaking Households Can Detect Those Different Hindi Phonemes (Figure 10.7b; Werker Et Al., 1981). Babies Begin This Process Of Losing The Ability To Distinguish Phonemes They Have Not Been Exposed To At About The Age They Themselves Start Making Halting Lan- Guage-Like Sounds, At 6 To 8 Months Of Age. The Baby’S Developing Language Abilities Are Especially Shaped By Motherese, The Singsong, High-Pitched Speech With Slow, Exaggerated Pro- Nunciation That Parents Use With Their Babies (Falk, 2004) In All Cultures (Boys- Son-Bardies, 2001). Babies Will Work Especially Hard To Hear This Sort Of Speech. The Lilting Qualities Of Motherese Convey Emotional Tone And Reward, Helping The Baby Attend To Speech And Use Developing Memory Skills To At- Tach Meaning To Previously Arbitrary Speech Sounds. The Fact That Babies Go Through This Process Of Attending To Speech And Sharpening Their Ability To Distinguish The Phonemes They Hear, And Losing The Ability To Distinguish Other Phonemes, Suggests That Our Brain Is Specialized To Motherese Learn Language. Certainly Many Linguists Believe This, And To The Extent That There The Singsong, High- Pitched Speech With Slow, Exaggerated Pronunciation That Parents Use With Babies. Breedlove Intro Psych 1e Fig. 10.06, #1006 06/30/14 07/10/14 Dragonfly Media Group Language And Cognition 407 American Infants Japanese Infants Adult Hindi Speakers American Infants Adult English Speakers Infants In English-Speaking Homes Can Distinguish Hindi Phonemes That Their Parents Cannot. Percentage Of Infants Distinguishing English Phonemes Percentage Of Participants Distinguishing Phonemes 408 Chapter 10 Box 10.1 Psychology In Everyday Life Williams Syndrome Offers Clues About Language Williams Syndrome, Which Occurs In Approximately 1 Out Of 20,000 Births (Bower, 2000), Illustrates A Fascinating Disconnect Between What We Normally Regard As Intelligence And Language. Individuals With Williams Syndrome Speak Freely And Fluently With A Large Vocabulary, Yet They May Be Unable To Draw Simple Images, Arrange Colored Blocks To Match An Example, Or Tie Shoelaces. The Individuals Are Very Sociable, Ready To Strike Up Conversa- Tion And Smile. They May Also Display Strong Musical Talent, Either Singing (See Figure) Or Playing An Instrument. The Syndrome Results From The Dele- Tion Of About 28 Genes From One Of The Two Copies Of Chromosome 7 (De Luis Et Al., 2000). No One Understands Why The Remaining Copies Of These Genes, On The Other Chromosome 7, Do Not Compensate For The Lost Copies. The Absence Of One Copy Of The Gene Called Elastin (Which Encodes A Protein Important For Connective Tissue In Skin And Ligaments) Leads To Pixielike Facial Features In People Who Have Williams Syndrome. Several Of The Other Missing Genes Are Thought To Lead To Changes In Brain Development And To The Behavioral Features Of The Syndrome. Because Speech Development In Williams Syndrome Is Spared In A Brain That Finds Many Other Tasks Difficult, The Human Brain May Indeed Be Spe- Cialized To Pick Up Languages In A Way That’S Distinct From Solving Other Tasks. The Psychological Development Of Such Individuals Is Complicated. As Infants They May Display A Greater Understanding Of Numbers Than Other Infants, But As Adults They May Show A Poor Grasp Of Numbers. Con- Versely, Their Language Performance Is Poor In Infancy But Greatly Improved By Adulthood (Paterson Et Al., The Appearance Of Williams Syndrome Children With Williams Syn- Drome Are Often Very Fluent In Languages And Very Expressive In Music. 1999). These Findings Suggest That The Developmental Process Is Distinctively Altered In Williams Syndrome, Which Adds To The Mystery Of Why These Children Seem To Catch Up In Language But Not Other Skills. In- Triguingly, Possession Of Extra Copies Of The Identified Genes On Chromosome 7—Rather Than Deletions Of These Genes—Produces A Syndrome That Is, In Many Ways, The Converse Of Williams Syndrome: Very Poor Expressive Language Accompanied By Normal Spatial Abilities (Somerville Et Al., 2005). These Cases Also Suggest That The Learning Of Language Is Distinct From Other Forms Of Intelligence, Perhaps Because Humans Evolved A Specialized Capacity To Acquire Language. Williams Syndrome A Genetic Disorder Characterized By Normal Verbal Abilities But Severe Deficits In Spatial Reasoning. Is Any Disagreement, It Lies In Different Ideas About What It Means To Say The Brain Is “Specialized.” One Reason To Think That Parts Of The Human Brain Are Especially Adapted To Learn Language, As Opposed To Being Generalized To Solve Any Prob- Lem, Is The Observation That Some People Have Especially Fluent Speech But Have Great Difficulty With Non-Speech Tasks, Discussed In Box 10.1. While It Is True That Babies Are Remarkably Good At Picking Up Language, They Need That Exposure To Language Early In Life In Order To Become Proficient In Lan- Guage, As We’Ll Discuss Next.
Flashcard
Studied by 4 people
Note