|
Children's inferences by exclusion in word learning and beyond: Its logical form and processing| old_uid | 9228 |
|---|
| title | Children's inferences by exclusion in word learning and beyond: Its logical form and processing |
|---|
| start_date | 2010/11/09 |
|---|
| schedule | 12h30 |
|---|
| online | no |
|---|
| location_info | salle C |
|---|
| summary | When children hear a speaker say a novel word in the presence of a novel object and one or more familiar objects, they exclude the familiar object as a likely referent of the speaker's utterance and assume that he intended to refer to the novel object (Markman and Wachtel, 1988; Merriman & Bowmann, 1989, Diesendruck & Markson, 2001).
The talk will first introduce the phenomenon and review empirical data investigating factors that influence children's exclusion in word learning. Then I will present a description of the inference underlying this phenomenon. Specifically, the suggestion is that overall the inference can be described as a Disjunction (a OR b, cf. Halberda, 2003; 2006): The speaker is referring to one of the available objects. Further, embedded in the overall disjunction is a Modus Tollens (IF a, THEN A; NOT A, THUS NOT a): If the speaker intends to refer to one of the familiar objects, then he would use the corresponding conventional label; since he uses none of the objects' labels; he thus is not referring to one of the familiar objects (cf., Clark, 1990; Diesendruck & Markson, 2001). Finally, the conclusion from the MT then serves as a premise for resolving the disjunction (NOT a, THUS, b). Thus, the conditional expectation of a certain familiar word is at the heart of the word learning by exclusion (Grassmann & Schulze, forthcommming).
Subsequently, a variety of phenomena in children (and maybe animals) will be reviewed, which could be described as (implicit) MT inferences (e.g., habituation-dishabituation, rational imitation).
Finally, I will present some speculations about the underlying computational processes. I suggest that very basic cognitive processes such as spreading activation and inhibition can account for what I describe as complex embedded exclusion inference. |
|---|
| responsibles | Boussidan |
|---|
| |
|