Thinking like a psycholinguist

Thinking like a psycholinguist John Field University of Reading Teaching Psycholinguistics.

University of Essex, 20th June 2008

Education that liberates consists of acts of cognition, not transferrals of information Paulo Freire (1921-1997)

The fuzzy boundaries of PL Psychological linguistics

Pragmatics

Neurolinguistics

Cognitive psychology of language acquisition, storage and use

Language evolution

Social psychology of language

Clinical linguistics

Cognitive linguistics Historical linguistics?

Some central areas First language acquisition  Representation, storage and retrieval  Processing: productive and receptive  Language and the brain  Language impairment  Second language acquisition 

Some central areas First language acquisition  Representation, storage and retrieval  Processing: productive and receptive  Language and the brain  Language impairment  Second language acquisition 

Two possible routes into PL ď Ž

ď Ž

Language background Awareness of form (products of language) Difficulty with the notion of process Lack of basic psychological concepts: memory, attention, representation Psychology background Understanding of models Limited language awareness (e.g. phrase structure) Limited linguistic terminology (word classes etc)

Linguist into psycholinguist: the literature Addressed to initiates  Dense in terminology  Heavy cross-referencing to theories taken as known  May contain statistics 

Solution: Introductory topics Accessible topics that do not require detailed knowledge of psychological theory (e.g. memory, attention, representation)  Topics that are discussed in the media.  At least one topic that lends itself to a small-scale project that can be carried out by students. 

Possible topics Animal communication  Language evolution  Brain lateralisation and localisation  Critical period  Vocabulary storage  Introduction to impairment  Child language and CDS  Bilingualism 

Problems with ‘basic’ topics  





Some use mixed data and methods They are often not representative of more central issues in PL because they use less rigorous methods.

They do not have the same career relevance as topics related to processing (applications to education – media – law – management etc.)

They may lead students to write at a simplistic level in terms of theory, argument and supporting evidence.

Solution: Directed reading 

Students rely initially upon secondary sources. But original attributions must be made: e.g. Rosch, 1973, Levelt, 1989.



Problem: many secondary sources are designed for psychologists (exceptions: Altmann, 1997, Whitney, 1998, Aitchison, 2003a, 2007, Field 2003, Steinberg & Sciarini, 2006).

 

Use a set of accessible readings: one per topic, edited if necessary. Examples, Field 2003, Section D Insist on students checking terms and theory in introductory reference sources when writing assignments (e.g. Field, 2004, Aitchison, 2003b)

Linguist into psycholinguist: the methodology May be data-led (vs theory-led)  Scientific approach (not anecdotal, not subjective)  Unfamiliar methods: Reaction Time, priming, head-turn preference, eye tracking, connectionist modelling 

Solution: Introductory session 1. Different objectives of linguists and psycholinguists 2. Types of data collection 3. Students classify examples by type 4. Students interpret what they tell us

Thinking like a psycholinguist 1. Students need to be able to interpret psycholinguistic data, both raw and as presented in the literature ď Ž 2. Discovery provides a deeper learning experience, within which field-specific patterns of thought are elicited. ď Ž 3. We are all processors of language. The best subject for a student to investigate and interrogate is him/herself. ď Ž

A discovery approach (Field, 2005) 

 

Task sheet with introductory explanations and exercises based on:  Samples of data for analysis (e.g. transcript, dysgraphic spelling errors);  Graphics or tables summarising data;  Language activities followed by reflection on the processes involved; Powerpoint. Explanatory text and graphics Answer sheet, handed out at the end of the session and summarising issues that have arisen

The dual route model READ

Sub-lexical /r+i:+d/

Lexical /r+i:d/

/ri:d/

/ri:d/

Neighbours GEAD  NEAN  SOAT  PIVE  FOWN  HEAF  WIRT 

head dead read bead mean bean lean clean coat goat boat live give five drive down town grown known leaf sheaf deaf dirt shirt

Conclusions on sound-spelling 



Word-matching in English seems to use:  Whole-word matches YACHT  Grapheme-phoneme rules HOSPITALITY  Analogy LIGHT  Digraphs EE – SH – TH Note that children may not have an awareness of phonemes before learning to read in L1 (Morais et al., 1979)

Developmental dyslexia ď Ž

Phonological dyslexia Cannot decode non-words Recognises complete irregular words

ď Ž

Surface dyslexia Decodes non-words Reports irregular words phonically Uses a single analogous match (PINT/MINT)

Skilled vs unskilled readers

Assessing and applying Small-scale research project for students to familiarise themselves with PL enquiry and become critical of methods and findings. ď Ž Full length assignment with the expectation that the ideas discussed will be supported by a small-scale independent research project. ď Ž

A small-scale project

(Field, 2005 abridged)

Study the execution errors of five of your fellow students.

First, ask them to do a brief typing test, copying a page from a book. Time them.

When they write their next essay, ask them to turn on the Track Changes facility. Get them to print out their final draft, showing all the changes they have made. Analyse their errors.

Look especially for phonologically based errors and errors which suggest that the subject has developed an automatic key stroke sequence that is incorrect. Check for the position on the keyboard of wrong sequences of letters. Compare the percentages of different types of error among your five subjects. Then check against typing speed and decide if that is a factor or not.

A small-scale evaluative project (Field 2005) Replicate Rosch’s experiment. Choose 3 categories and draw up a list of 20 examples in each. Ask three or four subjects to number the items from 1 to 7 according to how good an example they are of the category. Examine how consistent their answers are; then provide your own explanations for this consistency. You may want to extend the task by studying two distinct groups of 2 or 3 people. They might be of: a. two different age groups (e.g. teenage vs elderly) b. two different social backgrounds c. two different ethnic backgrounds (native speakers) Interpret your findings; compare them with those of Rosch.

Then go on to evaluate a) the task b) the evidence that you obtained. Do you have any reservations about them?

Assignment Meaning building. How does a listener or reader achieve a fuller understanding of a piece of input by bringing additional meaning to bear? What decisions need to be made in building a complete representation of what the speaker or writer intended?

You should support your comments by reading aloud to 3-4 subjects the three-part taxi-driver story from the Worksheet, and asking them after each part to tell you what they have understood.

Record their retellings and comment on the inferences they made and the points that they seem to think are important.

Contact details: j.c.field@reading.ac.uk http://www.llas.ac.uk/events/archive/2966