Group items tagged

"Two vital parts of mentally organizing the world are classification, or the understanding that similar things belong in the same category; and induction, an educated guess about a thing's properties if it's in a certain category. ... 'For the last 30 to 40 years it has been believed that even for very young children, labels are category markers, as they are for adults,' explains psychologist Vladimir M. Sloutsky ... To test their hypothesis, the psychologists showed pictures of two imaginary creatures to preschoolers and college undergraduates. Both animals had a body, hands, feet, antennae, and a head. ... The difference arose when the head was a jalet's but [the] label was "flurp," or vice-versa. Then, most of the adults went with the label (we accept that a dolphin is a mammal, even though it looks and swims like a fish). The children relied on the head for identification. Regardless of its name, a thing with a jalet's head is a jalet." Link to the study (PDF): http://cogdev.cog.ohio-state.edu/Papers/2011/SD-VS-PsychScience.pdf

The German poet Christian Morgenstern once said that "all seagulls look as though their name were Emma." Though Morgenstern was known for his nonsense poetry, there was truth in his suggestion that some linguistic labels are perfectly suited to the concepts they denote. Similar to what we've learned about metaphors, labels and names influence how we think and behave. Studies suggest as soon as you label a concept, you change how people perceive it (aka the Heisenberg principle.) Words evoke images such as 'bouba' and 'kiki' from James Geary's TedTalk, directional concepts such as are "north" with up and "south" with down, and simplicity of pronunciation and spelling all affects how one perceives another.

3D interactive brain with labels: can select from left menu particular areas to look at, such as Broca's and Wernicke's

This is a helpful site about how to read a spectrogram that hasn't been labelled, such as one that you might record yourself using special software.

Without understanding the 'referential function' of language (words as 'verbal labels', symbolizing other things) it is impossible to learn a language. Is this implicit knowledge already present early in infants? Marno, Nespor, and Mehler of the International School of Advanced Studies conducted experiments with infants (4 months old). Babies watched a series of videos where a person might (or might not) utter an (invented) name of an object, while directing (or not directing) their gaze towards the position on the screen where a picture of the object would appear. By monitoring the infants' gaze, Marno and colleagues observed that, in response to speech cues, the infant's gaze would look faster for the visual object, indicating that she is ready to find a potential referent of the speech. However, this effect did not occur if the person in the video remained silent or if the sound was a non-speech sound. "The mere fact of hearing verbal stimuli placed the infants in a condition to expect the appearance, somewhere, of an object to be associated with the word, whereas this didn't happen when there was no speech, even when the person in the video directed the infant's gaze to where the object would appear, concludes Marno. "This suggests that infants at this early age already have some knowledge that language implies a relation between words and the surrounding physical world. Moreover, they are also ready to find out these relations, even if they don't know anything about the meanings of the words yet. Thus, a good advice to mothers is to speak to their infants, because infants might understand much more than they would show, and in this way their attention can be efficiently guided by their caregivers."

When it comes to the popular naming of infectious diseases, xenophobia has long played a prominent role. Susan Sontag, in her 1988 work, AIDS and Its Metaphors (a follow-up to her extended essay from a decade earlier, Illness as Metaphor), observed that "there is a link between imagining disease and imagining foreignness. It lies perhaps in the very concept of wrong, which is archaically identical with the non-us, the alien." Cognizant of how geographic labels have been unfairly used in the past, the WHO (World Health Organization) introduced a new set of best practices for naming infectious diseases, in 2015. Geographic names are to be avoided in order to "avoid causing offense," though the WHO did not insist that already established names like Middle East Respiratory Syndrome, or MERS, should be retroactively changed.

This article discusses the use and comparison of the two words "women" and "female." It takes a political, social, and economical aspect to show very interesting examples of how the two words differ. "Both words can function as nouns, but female, unlike woman, can also be an adjective. In an Oscar Hammerstein II lyric from "Flower Drum Song," written 50 years ago, a young woman glad to be a girl sings, "I'm strictly a female female" - the first use an adjective; the second, a noun. Adjectives are by their nature stretchable, happily taking "more" or "less": you can say "more female," but you cannot say "more woman"; you would have to say "more womanly." In modifying another noun, woman is what the O.E.D. labels an apposite noun - explaining, even identifying, the noun it "stands next to" - but syntactically stronger than an adjective. Both words can be used as modifiers of nouns, but the noun woman has more weight."

Jennifer Sclafani, Georgetown University linguist, examines the idiolect of Trump. Everyone possesses an idiolect: an idiosyncratic form of language that is unique to an individual. Trump's idiolect seems particularly polarizing. Critics might decry Trump thusly: "He doesn't make any sense." "He uses a lot of small words." "His speeches are non-substantive." On the other hand, supporters see Trump as "authentic," "relatable," and "consistent." He's a "straight shooter" who "doesn't mince words." So how does one idiolect produce such polarizing evaluations? It has to do with the precarious connections between linguistic form and meaning. The relationship between the two, as the anthropologist Elinor Ochs describes, is non-exclusive, indirect, and constitutive. Put simply, there are multiple meanings associated with any given linguistic feature, and the connection between form and meaning is a two-way street Whichever meaning is activated by a specific pronunciation, or any other aspect of your idiolect, has everything to do with context: Where are you? Who is your audience? What is your purpose? What image are you trying to project? These are factors that candidates are always taking into account as they put forth their presidential selves on the campaign trail. Tailoring their speech to the context, like when a candidate takes on a drawl while campaigning in the South, has been grounds for being labeled "inconsistent" or "fake," as we've seen with Hillary Clinton, even though this type of linguistic accommodation is a perfectly natural feature of everyone's idiolect.

This article examines the origin, history, and evolving use of the pejorative term "Karen" on social media. The label publicly lambasts whiny, middle-aged white women who shamelessly display entitlement, privilege, and racism - and who tend to call the police when they don't get what they want.

This article, published by BYU, talks about the effects that certain accents have on people's perceptions. Because everyone talks in a different way, some cultures may associate people with certain labels. Many studies are conducted within this article that displays statistical data on the perception of certain accents. Some people perceive certain accents positively while others see them negatively. This article reflects how different cultures act while being combined and the outcomes that come out of that action.

This study found that smokers' who performed self-affirming activities were less defensive and more responsive to cigarette warning ads and quitting smoking than smokers who did not perform these activities.

When we reduce the Israel-Hamas war to simple labels like 'pro-' or 'anti-,' we overlook how complex the issue is and the wide spectrum of opinions. These terms pigeonhole people into one side versus another, preventing understanding and dialogue towards peace.

This article discusses the dangers of disappearing languages that are native to small regions and minorities. There seems to be a label set on each language that determines its superiority or inferiority due to power, class and commonality.