Displaying 1 - 9 of 9
-
Garrido Rodriguez, G., Huettig, F., Norcliffe, E., Brown, P., & Levinson, S. C. (2017). Participant assignment to thematic roles in Tzeltal: Eye tracking evidence from sentence comprehension in a verb-initial language. Poster presented at the workshop 'Event Representations in Brain, Language & Development' (EvRep), Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
-
Hömke, P., Holler, J., & Levinson, S. C. (2017). Blinking as addressee feedback in face-to-face conversation. Talk presented at the MPI Proudly Presents series. Nijmegen, The Netherlands. 2017-06-29.
-
Hömke, P., Holler, J., & Levinson, S. C. (2017). Eye blinking as listener feedback in face-to-face communication. Talk presented at the 5th European Symposium on Multimodal Communication (MMSYM). Bielefeld, Germany. 2017-10-16 - 2017-10-17.
Additional information
Abstract -
Levinson, S. C. (2017). A manifesto for time. Talk presented at the Workshop Key Questions and New Methods in the Language Sciences. Berg en Dal, The Netherlands. 2017-06-14 - 2017-06-17.
-
Levinson, S. C. (2017). Cultural diversity in an age of fear [invited talk]. Talk presented at Pressing Questions in the Study of Psychological and Behavioral Diversity: An Arthur M. Sackler Colloquium. Irvine, CA, USA. 2017-09-07 - 2017-09-09.
-
Levinson, S. C. (2017). Natural forms of purposeful interaction among humans: What makes interaction effective [invited talk]. Talk presented at the Ernst Strungmann Forum. Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 2017-05-22.
-
Levinson, S. C. (2017). Processing in interactive language use offers clues to the evolution of language. Talk presented at the 30th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing. Cambridge, MA, USA. 2017-03-30 - 2017-04-01.
Abstract
The central niche for language use is social interaction: this is the context in which language is
learned, most heavily used, and doubtless evolved. Interactive language use has well defined
properties which look strongly universal. Amongst these is turn-taking or the rapid alternation
of speakers. Investigations of turn-taking reveal rather stable temporal parameters, with
alternating short bursts of speech (averaging c. 2 secs), separated by modal gaps of only 200 ms
or less. Given the latencies involved in language production (c. 600 ms for a single word, 1500
ms for a simple clause) this implies an overlap in comprehension and production by the
addressee towards the end of the incoming turn, an implication confirmed by neuroimaging
and other measures. Such multitasking must involve a high cognitive load. Looking at the
development of turn-taking in infancy and childhood, one can see relatively quick responses in
the early months slowing down as ever more complex language has to be crammed into short
turns, with children struggling to meet adult norms even in middle childhood. The intensive
processing required by turn-taking suggests it might be a kind of “fossil” with temporal
properties inherited from our primate ancestors before complex vocal language gradually
developed, filling short turns with increasingly complex structures. A glance across our primate
cousins gives some reasons to think this is a plausible scenario. -
Slonimska, A., Roberts, S., & Levinson, S. C. (2017). Selection pressures on language emerge from interaction between individuals in conversation. Talk presented at the Inaugural Cultural Evolution Society Conference (CESC 2017). Jena, Germany. 2017-09-13 - 2017-09-15.
-
Majid, A., Haun, D. B. M., Rapold, C. J., Call, J., Janzen, G., & Levinson, S. C. (2008). Cognitive Inheritance and Cultural Override in Human Spatial Cognition. Talk presented at the 2008 AAAS Annual Meeting. 90-Minute Symposium. “Thinking with and without language”. Boston, MA. 2008-02-15.
Abstract
Human languages differ in which spatial frame they habitually use. We survey these differences and present a study investigating whether this linguistic difference influences spatial cognition. We compared humans whose languages differ in their spatial relational frames with apes - Pongo, Gorilla, and Pan - on a nonlinguistic spatial task. The same spatial frame was used by all three great ape genera, as well as 4-year-olds in both languages. Older children and adults diverged, using the frame consistent with their language. This suggests that young humans share with apes an inherited primate basis for spatial frames, but that this preference can be overridden by language and culture in humans.
Share this page