Podcasts about chomskyan

Problems of Linguistics, Part II: Chomskyan Revolution In this episode, we explored the profound impact of the Chomskyan revolution on ‎linguistics, alongside the contributions of post-structuralist linguists who ‎challenged traditional views. We delved into syntax, grammar, and how vivid ‎language shapes our understanding of the world, all while making complex ideas ‎accessible and engaging. Stay tuned for more in-depth discussions in future ‎episodes, where we'll continue to unpack other schools of linguistics and their ‎lasting influence!‎ Keywords ‎#Linguistics; #Syntax; #Grammar; #Humanities; #LanguageLearning; #Language; #LinguisticSchools; #SyntaxAndSemantics; #Verificationism; ‎ #NoamChomsky; #CarlHempel; #JamesSledd; #Voegelin; #TransformationalGenerativeGrammar; #OldGuard; #SyntacticStructures

Using language is a complex business. Let's say you want to understand a sentence. You first need to parse a sequence of sounds—if the sentence is spoken—or images—if it's signed or written. You need to figure out the meanings of the individual words and then you need to put those meanings together to form a bigger whole. Of course, you also need to think about the larger context—the conversation, the person you're talking to, the kind of situation you're in. So how does the brain do all of this? Is there just one neural system that deals with language or several? Do different parts of the brain care about different aspects of language? And, more basically: What scientific tools and techniques should we be using to try to figure this all out?   My guest today is Dr. Ev Fedorenko. Ev is a cognitive neuroscientist at MIT, where she and her research group study how the brains supports language and complex thought. Ev and her colleagues recently wrote a detailed overview of their work on the language network—the specialized system in our brain that underlies our ability to use language. This network has some features you might have expected, and—as we'll see—other features you probably didn't.   Here, Ev and I talk about the history of our effort to understand the neurobiology of language. We lay out the current understanding of the language network, and its relationship to the brain areas historically associated with language abilities—especially Broca's area and Wernicke's area. We talk about whether the language network can be partitioned according to the subfields of linguistics, such as syntax and semantics. We discuss the power and limitations of fMRI, and the advantages of the single-subject analyses that Ev and her lab primarily use. We consider how the language network interfaces with other major neural networks—for instance, the theory of mind network and the so-called default network. And we discuss what this all tells us about the longstanding controversial claim that language is primarily for thinking rather than communicating.   Along the way, Ev and I touch on: some especially interesting brains; plasticity and redundancy; the puzzle of lateralization; polyglots; aphasia; the localizer method; the decline of certain Chomskyan perspectives; the idea that brain networks are "natural kinds"; the heart of the language network; and the question of what the brain may tell us—if anything—about how language evolved.   Alright friends, this is a fun one. On to my conversation with Dr. Ev Fedorenko. Enjoy!   A transcript of this episode will be available soon.     Notes and links 3:00 – The article by a New York Times reporter who is missing a portion of her temporal lobe. The website for the Interesting Brains project.  5:30 – A recent paper from Dr. Fedorenko's lab on the brains of three siblings, two of whom were missing portions of their brains.  13:00 – Broca's original 1861 report.  18:00 – Many of Noam Chomsky's ideas about the innateness of language and the centrality of syntax are covered in his book Language and Mind, among other publications. 19:30 – For an influential critique of the tradition of localizing functions in the brain, see William R. Uttal's The New Phrenology. 23:00 – The new review paper by Dr. Fedorenko and colleagues on the language network.  26:00 – For more discussion of the different formats or modalities of language, see our earlier episode with Dr. Neil Cohn. 30:00 – A classic paper by Herbert Simon on the “architecture of complexity.” 31:00 – For one example of a naturalistic, “task-free” study that reveals the brain's language network, see here.  33:30 – See the recent paper arguing “against cortical reorganization.” 33:00 – For more on the concept of “natural kind” in philosophy, see here.  38:00 – On the “multiple-demand network,” see a recent study by Dr. Fedorenko and colleagues.  41:00 – For a study from Dr. Fedorenko's lab finding that syntax and semantics are distributed throughout the language network, see here. For an example of work in linguistics that does not make a tidy distinction between syntax and semantics, see here.  53:30 – See Dr. Fedorenko's recent article on the history of individual-subject analyses in neuroscience.  1:01:00 – For an in-depth treatment of one localizer used in Dr. Fedorenko's research, see here.  1:03:30 – A paper by Dr. Stephen Wilson and colleagues, describing recovery of language ability following stroke as a function of the location of the lesion within the language network. 1:04:20 – A paper from Dr. Fedorenko's lab on the small language networks of polyglots.  1:09:00 – For more on the Visual Word Form Area (or VWFA), see here. For discussion of Exner's Area, see here.   1:14:30 – For a discussion of the brain's so-called default network, see here.  1:17:00 – See here for Dr. Fedorenko and colleagues' recent paper on the function of language. For more on the question of what language is for, see our earlier episode with Dr. Nick Enfield.  1:19:00 – A paper by Dr. Fedorenko and Dr. Rosemary Varley arguing for intact thinking ability in patients with aphasia.  1:22:00 – A recent paper on individual differences in the experience of inner speech.   Recommendations Dr. Ted Gibson's book on syntax (forthcoming with MIT press) Nancy Kanwisher, ‘Functional specificity in the human brain'    Many Minds is a project of the Diverse Intelligences Summer Institute, which is made possible by a generous grant from the John Templeton Foundation to Indiana University. The show is hosted and produced by Kensy Cooperrider, with help from Assistant Producer Urte Laukaityte and with creative support from DISI Directors Erica Cartmill and Jacob Foster. Our artwork is by Ben Oldroyd. Our transcripts are created by Sarah Dopierala.   Subscribe to Many Minds on Apple, Stitcher, Spotify, Pocket Casts, Google Play, or wherever you listen to podcasts. You can also now subscribe to the Many Minds newsletter here! We welcome your comments, questions, and suggestions. Feel free to email us at: manymindspodcast@gmail.com.    For updates about the show, visit our website or follow us on Twitter (@ManyMindsPod) or Bluesky (@manymindspod.bsky.social).

------------------Support the channel------------ Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenter PayPal: paypal.me/thedissenter PayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuy PayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9l PayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpz PayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9m PayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao   ------------------Follow me on--------------------- Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/ Twitter: https://twitter.com/TheDissenterYT   This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/   Dr. Paul van Geert is Professor Emeritus of Developmental Psychology at the University of Groningen, Netherlands. He is renowned for his work on developmental psychology and the application of dynamical systems theory in social science. He is the author of A Dynamic Systems Model of Cognitive and Language Growth, Dynamic Systems of Development: Change between Complexity and Chaos, and, together with Naomi de Ruiter, Toward a Process Approach in Psychology: Stepping into Heraclitus' River.   In this episode, we talk about a dynamical systems theory approach to developmental psychology. We discuss what is the evidence for psychology being a dynamic system. We talk about levels of analysis, causality in psychology, and stages of development and critical periods. We discuss a process ontology, and how it differs from a substance ontology. We talk about 4E cognition. Finally, we discuss language development, and challenging Chomskyan views of it; and theory-of-mind development, and the idea of innateness. -- A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, HANS FREDRIK SUNDE, BERNARDO SEIXAS, OLAF ALEX, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, JOHN CONNORS, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, DAN DEMETRIOU, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, ADANER USMANI, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, EDWARD HALL, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, DANIEL FRIEDMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, PAUL-GEORGE ARNAUD, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ANTON ERIKSSON, CHARLES MOREY, ALEX CHAU, AMAURI MARTÍNEZ, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, IGOR N, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, BENJAMIN GELBART, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, NIKLAS CARLSSON, ISMAËL BENSLIMANE, GEORGE CHORIATIS, VALENTIN STEINMANN, PER KRAULIS, KATE VON GOELER, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, LIAM DUNAWAY, BR, MASOUD ALIMOHAMMADI, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, DAVID PINSOF, SEAN NELSON, MIKE LAVIGNE, JOS KNECHT, ERIK ENGMAN, AND LUCY! A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, AL NICK ORTIZ, AND NICK GOLDEN! AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, BOGDAN KANIVETS, ROSEY, AND GREGORY HASTINGS!

On this episode, we wrap up on our first A Thousand Plateaus reading group by discussing The Rhizome with Sam, one of attendees. We talk about the perspectives of rhizomatic vs tree-like forms of connective and semiotic structures, using paradigmatic examples from Chomskyan linguistics, Frank Herbert's Dune, and the dynamics of music and genre formation. We explain what Deleuze and Guattari mean by "n-1", "overcoding", "tracing", and discuss the political and creative opportunities (and dangers) that their field of rhizomatics can offer.Subscribe to Acid Horizon on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcastMerch: http://www.crit-drip.comSubscribe to us on Apple Podcasts: https://tinyurl.com/169wvvhiZer0 Books YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/c/Zer0BooksHappy Hour at Hippel's (Adam's blog): https://happyhourathippels.wordpress.comDestratified (Matt's Blog): https://destratified.com/​Revolting Bodies (Will's Blog): https://revoltingbodies.com​Split Infinities (Craig's Substack): https://splitinfinities.substack.com/​Music: https://sereptie.bandcamp.com/Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/acidhorizonpodcast)

Stephen talks with Willem “Pim” Levelt, Director Emeritus of the Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics and author of “A history of psycholinguistics: The pre-Chomskyan era”, about the early history of the neuroscience of language.

Noam Chomsky in his only Ask Me Anything in years. Video version here: https://youtu.be/pUWmTXkpHjE Links to what's been mentioned in the video are below (scroll).00:00:00 Introduction00:02:03 What do Gödel's incompleteness theorems say about mathematical realism / linguistics? (Prof. Rebecca Goldstein)00:04:25 Progress on the science of consciousness? (Prof. Anil Seth)00:09:52 Modern Ptolemaic models in science00:11:29 Analyzing infinitival phrases (Prof. Daniel Bonevac)00:14:38 Are there units of culture, like memes? (Prof. Joseph Velikovsky)00:21:55 Extralinguistic experiences being fathomed only through linguistics? (Andres Zuleta)00:25:16 Can you perceive a thought even if you don't verbally express it? (Rivulet)00:27:37 Is there a Chomskyan pre-grammar for religion like Eric Weinstein suggests? (Aro Own)00:33:52 On Wittgenstein's Philosophical Investigations and its influence on Chomsky (Jack McGreevy)00:39:51 Conscious volition vs. unconscious "wiring" in relation to free will (Joel Suro)00:44:51 Is mathematics itself the domain of all languages? (Boris Costello)00:46:33 Is language created from the top down (enforcement from authorities) or bottom up ("the people")?00:49:47 Social constructionism vs. Chomsky00:51:47 Jung's archetypes' relationship to Chomskyan grammar00:54:02 Bakunin, freedom, language, and human nature00:57:51 What revolutionary words / phrases have we forgotten that we should re-learn?00:58:39 How has Chomsky's views on universal grammar changed since he conceived it?01:08:13 Change vs. Evolution (variation, replication, selection)01:15:12 The invention of terms like LatinX and BIPOC, etc. Is there something different about them?01:17:14 The Sapir Whorf hypothesisPatreon for conversations on Theories of Everything, Consciousness, Free Will, and God: https://patreon.com/curtjaimungalHelp support conversations like this via PayPal: https://bit.ly/2EOR0M4Twitter: https://twitter.com/TOEwithCurtiTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/better-left-unsaid-with-curt-jaimungal/id1521758802Pandora: https://pdora.co/33b9lfPSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4gL14b92xAErofYQA7bU4eGoogle Podcasts: https://play.google.com/music/listen?u=0#/ps/Id3k7k7mfzahfx2fjqmw3vufb44iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/better-left-unsaid-with-curt-jaimungal/id1521758802* * *Rebecca Goldstein's interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VkL3BcKEB6YAnil Seth's interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_hUEqXhDbVsAnil Seth's twitter: https://twitter.com/anilksethDaniel Bonevac's YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/user/PhiloofAlexandriaEric Weinstein interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KElq_MLO1kw* * *Subscribe if you want more conversations on Theories of Everything, Consciousness, Free Will, God, and the mathematics / physics of each.* * *I'm producing an imminent documentary Better Left Unsaid http://betterleftunsaidfilm.com on the topic of "when does the left go too far?" Visit that site if you'd like to contribute to getting the film distributed (early-2021).

YouTube Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o3fG96gvgLUDavid Sloan Wilson is an American evolutionary biologist and a Distinguished Professor of Biological Sciences and Anthropology at Binghamton University. https://twitter.com/David_S_WilsonCurt Jaimungal is directing / writing an imminent documentary Better Left Unsaid http://betterleftunsaidfilm.com on the topic of "when does the left go too far?" Visit that site if you'd like to contribute to getting the film distributed (early-2021).Patreon for conversations on Theories of Everything, Consciousness, Free Will, and God: https://patreon.com/curtjaimungalHelp support conversations like this via PayPal: https://bit.ly/2EOR0M4Twitter: https://twitter.com/TOEwithCurtiTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/better-left-unsaid-with-curt-jaimungal/id1521758802Pandora: https://pdora.co/33b9lfPSpotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/4gL14b92xAErofYQA7bU4eGoogle Podcasts: https://play.google.com/music/listen?u=0#/ps/Id3k7k7mfzahfx2fjqmw3vufb44iTunes: https://podcasts.apple.com/ca/podcast/better-left-unsaid-with-curt-jaimungal/id1521758802* * *00:00:00 Introduction00:01:54 Is "the West" losing its values? What are those values?00:05:24 Multi-level selection vs. Group Selection00:11:10 The political right vs left in terms of level of evolutionary selection00:12:51 Identity Politics framed in terms of group selection (plus a definition of Identity Politics)00:15:04 Why can't a propitious argument made FOR Identity Politics?00:20:05 How can we adopt a "whole Earth ethic" as a country, when others don't adopt it?00:23:47 What do humans need to behave "selflessly" when animals get along with doing so?00:28:16 Link between evolutionary theory and Buddhism00:30:00 Humans are built to cooperate in small groups (not large)00:32:49 We've selected ourselves for timidity00:38:03 A synoptic view of "This View of Life" and the need for encompassing values00:38:32 Classical economics (and some contemporary) is wrong and unadaptive00:40:44 If we've been selected for altruism, why is it difficult?00:44:54 Carl Jung and selfish acts being unselfish (because they harm you in the long-run)00:50:24 A $1000 suit isn't to look good, but to look BETTER than the guy with a $500 suit00:53:00 How good is altruism as a motivational agent for behavior? 00:55:54 Tribalism is the answer, not the problem00:57:05 Problems with Social Constructionism00:59:18 Postmodernism and David Sloan Wilson's issues with it01:03:28 Women's studies / LGBTQ studies / etc. utilizing "tribal circuitry"01:06:53 The "Ultimatum Game" in evolutionary psychology01:09:55 On this "tribal circuitry" again01:17:40 On the Nordic countries and the "homogeneity" argument01:23:58 Is communism more adaptive than capitalism?01:28:31 "Tight and loose" compared to totalitarian systems (existential security)01:31:38 Which memes are prius to liberalism?01:36:28 Are the Inuit less adapted than the White Europeans who invented centralized heating?01:42:37 Is virtue as "honesty / forthrightness / generosity" a human universal given most studies are done on Westerners?01:45:10 Is David Sloan Wilson a moral relativist?01:47:38 The effects of arcane disciplines in Universities spreading outward to the culture01:49:47 Evolutionary theory as a unifying language for the disparate fields of science01:54:05 "When does the left go too far?"01:56:18 Memes that last so long they affect our evolution01:57:26 Dawkin's concept of "gene" was problematic, and thus so is "meme"02:00:06 Jordan Peterson vs Susan Blackmore on memes and Jung02:02:10 Chomskyan grammar and Pinker's language instinct is wrong02:04:06 On Victor Huang's "innovation oasis"02:08:58 Applying Victor's Huang's concept to Curt's non-profit indiefilmTO02:14:46 Is there such a thing as biological sex?02:16:08 What's the definition of "adaptiveness" in evolution?02:17:54 David Sloan Wilson's thoughts on free will02:18:39 The "Theory of Everything" being encompassed by evolutionary theory02:20:21 His thoughts on Donald Hoffman's ideas02:24:43 Extra: On Daniel Dennett's 2nd endosymbiotic revolution02:26:57 Extra: Is history an example of humans "externalizing" their code? Computers? (via memes)Subscribe if you want more conversations on Theories of Everything, Consciousness, Free Will, God, and the mathematics / physics of each.

The outtakes crew unveils a new, original segment called on the media where they investigate how the media shapes our world view. (TM) This time, they review the reviews of Venom-- sparks fly.

The last decade has seen a lot of questioning the validity and usefulness of presumed language universals of the Greenbergian and Chomskyan type, Evans & Levinson’s (2009) The myth of language universals perhaps being the most prominent example. This talk takes stock as to where this leaves us with regard to language universals research, pointing out some unwarranted exaggerations and ill-conceived distinctions. The hypothesis is proposed that there are universals levels (or aspects) of linguistic structure that are directly derivative of the biological and communicative infrastructure for communication. Recognizing such levels allows one to avoid some of the confusions characterizing the current debate. Examples mostly come from prosody (syllable and intonational phrase), but also Dingemanse et al.’s proposal of “universal words” is being discussed.

What is the Nature of Human Morality? Professor Shaun Nichols (Arizona) Abstract Prof Nichols: Philosophical observation and psychological studies indicate that people draw subtle distinctions in the normative domain. But it remains unclear exactly what gives rise to such distinctions. On one prominent approach, emotion systems trigger non-utilitarian judgments. The main alternative, inspired by Chomskyan linguistics, suggests that moral distinctions derive from an innate moral grammar. We develop a rational learning account. We argue that the “size principle”, which is implicated in word learning (Xu & Tenenbaum 2007), can also explain how children would use scant and equivocal evidence to interpret candidate rules as applying more narrowly than utilitarian rules. Shaun Nichols is a Professor of Philosophy at the University of Arizona. A pioneer of the emerging discipline of ‘experimental philosophy’, Prof Nichols is interested in the psychological processes underlying our everyday moral intuitions, moral reasoning and moral decision-making – and in how understanding these processes can shed light on classic and contemporary questions in morality and ethics. More specifically, his research has brought an empirically-informed lens to bear on a range of philosophical questions including free will, moral responsibility and blameworthiness, and notions of self and personal identity. He is author of three edited volumes and two books (Sentimental Rules and Mindreading), and has been published in such prestigious journals as Mind and Language and the Journal of Philosophy.

The only disappointment with A History of Psycholinguistics: The Pre-Chomskyan Era (Oxford UP, 2012) is that, as the subtitle says, the story it tells stops at the cognitive revolution, before Pim Levelt is himself a major player in psycholinguistics. He says that telling the story of the last few decades is a task for someone else. The task he’s taken on here is to describe the progress made in the psychology of language between its actual foundation – around 1800 – and the point at which it’s widely and erroneously believed to have been founded – around 1951. The story that the book tells is remarkable in many ways: not only for its vast breadth and depth of scholarship, but also for the number of misconceptions that it corrects. Levelt uncovers how many modern theories in psycholinguistics are in fact independent rediscoveries of proposals made in the 19th century, and charts the significant positive contributions made to the science by figures who are often overlooked or even derided now (we discuss a couple of such cases in this interview). He vividly depicts how the rapid march of progress was catastrophically disrupted in the early 20th century, by a combination of political strife and scientific wrong turns, before being restored in the 1950s. In this interview we talk about some of the recurring themes of the book – forgetting and rediscovery, the remarkably prescient nature of much 19th century theoretical and experimental work, and the collective misunderstanding of the history of the discipline. And we touch upon the intentional misunderstandings that allowed research in psycholinguistics to be exploited for financial gain or more sinister purposes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The only disappointment with A History of Psycholinguistics: The Pre-Chomskyan Era (Oxford UP, 2012) is that, as the subtitle says, the story it tells stops at the cognitive revolution, before Pim Levelt is himself a major player in psycholinguistics. He says that telling the story of the last few decades is a task for someone else. The task he’s taken on here is to describe the progress made in the psychology of language between its actual foundation – around 1800 – and the point at which it’s widely and erroneously believed to have been founded – around 1951. The story that the book tells is remarkable in many ways: not only for its vast breadth and depth of scholarship, but also for the number of misconceptions that it corrects. Levelt uncovers how many modern theories in psycholinguistics are in fact independent rediscoveries of proposals made in the 19th century, and charts the significant positive contributions made to the science by figures who are often overlooked or even derided now (we discuss a couple of such cases in this interview). He vividly depicts how the rapid march of progress was catastrophically disrupted in the early 20th century, by a combination of political strife and scientific wrong turns, before being restored in the 1950s. In this interview we talk about some of the recurring themes of the book – forgetting and rediscovery, the remarkably prescient nature of much 19th century theoretical and experimental work, and the collective misunderstanding of the history of the discipline. And we touch upon the intentional misunderstandings that allowed research in psycholinguistics to be exploited for financial gain or more sinister purposes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The only disappointment with A History of Psycholinguistics: The Pre-Chomskyan Era (Oxford UP, 2012) is that, as the subtitle says, the story it tells stops at the cognitive revolution, before Pim Levelt is himself a major player in psycholinguistics. He says that telling the story of the last few decades is a task for someone else. The task he's taken on here is to describe the progress made in the psychology of language between its actual foundation – around 1800 – and the point at which it's widely and erroneously believed to have been founded – around 1951. The story that the book tells is remarkable in many ways: not only for its vast breadth and depth of scholarship, but also for the number of misconceptions that it corrects. Levelt uncovers how many modern theories in psycholinguistics are in fact independent rediscoveries of proposals made in the 19th century, and charts the significant positive contributions made to the science by figures who are often overlooked or even derided now (we discuss a couple of such cases in this interview). He vividly depicts how the rapid march of progress was catastrophically disrupted in the early 20th century, by a combination of political strife and scientific wrong turns, before being restored in the 1950s. In this interview we talk about some of the recurring themes of the book – forgetting and rediscovery, the remarkably prescient nature of much 19th century theoretical and experimental work, and the collective misunderstanding of the history of the discipline. And we touch upon the intentional misunderstandings that allowed research in psycholinguistics to be exploited for financial gain or more sinister purposes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices Support our show by becoming a premium member! https://newbooksnetwork.supportingcast.fm/psychology

The only disappointment with A History of Psycholinguistics: The Pre-Chomskyan Era (Oxford UP, 2012) is that, as the subtitle says, the story it tells stops at the cognitive revolution, before Pim Levelt is himself a major player in psycholinguistics. He says that telling the story of the last few decades is a task for someone else. The task he's taken on here is to describe the progress made in the psychology of language between its actual foundation – around 1800 – and the point at which it's widely and erroneously believed to have been founded – around 1951. The story that the book tells is remarkable in many ways: not only for its vast breadth and depth of scholarship, but also for the number of misconceptions that it corrects. Levelt uncovers how many modern theories in psycholinguistics are in fact independent rediscoveries of proposals made in the 19th century, and charts the significant positive contributions made to the science by figures who are often overlooked or even derided now (we discuss a couple of such cases in this interview). He vividly depicts how the rapid march of progress was catastrophically disrupted in the early 20th century, by a combination of political strife and scientific wrong turns, before being restored in the 1950s. In this interview we talk about some of the recurring themes of the book – forgetting and rediscovery, the remarkably prescient nature of much 19th century theoretical and experimental work, and the collective misunderstanding of the history of the discipline. And we touch upon the intentional misunderstandings that allowed research in psycholinguistics to be exploited for financial gain or more sinister purposes.

The only disappointment with A History of Psycholinguistics: The Pre-Chomskyan Era (Oxford UP, 2012) is that, as the subtitle says, the story it tells stops at the cognitive revolution, before Pim Levelt is himself a major player in psycholinguistics. He says that telling the story of the last few decades is a task for someone else. The task he’s taken on here is to describe the progress made in the psychology of language between its actual foundation – around 1800 – and the point at which it’s widely and erroneously believed to have been founded – around 1951. The story that the book tells is remarkable in many ways: not only for its vast breadth and depth of scholarship, but also for the number of misconceptions that it corrects. Levelt uncovers how many modern theories in psycholinguistics are in fact independent rediscoveries of proposals made in the 19th century, and charts the significant positive contributions made to the science by figures who are often overlooked or even derided now (we discuss a couple of such cases in this interview). He vividly depicts how the rapid march of progress was catastrophically disrupted in the early 20th century, by a combination of political strife and scientific wrong turns, before being restored in the 1950s. In this interview we talk about some of the recurring themes of the book – forgetting and rediscovery, the remarkably prescient nature of much 19th century theoretical and experimental work, and the collective misunderstanding of the history of the discipline. And we touch upon the intentional misunderstandings that allowed research in psycholinguistics to be exploited for financial gain or more sinister purposes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The only disappointment with A History of Psycholinguistics: The Pre-Chomskyan Era (Oxford UP, 2012) is that, as the subtitle says, the story it tells stops at the cognitive revolution, before Pim Levelt is himself a major player in psycholinguistics. He says that telling the story of the last few decades is a task for someone else. The task he’s taken on here is to describe the progress made in the psychology of language between its actual foundation – around 1800 – and the point at which it’s widely and erroneously believed to have been founded – around 1951. The story that the book tells is remarkable in many ways: not only for its vast breadth and depth of scholarship, but also for the number of misconceptions that it corrects. Levelt uncovers how many modern theories in psycholinguistics are in fact independent rediscoveries of proposals made in the 19th century, and charts the significant positive contributions made to the science by figures who are often overlooked or even derided now (we discuss a couple of such cases in this interview). He vividly depicts how the rapid march of progress was catastrophically disrupted in the early 20th century, by a combination of political strife and scientific wrong turns, before being restored in the 1950s. In this interview we talk about some of the recurring themes of the book – forgetting and rediscovery, the remarkably prescient nature of much 19th century theoretical and experimental work, and the collective misunderstanding of the history of the discipline. And we touch upon the intentional misunderstandings that allowed research in psycholinguistics to be exploited for financial gain or more sinister purposes. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the preface to Fifty Key Thinkers on Language and Linguistics (Routledge, 2011), devoted to short but attentively researched biographical sketches of major figures in the language sciences, Margaret Thomas compares the task of compiling it with that of organising a party. Here, the enterprise has been successful – the guests are interesting (as you might expect), but they are also presented to their best advantage, and the host succeeds in establishing connections between them, so that no-one is left out. Also, it proceeds at an agreeably fast pace and ends promptly before anyone can make a scene. We develop this analogy a little further over the course of the interview, but we do also talk about the book in its own right. We discuss the question of whether or not Chomskyan linguistics is, or should be, related to the earlier history of the discipline, and consider the effect of 20th century American linguistics on the historiography of the subject. And we touch upon some of the figures outside the mainstream Western tradition whose influences haven’t always been widely felt, but whose contribution to the study of language is nonetheless remarkable. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the preface to Fifty Key Thinkers on Language and Linguistics (Routledge, 2011), devoted to short but attentively researched biographical sketches of major figures in the language sciences, Margaret Thomas compares the task of compiling it with that of organising a party. Here, the enterprise has been successful – the guests are interesting (as you might expect), but they are also presented to their best advantage, and the host succeeds in establishing connections between them, so that no-one is left out. Also, it proceeds at an agreeably fast pace and ends promptly before anyone can make a scene. We develop this analogy a little further over the course of the interview, but we do also talk about the book in its own right. We discuss the question of whether or not Chomskyan linguistics is, or should be, related to the earlier history of the discipline, and consider the effect of 20th century American linguistics on the historiography of the subject. And we touch upon some of the figures outside the mainstream Western tradition whose influences haven’t always been widely felt, but whose contribution to the study of language is nonetheless remarkable. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In the preface to Fifty Key Thinkers on Language and Linguistics (Routledge, 2011), devoted to short but attentively researched biographical sketches of major figures in the language sciences, Margaret Thomas compares the task of compiling it with that of organising a party. Here, the enterprise has been successful – the guests are interesting (as you might expect), but they are also presented to their best advantage, and the host succeeds in establishing connections between them, so that no-one is left out. Also, it proceeds at an agreeably fast pace and ends promptly before anyone can make a scene. We develop this analogy a little further over the course of the interview, but we do also talk about the book in its own right. We discuss the question of whether or not Chomskyan linguistics is, or should be, related to the earlier history of the discipline, and consider the effect of 20th century American linguistics on the historiography of the subject. And we touch upon some of the figures outside the mainstream Western tradition whose influences haven’t always been widely felt, but whose contribution to the study of language is nonetheless remarkable. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices