Genie 2

1.                   What was so significant about Chomsky's argument?

Chomsky’s argument is significant because it goes directly against the accepted idea that we are all born as ‘blank slates’. That we aquire language simply by every aspect of it being taught or presented to us. Chomsky felt that we are not infact blank slates at birth, that there is some type of innate ability to be able to understand the structure of language, and that as we learn vocabulary and meaning it is applied into this structure, and formulated into communication.

2. What do you make of Chomsky's bird argument on p. 36?

I think that the bird argument is very concise way to state his theory. Since he believes that language is innate, and not something learned he states that a human raised by an animal would still walk, and not travel the way that animal does. If a child raised by birds doesn’t learn to fly, then how do we know that we do not know language? It could be just as innate as walking.

3. Do you agree with Chomsky's claim about the island at the end of Chapter 7? Please explain your answer.

I do agree with Chomsky. Most languages have similar structures to them. I think that language is innate. There are two many similarities between languages that have never had contact with each other when created for their not to be. Also there are so many un written rules, that are not taught that people know without being able to explain.

4. In Chapter 10, why were Genie's observers pleased to see her hitting other children?

Genies observers were pleased because before this all of her rage had been expressed inwardly, but now she was becoming angered with someone else, and trying to hurt them not herself.

5. Describe how Genie's language was developing.

She was expressing interest in learning what things were called, she would walk around with caretakers and point to things and want the name for what she was pointing to. However even though she was trying to expand her vocabulary she was unable to speak more than a few utterances, but it was clear to her caretakers that she was understanding much more then she could say.

 
6. After reading Chapter 11, what are the primary differences between the reading and the film?

The main differences is that the reading does not say he learned to say the word “lait” and that it seems to stress the importance of the relationship between Dr. Itard and Victor, which I do not think was as strong as it is being expressed in the reading.

7. How did the film, Wild Child impact the symposium members? What is meant by: "all of us  saw in the movie what we were prepared to see to confirm to our own biases."?

This film can be interpreted many ways. Dr. Itard  uses many different techniques to teach Victor language and it is impossible to accurately state how accurate they were since some things seem to bend both ways in the blank slate vs. innate ability debate. What the quote means is that people were able to view the film, perceive it their own way, and use it to support their theories.

8. What do you think of Dr. Elkind's quote on p. 59? How do you feel about Dr. Freedman's suggestion on p. 59-61

I think that Dr. Elkind’s quote makes some valid points. If genie starts to connect speaking language correctly to getting attention and love then she will only be doing it for the reward, and there is no way to tell if she is actually learning and comprehending it. Similar to Wild Child. However I think that Dr. Freedman’s suggestion is just as valid. If Genie has someone to relate to and trust then she may be able to be more interactive and see other humans as people not objects in her life, however if this suggestion was to be taken it should have been taken with the caution of what Dr. Eklind said.

9. Why was it important for Itard to teach Vistor to "imagine the needs of others (p. 73)"? Does CAS do this? Why or why not?

It is important for Itard to teach Victor this because if he doesn’t imagine the needs of others he may not connect to the idea that other humans are just like him, and he will instead view them as objects in his scenery, not as something to interact with. CAS does this in some of it’s goals. For example the one about doing something of global importance, it makes us connect to other people that we would normally not connect with. As students, and people in general, we are not constantly thinking about the needs of everyone else in the world. Everyone else in the world seems to be scenery to our day-to-day interactions. By investing time into something of global importance yo uare breaking that barrier, and connecting to more people

10. After reading Chapter 14, do you agree that Truffaut's film ending was too optimistic?

I do think Truffault’s ending was too optimistic. It ended with him returning to his studies as normal and everyone with a smile on their face. It also ended after he had made huge progress by returning to Dr. Itard, making the audience feel like things can only get better now, when in fact that is not what happened at all.

Wild Child Project

The picture does not really show my 'art piece' very well, but i'm bringing it to school so you will be able to see it better.

For Language  (the area with all the letters) I used two pictures from the movie and block letters to express the different ways Dr. Itard tried to teach Victor Language. One picture is of him moving around the wooden blocks. I thought that this was extremely important in his learning because it was helping him to recognize letters and their placement. I used the wooden blocks to further show this. The wooden blocks are also representitive of the block letters 'L-A-I-T' which he connected to milk, or the reciving of milk. (i just didn't have those letters so i put random ones.)

For perception i put a picture of scissors over a drawing of scissors, to symbolize the matching game Dr. Itard played with Victor. This helped victor to start seeing the world instead of just viewing it. He was not connecting things together through this simple mathing game. I also have a picture of Victor next to a candle to symbolize when Dr Itard said different letters into the flame of a candle, helping Victor to learn and try and match what Dr. Itard was doing. However this needed perception becuase Victor had to be able to connect the moving flame to Dr. Itards voice, which was what he was trying to accomplish.

For emotion I have a pciture of a blind fold with tears comming out at the bottom to symbolize when he cried for the first time. This was showing that he was able to express emotion and understand Dr. Itards harsh tone, and mabey even his words. This was able to happen becuase Dr. Itard always spoke to him, even though he knew at first that he could not understand him. However, Victor was able to pick up tone, and learn emotion through this.

For Reason i put it in gold becuase i felt like it was one of the bigger acomplishments Dr. Itard wanted to achive. I put a picture of a broken bowl then an arrow to a fine bowl to symoblize when Victor felt sorry for breaking the bowl and brought his own, showing some development to reason. I also put a picture of a closet to symbolize the time when Dr. Itard put Victor in the closet unjustly and he reacted to it. Showing that hewas learing right from wrong, and justice.

In order to show why Dr. Itard did this (the red section) i put an image of cavemen evolving into humans and then a person saying hello to symbolize the evolution of language. I then put a blank slate and an open brain to symbolize the 'blank slate'theroy and chompsky's idea of language development.

Essay Re-Write

Two what extent do the Oralism and Sign language impact the deaf view on reality?

I feel as though Oralism and sign language in the deaf community is defiantly impacted on how they view the world. I feel that it is to an great extent because they are focusing and experiencing things in a different way then they must when communicating in another way. 

One thing that supports this view is the Sapir Worf Hypothesis. This hypothesis states that language effects the way we view the world, it effects our experience. I fully agree with this. For example in different languages there is different structures and word order, giving more importance to something over another. This influences the way we view the importance of things. Sign language is no different. It is a language of it's own, and to function as a language there must be a certain "grammatical" order to how signing is set up. I cannot personally sign sign language so i do not for a fact if there is an order to signing that makes words more importance, like we do in a sentence, but assuming there is I feel like it would effect Deaf peoples view on what is more important.

Signing can limit and extend thinking. Signing has more of an expressive way about it than words do. In the movie "Through Deaf Eyes" a man signed a poem. This poem if written down would only look like a list of words, unless read aloud with rhythm or artistic interpretation, one would not see them as poetic. However the signing added an extra element to the poem, enhancing these words. This poem showed how words/signs seem to have more meaning in Sign Language. Even just viewing the poem without knowing sign, you still had some small bit of explanation to what was going on. 

However the limitations of signing and oralism are what the Deaf Culture seemed to be so strongly for. They feel that by signing and using oralism they are trying to fit in with the "norm" or the hearing community. By doing so they limit any views they could have of the worlds as a deaf person. What i mean by this is by using sign and oralism they are doing so to communicate with those who can hear, and they are doing so to communicate with those who can hear, and the language itself is based off of language created by people who hear and their interpretations this limits them to express how they might see things differently and also limit them to viewing the world the way the hear does through language.

Abel's view on language seems to support this view "linguistic symbols to organize experience". Words are only symbols that we use to represent experiences in our life, our world. Signing is full of symbols that are used to symbolize meaning for their experiences. However their signs are more expressive then a word is, and seem to convey a deeper meaning . The word stars vs. the symbol for the stars shown in the video are very different. Stars is a very simple word while the sign for it points then symbolizes the sparkles. It is more complex. Since I am not deaf there is no way for me to know but it is interesting to see how two different representations for the same word differ in complexity. This complexity for the word may give it more meaning or a different feel for deaf people.

My claims are that oralism and sign language does in fact give people a different view on reality, as i feel that all language does. The implications of this are that language directly affects how we see the world. Deaf people have their own language that I feel gives them a more expressive view. A counter claim to this could be that Deaf people do not have a different view on the world because language is based off of experience not visa versa. I think that language can limit our thinking, and define how we view things because grammatical structure and the difference in vocabulary or the symbols for things. It tells us what is true and false. For example in Able's book there is the issue of referential opacity, and how it is only a problem because certain contexts will not allow it. Language has limited us to thinking that such a way with certain truths and accepted structures that it effects how we think and in turn view the world. Since oralism and sign is language Deaf people are just as affected. 

I feel that language does affect peoples views on the world, and sign language and oralism are affected equally.

Able Language 2

1. What are the functions of language?  Just provide the main ones Abel describes.

The functions are cognitive, or “language that transmits information” and it also operates expressively. Language can be used expressively, ceremonially, preformatory, and there can also be “phatic communication”. One function that able describes is ceremonial language, that is not expressive or cognitive but in fact it is preformatory. “they themselves are the sole instrument of their actions. Ex. “ I thank you” this does not describe the action of thanking but constitutes it.

 

2. What is significant about the story of the tribal boys and the table? 

The significance about the tribal boys and the table is that by pointing at something to learn a word in a new language you are unable to communicate what it is that you are trying to convey. It creates a giant ambiguity in communication.

 

3. What is the “inscrutability of reference?” (p. 228)

The “inscrutability of reference is that you are not able to clearly communicate to someone something, even just an object you are pointing to, by merely pointing at it. This is because there are two many objects in pointing range and different parts or descriptions to the object that may be misinterpreted as what is being pointed at

 

4. What does Abel mean when he says that “Words are mete breaths of air, or scribbled pencil marks, but as used in a ‘language game’ by a speech community they are not arbitrary? “( p. 228)

Abel means that words can only mean what they mean, hot cannot mean cold for example.

 

5. What is the difference between Animal and Human Language?

Animal language is more monotonous and automatic. It is produced based off a stimulus that an animal receives. When an animal sees a certain type of predator it makes a different noise then when it loses a child.

 

6. What is Chomsky’s argument on how humans learn language?  Be specific about linguistic competence.

Chomsky feels that language is not something that is learned as if you were a blank slate, but instead is genetically done, that humans have a special ability to learn language. He believes that most structure and rules are already in us at birth. He then thinks that we pick up the vocabulary and are able to put the language we learn together, through linguistic compentence.

7. What does Abel think about Chomsky’s argument?

Able does not agree with Chomsky, “I belive that it is not warranted to postulate a specific human attribute called linguistic competence.”

 

8. How would you answer Abel’s questions:” Would an infant learn to speak, although isolated from adults, he were constantly within earshot of a radio?” (p. 231)

I think a baby would learn to speak, because he or she is able to hear language, and since I agree with Chomsky, the baby would pick up the vocabulary and with linguistic competence be able to tie them together. The baby’s language would be limited to whatever is on the radio however.

 

9. Why does Abel believe that “language is not in fact unique in the spectrum of human capacities?” (p. 231)

Abel believes this because he thinks that it is only a small part in social interaction. That things like etiquette and social behavior are just as important and unique.

 

10. What does Abel mean when he says: “We all learn these codes of stance, mannerism, gesture, tactility, interpersonal behavior…yet we are equally unable to state them fully”? (p. 232)

Abel means that there are so many different rules to social behavior and so many exceptions that it is impossible to fully explain them. Like in the reading when the man tried to explain how to shake someone’s hand. He went off on a huge explanation and only left me with more confusion and more questions.

Genie 1

1. What was Psamtik's experiment? What did he hope to learn? Did he?

Psamtik's experiment was that he placed two children in a sheapeards hut completely cut off from any type of language. He hoped to be able to study the development of languages, he hoped that these two children would develop thier own language to comunicate with each other. When the children said the word "bekos" for bread he imidiatly compared this to another older language and did not do more research on the subject itself. He technically did not learn much becuase he did not let the experiament continue on to see if these children did infact creatre thier own language or even use one similar to an already invented one.
2. Rymer claims on pg. 5 that "while his experiment was flawed in fulfilling its declared intention...it embodied both the theological questions and the practical quandaries that still bedevil the discipline." Where did Abel hint at this same concept?

Abel hinted at this same concept when he refered to the idea of... i honestly have no idea.
3. Why do Linguistics and Astronomy "constitute an unlikely sisterhood"?

Linguistics and Astronomy "constitue an unlikely sisterhood" because they have many similarities. They both have to be observational rather than having some type of experamentation to them. Astronomy because the stars are far away and linguistics becuase the topics are just "to human"
4. Why was the Social Worker concerned about the young girl that came to her Welfare Office with her mother?

The social worker was concerned because the girl stood unnaturally stooped holding her hands up, she felt that it was a case of autism in a child that must have been around 6 or 7.
5. Consider the history of Linguistics outlined in Chapter 5. Please explain how the study of language grew from the religious to the biological and finally to the psychological.

Lingustics started at religiously. People used to go into the rain forest with the bible and learn languages from using the bible to interact with the people speaking the language. People felt that language was a divine creation. Then Descartes came up with the idea that the soul was independent of the body, and alot of the brain. From here in the late ninteenth centuary a large amount of questions about human's language had found thier way under physchology, "a discipline the questions had helped to create"

Eyak Language

I feel that we should not go to far to try and preserve a dying language. I feel like if anything should be done it should be something similar to what Chief Marie Smith Jones did to preserve the Eyak language. Not so much the idea of fighting its extinction but creating dictionaries and recordings of the language. This way the language is never entirely lost, even when people no longer speak it. It is still there for people to look upon for cultural and historical reasons. Some people would disagree with this saying that it is extremely important to stop languages from becoming extinct, that the languages are extremely important to people’s cultures. However I feel that fighting to keep a language alive is almost impossible. If it is dying out it is dying out for a reason, whether it is issues with the construction or popularity of another language. In the world now communication, and global communication are huge. Fighting to keep dying languages alive is almost weakening these peoples ability to succeed in the ‘modern age’. Plus if we were to fight extremely hard to save languages the money spent would be immense. Even simply trying to create dictionaries for each and every of the hundreds of dying languages would add up a pretty hefty cost. If people say that they are losing their culture because their language is dying it makes me wonder why it is then dying in the first place if they aren’t keeping it alive if it means so much to them. I think that the IB supporting the International Mother Language Day is great. I think it shows how much the IB does want its students to broaden their horizons. I also think it is helping younger generations to connect with other languages, instead of keeping one as like a “master language” in which everybody uses. I feel as though this can help decrease the number of languages that are dying.