MMMM

667 views

Published on

This is a tentative attempt to show how the great literacy theory is related to communication study and meaning making. Comments are welcomed.

Published in: Education
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
667
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
4
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

MMMM

  1. 1. Meaning of meaning vs making meaning Presented at IMS STUTTGART During TSM ERASMUS 2010 Konrad Juszczyk, Ph.D. Intitute of Lingustics Department of Psycholinguistics Adam Mickiewicz University Poznań-Poland czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 1
  2. 2. Korzybski claims czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 2
  3. 3. Korzybski claims Map is not a territory. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 2
  4. 4. Korzybski claims Map is not a territory. Map does not equal the territory. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 2
  5. 5. Korzybski claims Map is not a territory. Map does not equal the territory. A word is not a thing/object. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 2
  6. 6. Korzybski claims Map is not a territory. Map does not equal the territory. A word is not a thing/object. Word is not the meaning itself. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 2
  7. 7. One of the world’s maps czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 3
  8. 8. One of the world’s maps czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 3
  9. 9. Population map of the world czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 4
  10. 10. Population map of the world czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 4
  11. 11. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 5
  12. 12. This is not a pipe. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 6
  13. 13. This is not a pipe. What is written above is a regular sentence, isn’t it? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 6
  14. 14. This is not a pipe. What is written above is a regular sentence, isn’t it? What does this tell us about the language itself? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 6
  15. 15. This is not a pipe. What is written above is a regular sentence, isn’t it? What does this tell us about the language itself? What can you see? What can you do with it? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 6
  16. 16. This is not a pipe. What is written above is a regular sentence, isn’t it? What does this tell us about the language itself? What can you see? What can you do with it? How you can analyze it? What are its properties? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 6
  17. 17. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 7
  18. 18. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 7
  19. 19. Are you a piper or a plumber? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 8
  20. 20. Are you a piper or a plumber? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 8
  21. 21. Futuristic Smoking Pipe Shaped Toilet czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 9
  22. 22. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 10
  23. 23. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 10
  24. 24. MONOMODALITY czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 11
  25. 25. MONOMODALITY We can see a sentence, so language is observable. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 11
  26. 26. MONOMODALITY We can see a sentence, so language is observable. We can hear a spoken sentence, so speech is observable as well, although is so elusive. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 11
  27. 27. MONOMODALITY We can see a sentence, so language is observable. We can hear a spoken sentence, so speech is observable as well, although is so elusive. We can record the speech with writing or any other modern tools like digital recording equipment. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 11
  28. 28. MONOMODALITY We can see a sentence, so language is observable. We can hear a spoken sentence, so speech is observable as well, although is so elusive. We can record the speech with writing or any other modern tools like digital recording equipment. Writing records only part of the spoken language, speech is just one modality of communication. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 11
  29. 29. LINEARITY czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 12
  30. 30. LINEARITY We can see series of letters (words) in proper order. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 12
  31. 31. LINEARITY We can see series of letters (words) in proper order. Speaking is linear, words are produced in order. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 12
  32. 32. LINEARITY We can see series of letters (words) in proper order. Speaking is linear, words are produced in order. We can study the speech on spectrograms. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 12
  33. 33. LINEARITY We can see series of letters (words) in proper order. Speaking is linear, words are produced in order. We can study the speech on spectrograms. Word order makes meaning in some languages (according to some theories of grammar, of course). czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 12
  34. 34. LINEARITY We can see series of letters (words) in proper order. Speaking is linear, words are produced in order. We can study the speech on spectrograms. Word order makes meaning in some languages (according to some theories of grammar, of course). LINEARITY is a property of language and speech. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 12
  35. 35. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 13
  36. 36. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 13
  37. 37. CONTAINER & CONDUIT czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 14
  38. 38. CONTAINER & CONDUIT We can see words as the actual objects and analyze these objects. These objects contain some meaning. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 14
  39. 39. CONTAINER & CONDUIT We can see words as the actual objects and analyze these objects. These objects contain some meaning. Putting containers together make meaning. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 14
  40. 40. CONTAINER & CONDUIT We can see words as the actual objects and analyze these objects. These objects contain some meaning. Putting containers together make meaning. Lg expressions are words which are containers. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 14
  41. 41. CONTAINER & CONDUIT We can see words as the actual objects and analyze these objects. These objects contain some meaning. Putting containers together make meaning. Lg expressions are words which are containers. Speaking is like transmitting (Reddy, Lakoff) czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 14
  42. 42. CONDUIT metaphor in communication model czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 15
  43. 43. CONDUIT metaphor in communication model The description of communication and meaning is based on conduit metaphors (Reddy 1979, Lakoff 1980). czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 15
  44. 44. CONDUIT metaphor in communication model The description of communication and meaning is based on conduit metaphors (Reddy 1979, Lakoff 1980). LINGUISTIC EXPRESSIONS ARE CONTAINERS FOR MEANING/IDEAS, WHICH ARE OBJECTS czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 15
  45. 45. CONDUIT metaphor in communication model The description of communication and meaning is based on conduit metaphors (Reddy 1979, Lakoff 1980). LINGUISTIC EXPRESSIONS ARE CONTAINERS FOR MEANING/IDEAS, WHICH ARE OBJECTS COMMUNICATION IS SENDING CONTAINERS czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 15
  46. 46. CONDUIT metaphor in communication model The description of communication and meaning is based on conduit metaphors (Reddy 1979, Lakoff 1980). LINGUISTIC EXPRESSIONS ARE CONTAINERS FOR MEANING/IDEAS, WHICH ARE OBJECTS COMMUNICATION IS SENDING CONTAINERS We seem to pack and unpack the meanings from containers and ideas from words. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 15
  47. 47. Meaning of meaning czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 16
  48. 48. Meaning of meaning czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 16
  49. 49. Meaning of meaning czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 17
  50. 50. Meaning of meaning czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 17
  51. 51. Meaning of meaning czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 18
  52. 52. Meaning of meaning czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 19
  53. 53. Meaning of meaning czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 20
  54. 54. 70% of descriptions of language are like these: czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 21
  55. 55. 70% of descriptions of language are like these: It’s hard to get that idea across to him. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 21
  56. 56. 70% of descriptions of language are like these: It’s hard to get that idea across to him. It’s difficult to put my ideas into words. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 21
  57. 57. 70% of descriptions of language are like these: It’s hard to get that idea across to him. It’s difficult to put my ideas into words. The meaning is right there in the words. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 21
  58. 58. 70% of descriptions of language are like these: It’s hard to get that idea across to him. It’s difficult to put my ideas into words. The meaning is right there in the words. This sentence is without any meaning. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 21
  59. 59. 70% of descriptions of language are like these: It’s hard to get that idea across to him. It’s difficult to put my ideas into words. The meaning is right there in the words. This sentence is without any meaning. Try to pack more thought into fewer words. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 21
  60. 60. Discourse semantics czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 22
  61. 61. Discourse semantics The way one think of discourse has a strong effect of a kind of a theory or model of discourse semantics one creates. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 22
  62. 62. Discourse semantics The way one think of discourse has a strong effect of a kind of a theory or model of discourse semantics one creates. Within the conduit metaphor one is invited to think of language and texts as containing meaning. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 22
  63. 63. Discourse semantics The way one think of discourse has a strong effect of a kind of a theory or model of discourse semantics one creates. Within the conduit metaphor one is invited to think of language and texts as containing meaning. Language, in a sense, is viewed as a precision instrument which is used to craft a precise meaning, fully embodied in the text. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 22
  64. 64. Discourse semantics The way one think of discourse has a strong effect of a kind of a theory or model of discourse semantics one creates. Within the conduit metaphor one is invited to think of language and texts as containing meaning. Language, in a sense, is viewed as a precision instrument which is used to craft a precise meaning, fully embodied in the text. Tomlin, Forrest, Pu, Kim czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 22
  65. 65. Lakoff claims: czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 23
  66. 66. Lakoff claims: The conduit metaphor does not fit cases where context is required to determine whether the sentence has any meaning at all and, if so, what meaning it has. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 23
  67. 67. Lakoff claims: The conduit metaphor does not fit cases where context is required to determine whether the sentence has any meaning at all and, if so, what meaning it has. People are more than senders and receivers. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 23
  68. 68. Lakoff claims: The conduit metaphor does not fit cases where context is required to determine whether the sentence has any meaning at all and, if so, what meaning it has. People are more than senders and receivers. Writing provides containers for meaning and the conduit metaphor for communication. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 23
  69. 69. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 24
  70. 70. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 24
  71. 71. REGULARITY czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 25
  72. 72. REGULARITY Lg is seen as regular, repetitive, hence “foreseeable“. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 25
  73. 73. REGULARITY Lg is seen as regular, repetitive, hence “foreseeable“. You can program grammar of language in algorythms. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 25
  74. 74. REGULARITY Lg is seen as regular, repetitive, hence “foreseeable“. You can program grammar of language in algorythms. Computer Assisted Translation, Google Translator, speech synthesis and recognition, computer lgs... czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 25
  75. 75. REGULARITY Lg is seen as regular, repetitive, hence “foreseeable“. You can program grammar of language in algorythms. Computer Assisted Translation, Google Translator, speech synthesis and recognition, computer lgs... Meaning seems to be computable with computers. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 25
  76. 76. REGULARITY Lg is seen as regular, repetitive, hence “foreseeable“. You can program grammar of language in algorythms. Computer Assisted Translation, Google Translator, speech synthesis and recognition, computer lgs... Meaning seems to be computable with computers. The writing suggests that lg always looks the same. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 25
  77. 77. STATIC & PASSIVE czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 26
  78. 78. STATIC & PASSIVE This is just a description of a certain fact. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 26
  79. 79. STATIC & PASSIVE This is just a description of a certain fact. It is passive, static and decontextualised. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 26
  80. 80. STATIC & PASSIVE This is just a description of a certain fact. It is passive, static and decontextualised. It seems to be out of context and content. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 26
  81. 81. STATIC & PASSIVE This is just a description of a certain fact. It is passive, static and decontextualised. It seems to be out of context and content. Words verbalise our thoughts. Is that all? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 26
  82. 82. STATIC & PASSIVE This is just a description of a certain fact. It is passive, static and decontextualised. It seems to be out of context and content. Words verbalise our thoughts. Is that all? Writing is out of time, place and body. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 26
  83. 83. LANGUAGE and COMMUNICATION MODELS meaning of meaning vs making meaning monomodality multimodality linearity crossmodality regularity irregularity container in conduit meaning is embodied sending and (offline) joint attention (online) static and passive dynamic and interactive feedback product process discrete continuous czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 27
  84. 84. This is not a pipe. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 28
  85. 85. This is not a pipe. This is not a language. This is not a speech. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 28
  86. 86. This is not a pipe. This is not a language. This is not a speech. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 28
  87. 87. This is not a pipe. This is not a language. This is not a speech. It looks like a language, but it is writing! czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 28
  88. 88. This is not a pipe. This is not a language. This is not a speech. It looks like a language, but it is writing! czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 28
  89. 89. This is not a pipe. This is not a language. This is not a speech. It looks like a language, but it is writing! Writing is neither a language nor a speech. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 28
  90. 90. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 29
  91. 91. Language seen in linguistics czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 29
  92. 92. Language seen in linguistics as an effect of writing czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 29
  93. 93. Language seen in linguistics as an effect of writing czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 29
  94. 94. Language seen in linguistics as an effect of writing How writing models speech, language and communication czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 29
  95. 95. Language seen in linguistics as an effect of writing How writing models speech, language and communication czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 29
  96. 96. Language seen in linguistics as an effect of writing How writing models speech, language and communication How does writing influence the way we think about language? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 29
  97. 97. Language seen in linguistics as an effect of writing How writing models speech, language and communication How does writing influence the way we think about language? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 29
  98. 98. Language seen in linguistics as an effect of writing How writing models speech, language and communication How does writing influence the way we think about language? What do we know about communication from writing? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 29
  99. 99. Language in Literacy Theories’ perspective Speech turned reality into object of reflection, so did writing with speech and language. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 30
  100. 100. Language in Literacy Theories’ perspective Think about a thing. Speech turned reality into object of reflection, so did writing with speech and language. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 30
  101. 101. Language in Literacy Theories’ perspective Think about a thing. Thing as a thought Speech turned reality into object of reflection, so did writing with speech and language. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 30
  102. 102. Language in Literacy Theories’ perspective Think about a thing. Thing as a thought SPEECH: ORALITY Speech turned reality into object of reflection, so did writing with speech and language. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 30
  103. 103. Language in Literacy Theories’ perspective Think about a thing. Think about a thought. Thing as a thought SPEECH: ORALITY Speech turned reality into object of reflection, so did writing with speech and language. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 30
  104. 104. Language in Literacy Theories’ perspective Think about a thing. Think about a thought. Thing as a thought Thought as a thing SPEECH: ORALITY Speech turned reality into object of reflection, so did writing with speech and language. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 30
  105. 105. Language in Literacy Theories’ perspective Think about a thing. Think about a thought. Thing as a thought Thought as a thing SPEECH: ORALITY WRITING: LITERACY Speech turned reality into object of reflection, so did writing with speech and language. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 30
  106. 106. Benefits of writing czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 31
  107. 107. Benefits of writing erasing and precision czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 31
  108. 108. Benefits of writing erasing and precision While speaking you can’t take your words back! czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 31
  109. 109. Benefits of writing erasing and precision While speaking you can’t take your words back! external storage czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 31
  110. 110. Benefits of writing erasing and precision While speaking you can’t take your words back! external storage Your mind is relieved from memorization. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 31
  111. 111. Benefits of writing erasing and precision While speaking you can’t take your words back! external storage Your mind is relieved from memorization. backward scanning czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 31
  112. 112. Benefits of writing erasing and precision While speaking you can’t take your words back! external storage Your mind is relieved from memorization. backward scanning You can look at the whole text or list of data. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 31
  113. 113. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 32
  114. 114. Vygotsky, L. 1962. Thought and Language. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 32
  115. 115. Vygotsky, L. 1962. Thought and Language. Goody, J. & Watt, I. 1968. The consequences of literacy. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 32
  116. 116. Vygotsky, L. 1962. Thought and Language. Goody, J. & Watt, I. 1968. The consequences of literacy. Havelock, E. 1982. The literate revolution in Greece and its cultural consequences and Preface to Plato. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 32
  117. 117. Vygotsky, L. 1962. Thought and Language. Goody, J. & Watt, I. 1968. The consequences of literacy. Havelock, E. 1982. The literate revolution in Greece and its cultural consequences and Preface to Plato. Ong, W. 1982. Orality and literacy. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 32
  118. 118. Vygotsky, L. 1962. Thought and Language. Goody, J. & Watt, I. 1968. The consequences of literacy. Havelock, E. 1982. The literate revolution in Greece and its cultural consequences and Preface to Plato. Ong, W. 1982. Orality and literacy. Olson, D. 1994. The world on paper. The conceptual and cognitive implications of writing and reading. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 32
  119. 119. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 33
  120. 120. The   men   who   invented   and   perfected   wri2ng   were   great   linguists   and   it   was   they   who   invented  linguis2cs. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 33
  121. 121. The   men   who   invented   and   perfected   wri2ng   were   great   linguists   and   it   was   they   who   invented  linguis2cs. Antoine  Meillet   czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 33
  122. 122. Linguistics is a study of written language! czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 34
  123. 123. Linguistics is a study of written language! Whatever we say about language as a communication tool is saying about the writing as a communication tool! czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 34
  124. 124. Linguistics is a study of written language! Whatever we say about language as a communication tool is saying about the writing as a communication tool! What the study of communication shows us is very different from the writing study. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 34
  125. 125. Linguistics is a study of written language! Whatever we say about language as a communication tool is saying about the writing as a communication tool! What the study of communication shows us is very different from the writing study. If we want to say something about the communication tools we need to study the communication itself, not writing! czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 34
  126. 126. The making of the literate mind David Olson The world on paper czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 35
  127. 127. Why monomodality? No writing system, including the alphabet, brings all aspects of what it is said into awareness. Script represent the verbal form of an expression but it fails to provide an explicit representation for the illocutionary force of an utterance. What the script-as-model does not represent is difficult to bring into consciousness. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 36
  128. 128. Why linearity? Writing was responsible for bringing aspects of spoken language into consciousness. Writing provides a set of categories for thinking about language. Writing is not the transcription of speech, but provides a conceptual model for that speech. Whorf’s hypothesis about relativism: Linguistic structures shape the world view. Culture may vary depending on language. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 37
  129. 129. Why regularity? Olson czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 38
  130. 130. Why regularity? Grammar evolved to express propositional content; writing systems, to the extent that they model the grammar, preserved the grammatical and lexical aspects of an utterance. Olson czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 38
  131. 131. Why regularity? Grammar evolved to express propositional content; writing systems, to the extent that they model the grammar, preserved the grammatical and lexical aspects of an utterance. What remained to be invented were devices for representing the illocutionary force, devices which, so far as possible indicated just how the speaker or writer intended his of her utterance to be taken. Olson czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 38
  132. 132. Why regularity? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 39
  133. 133. Why regularity? Writing makes some aspects of language, including words, into objects of consciousness. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 39
  134. 134. Why regularity? Writing makes some aspects of language, including words, into objects of consciousness. Writing as a model of speech allowed the formation of explicit lists, logics, grammars and dictionaries. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 39
  135. 135. Why regularity? Writing makes some aspects of language, including words, into objects of consciousness. Writing as a model of speech allowed the formation of explicit lists, logics, grammars and dictionaries. Writing helped us to organize the society with „tools” like economy, institutions, bureaucracy, law, religion... czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 39
  136. 136. Why regularity? Writing makes some aspects of language, including words, into objects of consciousness. Writing as a model of speech allowed the formation of explicit lists, logics, grammars and dictionaries. Writing helped us to organize the society with „tools” like economy, institutions, bureaucracy, law, religion... (GOODY’s CLAIMS) czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 39
  137. 137. Why conduit & container? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 40
  138. 138. Why conduit & container? Oral culture preserve information by making it memorable. Greeks mastered memorization. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 40
  139. 139. Why conduit & container? Oral culture preserve information by making it memorable. Greeks mastered memorization. Writing released cognition from the constraint of memorazing allowing a new form of discourse, the discourse of principles, statements, and definitions. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 40
  140. 140. Why conduit & container? Oral culture preserve information by making it memorable. Greeks mastered memorization. Writing released cognition from the constraint of memorazing allowing a new form of discourse, the discourse of principles, statements, and definitions. Writing helped to organize university and science. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 40
  141. 141. Why conduit & container? Oral culture preserve information by making it memorable. Greeks mastered memorization. Writing released cognition from the constraint of memorazing allowing a new form of discourse, the discourse of principles, statements, and definitions. Writing helped to organize university and science. (HAVELOCK’s CLAIMS) czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 40
  142. 142. Once the illocutionary force of a text is recognized as the expression of a personal, private intentionality, the concepts for representing how a text is to be taken provide just the concepts necessary for the represen- tation of mind. Theory of mind is nothing other than the set of mental concepts which correspond to the expression of the illocutionary force of utterances. Since we have those concepts we can interpret the written text almost like a spoken utterance. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 41
  143. 143. Why static and passive? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 42
  144. 144. Why static and passive? Writing readily preserves the lexical and syntactic properties of speech but loses the voice-qualities of the speaker including stress and intonation, czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 42
  145. 145. Why static and passive? Writing readily preserves the lexical and syntactic properties of speech but loses the voice-qualities of the speaker including stress and intonation, the silent language revealed in bodily cues manifest in the eyes, hands, and stance as well as the cognitively shared context, all of which in oral contexts indicate how the utterance is to be taken. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 42
  146. 146. Why static and passive? Writing readily preserves the lexical and syntactic properties of speech but loses the voice-qualities of the speaker including stress and intonation, the silent language revealed in bodily cues manifest in the eyes, hands, and stance as well as the cognitively shared context, all of which in oral contexts indicate how the utterance is to be taken. (OLSON’s CLAIMS) czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 42
  147. 147. LANGUAGE and COMMUNICATION MODELS meaning of meaning vs making meaning monomodality multimodality linearity crossmodality regularity irregularity container in conduit meaning is embodied sending (offline) joint attention (online) static and passive dynamic and interactive feedback product process discrete continuous czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 43
  148. 148. Alan Fogel’s claims czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 44
  149. 149. Alan Fogel’s claims Models are not true or false. Each model captures a particular feature of the phenomenon and no model expresses all of its properties. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 44
  150. 150. Alan Fogel’s claims Models are not true or false. Each model captures a particular feature of the phenomenon and no model expresses all of its properties. Natural phenomena are understood using models as interpretive tools, and those tools should match our world views and purposes. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 44
  151. 151. Alan Fogel’s claims Models are not true or false. Each model captures a particular feature of the phenomenon and no model expresses all of its properties. Natural phenomena are understood using models as interpretive tools, and those tools should match our world views and purposes. 2 models of communication: discrete and continuous czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 44
  152. 152. Alan Fogel’s claims Models are not true or false. Each model captures a particular feature of the phenomenon and no model expresses all of its properties. Natural phenomena are understood using models as interpretive tools, and those tools should match our world views and purposes. 2 models of communication: discrete and continuous product vs process or ergon vs energeia czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 44
  153. 153. LANGUAGE and COMMUNICATION MODELS meaning of meaning vs making meaning monomodality multimodality linearity crossmodality regularity irregularity container in conduit meaning is embodied sending (offline) joint attention (online) static and passive dynamic and interactive feedback product process discrete continuous czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 45
  154. 154. MULTIMODALITY czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 46
  155. 155. MULTIMODALITY GESTURES: beats, deictic, iconic, metaphoric czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 46
  156. 156. MULTIMODALITY GESTURES: beats, deictic, iconic, metaphoric EYES: gazing, gaze following, gaze directing czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 46
  157. 157. MULTIMODALITY GESTURES: beats, deictic, iconic, metaphoric EYES: gazing, gaze following, gaze directing LEXICAL: semantical and syntactical structures czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 46
  158. 158. MULTIMODALITY GESTURES: beats, deictic, iconic, metaphoric EYES: gazing, gaze following, gaze directing LEXICAL: semantical and syntactical structures PROSODIC: word stress, intonation, timbre, rhythm czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 46
  159. 159. MULTIMODALITY GESTURES: beats, deictic, iconic, metaphoric EYES: gazing, gaze following, gaze directing LEXICAL: semantical and syntactical structures PROSODIC: word stress, intonation, timbre, rhythm OTHER cues: relation between partners, social norms czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 46
  160. 160. CROSSMODALITY czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 47
  161. 161. CROSSMODALITY Cross-modal perception occurs when information perceived in one modality is translated into perception of action in another modality. (Fogel 1993:72) czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 47
  162. 162. CROSSMODALITY Cross-modal perception occurs when information perceived in one modality is translated into perception of action in another modality. (Fogel 1993:72) Information is cross-modal in the sense that it can be perceived through different sensory systems and translated into different forms of action in any part of the body. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 47
  163. 163. CROSSMODALITY Cross-modal perception occurs when information perceived in one modality is translated into perception of action in another modality. (Fogel 1993:72) Information is cross-modal in the sense that it can be perceived through different sensory systems and translated into different forms of action in any part of the body. Continuous communication is based on perception-action cross-modal linkages. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 47
  164. 164. EMBODIED MEANING czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 48
  165. 165. EMBODIED MEANING We express and extract meaning with our body. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 48
  166. 166. EMBODIED MEANING We express and extract meaning with our body. Meaning is based on metaphors. (Lakoff & Johnson) czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 48
  167. 167. EMBODIED MEANING We express and extract meaning with our body. Meaning is based on metaphors. (Lakoff & Johnson) Metaphors are primarly based on experience and body. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 48
  168. 168. EMBODIED MEANING We express and extract meaning with our body. Meaning is based on metaphors. (Lakoff & Johnson) Metaphors are primarly based on experience and body. Information is also meaningful with respect to the experience of one’s own body. (Fogel) czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 48
  169. 169. JA as a primary framework for communication czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 49
  170. 170. JA as a primary framework for communication What is that feeling that you are talking about? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 49
  171. 171. JA as a primary framework for communication What is that feeling that you are talking about? Show me what you feel – mean with your body, so I can feel it and make meaning with my body. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 49
  172. 172. JA as a primary framework for communication What is that feeling that you are talking about? Show me what you feel – mean with your body, so I can feel it and make meaning with my body. We make meaning in joint attention frames. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 49
  173. 173. JA as a primary framework for communication What is that feeling that you are talking about? Show me what you feel – mean with your body, so I can feel it and make meaning with my body. We make meaning in joint attention frames. How meaning emerge in joint attention frames? czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 49
  174. 174. JA as a primary framework for communication What is that feeling that you are talking about? Show me what you feel – mean with your body, so I can feel it and make meaning with my body. We make meaning in joint attention frames. How meaning emerge in joint attention frames? If you speak you use lg and you are in the JA frame. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 49
  175. 175. Triadical  Relation  in  Joint  Attentional  Frame  COMMUNICATION  btw  PARTNERS czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 50
  176. 176. Tomasello’s approach czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 51
  177. 177. Tomasello’s approach czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 51
  178. 178. Tomasello’s approach czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 52
  179. 179. Tomasello’s approach czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 52
  180. 180. DYNAMICS and INTERACTIVITY czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 53
  181. 181. DYNAMICS and INTERACTIVITY People in conversation speak one after another czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 53
  182. 182. DYNAMICS and INTERACTIVITY People in conversation speak one after another There are nonverbal cues of taking turns. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 53
  183. 183. DYNAMICS and INTERACTIVITY People in conversation speak one after another There are nonverbal cues of taking turns. Content of conversation depends on the situation: czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 53
  184. 184. DYNAMICS and INTERACTIVITY People in conversation speak one after another There are nonverbal cues of taking turns. Content of conversation depends on the situation: Partners of conversation, their aims and actions. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 53
  185. 185. DYNAMICS and INTERACTIVITY People in conversation speak one after another There are nonverbal cues of taking turns. Content of conversation depends on the situation: Partners of conversation, their aims and actions. Meaning of words is negotiated between partners. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 53
  186. 186. FEEDBACK czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 54
  187. 187. FEEDBACK There is always sb speaking and sb listening. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 54
  188. 188. FEEDBACK There is always sb speaking and sb listening. Speaking is acting and influencing others. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 54
  189. 189. FEEDBACK There is always sb speaking and sb listening. Speaking is acting and influencing others. The same sample (lg expression) may mean different things for two people. Or they agree. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 54
  190. 190. FEEDBACK There is always sb speaking and sb listening. Speaking is acting and influencing others. The same sample (lg expression) may mean different things for two people. Or they agree. We-intentionality – we perceive each other like the self. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 54
  191. 191. FEEDBACK There is always sb speaking and sb listening. Speaking is acting and influencing others. The same sample (lg expression) may mean different things for two people. Or they agree. We-intentionality – we perceive each other like the self. We identify with each other and understand intention. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 54
  192. 192. CONTINUOUS PROCESS OF COMMUNICATION czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 55
  193. 193. CONTINUOUS PROCESS OF COMMUNICATION Information (meaning) is continuously updated by partners and mutually negotiated between them. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 55
  194. 194. CONTINUOUS PROCESS OF COMMUNICATION Information (meaning) is continuously updated by partners and mutually negotiated between them. People participate in social interaction simultaneously and their actions are mutually coordinated. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 55
  195. 195. CONTINUOUS PROCESS OF COMMUNICATION Information (meaning) is continuously updated by partners and mutually negotiated between them. People participate in social interaction simultaneously and their actions are mutually coordinated. People are action-oriented agents. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 55
  196. 196. CONTINUOUS PROCESS OF COMMUNICATION Information (meaning) is continuously updated by partners and mutually negotiated between them. People participate in social interaction simultaneously and their actions are mutually coordinated. People are action-oriented agents. Perception and action are coordinated. czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 55
  197. 197. LANGUAGE and COMMUNICATION MODELS meaning of meaning vs making meaning monomodality multimodality linearity crossmodality regularity irregularity container in conduit meaning is embodied sending (offline) joint attention (online) static and passive dynamic and interactive feedback product process discrete continuous czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 56
  198. 198. MIRRORING MEANING czwartek, 6 stycznia 2011 57

×