منابع مشابه
1 Speaking vs . Thinking about Objects and Actions
A strong version of the Whorfian hypothesis is that the influence of language on thought is obligatory or at least habitual; that is, thought is always, or under most circumstances, guided by language. We argue, in contrast, that at the lexical level, language and thought need not closely or commonly mirror each other. Naming – of objects, events, or other entities -is a communicative process t...
متن کاملDimensions for Thinking About Thinking
We start by making a distinction between mind and cognition, and by positing that cognition is an aspect of mind. We propose as a working hypothesis a Separability Hypothesis which posits that we can factor off an architecture for cognition from a more general architecture for mind, thus avoiding a number of philosophical objections that have been raised about the "Strong AI" hypothesis. We the...
متن کاملRe-Thinking Anxiety: Using Inoculation Messages to Reduce and Reinterpret Public Speaking Fears
Inoculation theory offers a framework for protecting individuals against challenges to an existing attitude, belief, or state. Despite the prevalence and damaging effects of public speaking anxiety, inoculation strategies have yet to be used to help individuals remain calm before and during public speaking. We aimed to test the effectiveness of an inoculation message for reducing the onset of p...
متن کاملImagery for Speaking
The Whorfian hypothesis has alternately attracted and repelled linguists and psycholinguists for generations. The polar reactions tend to come in waves. We currently seem to be entering a phase of attraction, due in no small part to Dan Slobin’s innovative extension of the Whorfian hypothesis to encompass thinking-for-speaking. The classic Whorfian hypothesis is fundamentally static. It presume...
متن کاملThinking about thinking: implications for patient safety.
Clinical medicine, a learned, rational, science-using practice, is labelled a science even though physicians have the good sense not to practise it that way. Rather than thinking like scientists - or how we think scientists think - physicians are engaged in analogical, interpretive reasoning that resembles Aristotle's phronesis, or practical reasoning, more closely than episteme, or scientific ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society
سال: 1987
ISSN: 2377-1666,0363-2946
DOI: 10.3765/bls.v13i0.1826