What am I supposed to be looking at? Controls and measures in inter-modal preferential looking

Intermodal preferential looking (IMPL) is widely used in experimental studies of infant development, especially language development. Control measures vary, and it is not clear how these affect findings. We examined effects of parental awareness of stimuli. Infants (17–19 months) looked at paired pictures, one name-known and one name-unknown, each assigned target status in 50 % of trials. Infants looked longer at a name-known than a name-unknown target, regardless of parents’ awareness. When parents were aware, looking to a name-unknown target increased over a paired name-known non-target. There is evidence that infants’ looking at pictures in this paradigm is not due to direct matching of targets to novel names, but is influenced by additional cues present, in a way that could alter the conclusions of studies of infant word learning and other aspects of infant learning. Implications of these findings are discussed, emphasising replicability and theoretical conclusions drawn from studies using this method.     

Why don't you believe me? Detecting deception in messages written by nonnative and native speakers

Detecting lies is crucial in numerous contexts, including situations in which individuals do not interact in their native language. Previous research suggests that individuals are perceived as less credible when they communicate in a nonnative compared with native language. The current study was the first to test this effect in truthful and fabricated messages written by native and nonnative English speakers. One hundred native English speakers judged the veracity of these messages, and overall, they proved less likely to believe and to correctly classify nonnative speakers' messages; differences in verbal cues between native and nonnative speakers' messages partly explained the differences in the judgments. Given the increased use of nonnative languages in a globalized world, the discrimination against nonnative speakers in veracity judgments is problematic. Further research should more thoroughly investigate the role of verbal cues in written and spoken nonnative language to enable the development of effective interventions.     

What if Wittgenstein could speak Japanese?

ABSTRACT

Wittgenstein’s criticism of the notion of ‘private language’ is related to the putative centrality of “being“ and the ‘subject-predicate’ distinction . However, his efforts would prove to be more fruitful if he could use data from Japanese language. There is a list of Japanese terms to translate ‘being’: sonzai, de-aru, ga-aru, and iru. Among all of their variants, the only subject-predicate-form-related expression is the combination of the ‘Y ga Z aru’-part of ‘X wa Y ga Z aru.’ Hence, Japanese subject-predicate-form-related expressions are not as fundamental as their western counterparts. Insofar as ‘pain’ is concerned, in Japanese, there are two series of expressions on pain: in the first one, the notion of pain is deobjectied and hence immune to subject-predicate logic, while in the second one, it is barely objectified in a limited sense. Hence, a Japanese speaker could avoid the fallacy of attributing subjective sensations to a particular person.