A pragmatic defense of Millianism

A new kind of defense of the Millian theory of names is given, which explains intuitive counter-examples as depending on pragmatic effects of the relevant sentences, by direct application of Grice’s and Sperber and Wilson’s Relevance Theory and uncontroversial assumptions. I begin by arguing that synonyms are always intersubstitutable, despite Mates’ considerations, and then apply the method to names. Then, a fairly large sample of cases concerning names are dealt with in related ways. It is argued that the method, as applied to the various cases, satisfies the criterion of success: that for every sentence in context, it is a counter-example to Millianism to the extent that it has pragmatic effects (matching speakers’ intuitions).     

That <Emphasis Type="Italic">F</Emphasis>

Jeffrey King’s principal objection to the direct-reference theory of demonstratives is analyzed and criticized. King has responded with a modified version of his original argument aimed at establishing the weaker conclusion that the direct-reference theory of demonstratives is either incomplete or incorrect. It is argued that this fallback argument also fails.

时间隐喻中的空间参照框架

在时间隐喻研究早期, 研究者多将时间隐喻分为“自我移动”和“时间移动”两类, 关注的是“自我移动”和“物体移动”空间参照框架向时间概念的系统映射。最近, 有研究者在语料分析的基础上, 提出了由其他空间参照框架映射而来的新的时间参照系, 并确立了新的理论, 其中以自我参照点和时间参照点理论、三大参照系理论最具代表性。文章对“自我移动”和“时间移动”隐喻方面的最新研究及目前空间-时间隐喻方面一些新的参照点/系理论和相关实证研究进行了述评。     

正负参照点下性别和损益情景对大学生延迟折扣的影响

大量研究表明,延迟折扣受到个体特质性和状态性因素的影响。本研究通过两个实验分别探究正参照点(实验1)和负参照点(实验2)下,特质性因素性别和状态性因素损益情景对大学生个体延迟折扣的影响。实验1研究发现,在正性参照点下,无论男女,收益情景的主观远期价值远高于损失情景。实验2研究发现,在负性参照点下,男女在损益情景的主观远期价值不同;与男性相比,女性的主观远期价值在损失情景中更高,而在收益情景中则无显著差异。本研究结果表明,在不同的参照点下,男女在损益情景中表现了不同的延迟折扣倾向;与男性相比,女性在负性参照点面对损失情景跨期选择时,更愿意选择延迟赔偿。     

得失程数的变化: 损失规避现象的新视点

损失规避是预期理论的核心部分之一, 指等量的损失和获得产生的心理效用并不相同, 前者大于后者。大量研究从生理、认知、情感等角度探讨损失规避的内在机制和规律, 以期认识、预测并控制损失规避导致的偏差。本研究假设损失规避与获得或损失的“程数”(route)有关, 以往研究发现了损失规避现象, 是由于其采用的“双程损失-单程获得”典型情境中, 损失程数多于获得程数。为检验该假设, 本研究设计了不同于传统范式的“获得和损失程数相等”的镜像情境、“单程损失－双程获得”及“三程获得”三种不同的得失情境。研究结果支持本假设: 当损失的程数等于或少于获得的程数时, 损失规避现象消失; 获得或损失的程数越多, 个体对其的心理感受强度趋于越高。建议未来研究进一步检验心理感受强度在程数和损失规避行为之间的中介作用。     

Reasonably Traditional: Self–Contradiction and Self–Reference in Alasdair MacIntyre's Account of Tradition–Based Rationality

Alasdair MacIntyre's account of tradition–based rationality has been the subject of much discussion, as well as the object of some recent charges of inconsistency. The author considers arguments by Jennifer Herdt, Peter Mehl, and John Haldane which attempt to show that MacIntyre's account of rationality is, in some way, inconsistent. It is argued that the various charges of inconsistency brought against MacIntyre by these critics can be understood as variations on two general types of criticism: (1) that MacIntyre's account of tradition–based rationality presents a picture of rationality with inconsistent internal elements, and (2) that MacIntyre, in the act of presenting his picture of rationality, makes the sort of claims to which his own account of rationality denies legitimacy, and thus MacIntyre's account is self–referentially incoherent. In response to criticisms of the first sort, it is argued that MacIntyre can further clarify or develop his position to take the current criticisms into account without altering the fundamental aspects of his picture of rationality. In response to the charge of self–referential incoherence, it is argued that the charge rests on a mistaken understanding of MacIntyre's position and of the nature of justification. In dealing with these arguments, the author hopes to not only vindicate MacIntyre's account of rationality against the charges of some of its recent critics, but also to shed some light on the nature of arguments both for and against relativism and historicism.     

Spanish-speaking caregivers’ use of referential labels with toddlers is a better predictor of later vocabulary than their use of referential gestures

Variation in how frequently caregivers engage with their children is associated with variation in children's later language outcomes. One explanation for this link is that caregivers use both verbal behaviors, such as labels, and non-verbal behaviors, such as gestures, to help children establish reference to objects or events in the world. However, few studies have directly explored whether language outcomes are more strongly associated with referential behaviors that are expressed verbally, such as labels, or non-verbally, such as gestures, or whether both are equally predictive. Here, we observed caregivers from 42 Spanish-speaking families in the US engage with their 18-month-old children during 5-min lab-based, play sessions. Children's language processing speed and vocabulary size were assessed when children were 25 months. Bayesian model comparisons assessed the extent to which the frequencies of caregivers’ referential labels, referential gestures, or labels and gestures together, were more strongly associated with children's language outcomes than a model with caregiver total words, or overall talkativeness. The best-fitting models showed that children who heard more referential labels at 18 months were faster in language processing and had larger vocabularies at 25 months. Models including gestures, or labels and gestures together, showed weaker fits to the data. Caregivers’ total words predicted children's language processing speed, but predicted vocabulary size less well. These results suggest that the frequency with which caregivers of 18-month-old children use referential labels, more so than referential gestures, is a critical feature of caregiver verbal engagement that contributes to language processing development and vocabulary growth.

Research Highlights

• We examined the frequency of referential communicative behaviors, via labels and/or gestures, produced by caregivers during a 5-min play interaction with their 18-month-old children.
• We assessed predictive relations between labels, gestures, their combination, as well as total words spoken, and children's processing speed and vocabulary growth at 25 months.
• Bayesian model comparisons showed that caregivers’ referential labels at 18 months best predicted both 25-month vocabulary measures, although total words also predicted later processing speed.
• Frequent use of referential labels by caregivers, more so than referential gestures, is a critical feature of communicative behavior that supports children's later vocabulary learning.