A Gibsonian analysis of linguistic information Finding Common Ground: UConn 2014 Sabrina Golonka Leeds Metropolitan University Centre for Applied Social

A Gibsonian analysis of linguistic information

Finding Common Ground: UConn 2014

Sabrina GolonkaLeeds Metropolitan University

Centre for Applied Social Research

What is the place of language in ecological psychology?

Is language a type of perception? Is language comprehension direct perception? Does language have affordances?

“New affordances for language: distributed, dynamical, and dialogical resources” (Hodges & Fowler, 2010)

“Speech as the perception of affordances” (Worgan & Moore 2010)

Fowler, 1986 p 24

“As to...whether a linguistic message can be said to be perceived...from a direct-realist perspective, direct perception depends on a necessary relation between structure in information media and its distal source. But,...this does not appear to apply to the relation between sign and significance.”

Language does not fit cleanly into an ecological framework as currently defined

Need to identify precisely where the similarities and differences are to preserve the theoretical rigour of the ecological approach

Goal: Devise an extended framework for ecological information that accommodates language without straining or redefining original notions of affordances or direct-perception

The ecological approach to perception (Gibson, 1979;

Turvey, Shaw, Reed & Mace, 1981)

1. Affordances are dispositional properties of objects and events that provide opportunities for action to complementary organisms

2. Perception is of affordances3. Affordances uniquely structure energy (specification)4. Therefore, coordinating behaviour wrt information is

equivalent to coordinating behaviour wrt the affordance property (direct perception)

Information / behaviour relations

Affordance property structures

light in a way unique to that

property

Has the affordance property

“climbable”

Coordinating behaviour wrt the

information is equivalent to coordinating

behaviour wrt the affordance

The property that constrains the types of actions possible is specifically projected in light.


“Turn left at the corner”

Structures sound in a way that is specific to the speech event

There is a specific projection of the property, but this property does not lawfully constrain the types of actions possible in this task

Coordinating behaviour wrt the information is

equivalent to coordinating behaviour

wrt...what exactly?

Trained speaker coordinates actions of vocal tract to produce a certain series of sounds




There is a specific projection of the event, but this event does not lawfully constrain the types of actions possible

Behaviour is not organised WRT the

articulatory dynamics that created the

sound


No natural law relating behaviour to the property of the world that caused the information




There is a specific projection of the event, but this event does not lawfully constrain the types of actions possible

The action is precipitated by the

linguistic information, but it is then controlled by

perceptual information


No natural law relating behaviour to the property of the world that caused the information

Turvey et al 1981 p 244“Our strategy, as proponents of Gibson’s ecological approach, is to argue for a conception of natural law that allows meaningful relations between organism and environment to hold. Further, we constrain our use of the term ‘perception’ (and thus, of course, ‘direct perception’) to relations governed by such laws.”

“Perhaps if [so-called higher mental processes] are reconsidered in relation to ecological perceiving they will begin to sort themselves out in a new and reasonable way that fits with the evidence.”

Gibson, 1979 p 255

Re-analysis of informationObjects and events structure energy

These structures are lawfully related to the properties in the world that cause them

Information is any structure that an organism can use to precipitate or control a behaviour

Not all behaviours are organised wrt the property of the world that caused the information

perception / action -> information / behaviour


Evolution● types of energy an organism is sensitive to ● biases to pick up certain types of information● predetermined or strongly constrained relations (e.g., reflexes /instincts)● sophistication of nervous system - ability to learn new information / behaviour relations

Learning● learn to detect structure?● learn to coordinate behaviour wrt structure?● organise behaviour wrt property causing structure or convention?● structure stability/availability/reliability?● precipitate or control an action?

Questions for classifying information (learning-related)

1. Does the organism learn to detect the structure?2. Does the organism learn to coordinate its behaviour wrt

the structure?3. Does the organism organise behaviour wrt property

causing structure or convention?4. How stable/available/reliable is the structure?5. Is the structure being used to precipitate or control an

action?

Human infant learning to walk● learn to detect structure? Yes

● learn to coordinate behaviour wrt structure?

Yes

● organise behaviour wrt property causing structure or convention?

Property causing structure

● structure stability/availability/reliability?

Structure stable within ecological scope, changes in real time w property of interest

● precipitate or control an action? Control

Human language postural entrainment ● learn to detect structure? Yes


Yes






Paradigmatic perceptual examples fit this mold

Human language listener response to “Turn left at the corner”

● learn to detect structure? Yes


Yes


Convention - constrained by culture, linguistic context


Structure stable within ecological scope, reliable within language group / culture

● precipitate or control an action? Precipitate

Human language speaker producing “Turn left at the corner”



Yes






Honeybee waggle dance users (von Frisch, 1967)

● learn to detect structure? No


No


Convention - constrained by evolution


Structure stable within ecological scope, strongly correlated w property of interest


*The waggle dance is complex bc the behavioural repertoire of food- finding that it supports is complex (varies w relative position of sun, distance, and quality of food)

Honeybees associating blue cards with food (von Frisch, 1956)



Yes


Convention - constrained by experimenter


Structure stable within ecological scope, reliable within experimental context


Associative learning examples fit this mold

Recap● Perceptual information, ecologically defined, is only one

type of information● Others inc reflex, instinct, language● Some language-related behaviours are controlled by

perceptual information (e.g., postural sway, other types of entrainment)

● Some language-related behaviours are precipitated by conventional information

● Use of conventional information to precipitate behaviours is widespread (animal communication, operant learning)

Implications● Some aspects of language use do not

qualify as direct-perceptiono doesn’t mean that they require representations

● Not a clear perception vs language divideo requires task specificity

● In all cases an organism must learn how to organise its behaviour wrt relevant information

ConclusionThe field is aware that language presents a challenge for ecological psychology (Fowler, 1986; Gibson 1979)

Proposed framework draws out the differences rather than redefine original concepts

Still grounded in information

Method for systematising information / behaviour relations

Thanks!

Andrew WilsonAgnes Henson

Documents

A Gibsonian analysis of linguistic information Finding Common Ground: UConn 2014 Sabrina Golonka Leeds Metropolitan University Centre for Applied Social