BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//ILCB - ECPv6.15.20//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
X-WR-CALNAME:ILCB
X-ORIGINAL-URL:https://www.ilcb.fr
X-WR-CALDESC:Events for ILCB
REFRESH-INTERVAL;VALUE=DURATION:PT1H
X-Robots-Tag:noindex
X-PUBLISHED-TTL:PT1H
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Europe/Paris
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20110327T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20111030T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20120325T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20121028T010000
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
TZNAME:CEST
DTSTART:20130331T010000
END:DAYLIGHT
BEGIN:STANDARD
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
TZNAME:CET
DTSTART:20131027T010000
END:STANDARD
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20121012T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20121012T173000
DTSTAMP:20260426T185517
CREATED:20190213T085917Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20190213T085920Z
UID:2361-1350057600-1350063000@www.ilcb.fr
SUMMARY:Rudiments de langage chez les primates non-humains ? by Alban LEMASSON
DESCRIPTION:Rudiments de langage chez les primates non-humains ? by Alban LEMASSON (Université de Rennes 1\, Institut universitaire de France)\nLa communication vocale des primates non-humains a longtemps été considérée comme déterminée uniquement génétiquement et émotionnellement\, encourageant les théoriciens de l’origine du langage humain à en rechercher les précurseurs ailleurs\, notamment dans les gestes des grands singes. Pourtant\, les études menées au cours des dix dernières années\, particulièrement sur les cris des cercopithèques forestiers\, démontrent un parallèle avec plusieurs caractéristiques fondamentales du langage (p.ex. sémantique\, affixation\, syntaxe\, prosodie\, conversation\, accommodation et convergence vocale). Les différences entre le langage humain et la communication vocale des singes\, qui sont des actes sociaux comparables\, seraient donc plus d’ordre quantitatif que qualitatif
URL:https://www.ilcb.fr/event/rudiments-de-langage-chez-les-primates-non-humains-by-alban-lemasson/
LOCATION:Salle des voûtes\, St Charles\, 3 place Victor Hugo\, Marseille\, 13001\, France
CATEGORIES:Seminars
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20121019T110000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20121019T120000
DTSTAMP:20260426T185517
CREATED:20190213T085734Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20190213T085736Z
UID:2359-1350644400-1350648000@www.ilcb.fr
SUMMARY:Evelina FEDORENKO
DESCRIPTION:Evelina FEDORENKO (MIT)\n\n\nWhat cognitive and neural mechanisms do we use to understand language? Since Broca's and Wernicke's seminal discoveries in the 19th century\, a broad array of brain regions have been implicated in linguistic processing spanning frontal\, temporal and parietal lobes\, both hemispheres\, and subcortical and cerebellar structures. However\, characterizing the precise contribution of these different structures to linguistic processing has proven challenging. In this talk I will argue that high-level linguistic processing - including understanding individual word meanings and combining them into more complex structures/meanings - is accomplished by the joint engagement of two functionally and computationally distinct brain systems. The first is comprised of the classic “language regions” on the lateral surfaces of left frontal and temporal lobes that appear to be functionally specialized for linguistic processing (e.g.\, Fedorenko et al.\, 2011; Monti et al.\, 2009\, 2012). And the second is the fronto-parietal ""multiple demand"" network\, a set of regions that are engaged across a wide range of cognitive demands (e.g.\, Duncan\, 2001\, 2010). Most past neuroimaging work on language processing has not explicitly distinguished between these two systems\, especially in the frontal lobes\, where subsets of each system reside side by side within the region referred to as “Broca’s area” (Fedorenko et al.\, in press). Using methods which surpass traditional neuroimaging methods in sensitivity and functional resolution (Fedorenko et al.\, 2010; Nieto-Castañon & Fedorenko\, in press; Saxe et al.\, 2006)\, we are beginning to characterize the important roles played by both domain-specific and domain-general brain regions in linguistic processing.
URL:https://www.ilcb.fr/event/evelina-fedorenko/
LOCATION:Salle des voûtes\, St Charles\, 3 place Victor Hugo\, Marseille\, 13001\, France
CATEGORIES:Seminars
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20121019T160000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20121019T180000
DTSTAMP:20260426T185517
CREATED:20190213T085510Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20190213T085555Z
UID:2357-1350662400-1350669600@www.ilcb.fr
SUMMARY:The communicative basis of word order by Ted GIBSON
DESCRIPTION:The communicative basis of word order by Ted GIBSON (MIT)\nSome recent evidence suggests that subject-object-verb (SOV) may be the default word order for human language. For example\, SOV is the preferred word order in a task where participants gesture event meanings (Goldin-Meadow et al. 2008). Critically\, SOV gesture production occurs not only for speakers of SOV languages\, but also for speakers of SVO languages\, such as English\, Chinese\, Spanish (Goldin-Meadow et al. 2008) and Italian (Langus & Nespor\, 2010). The gesture-production task therefore plausibly reflects default word order independent of native language. However\, this leaves open the question of why there are so many SVO languages (41.2% of languages; Dryer\, 2005). We propose that the high percentage of SVO languages cross-linguistically is due to communication pressures over a noisy channel (Jelinek\, 1975; Brill & Moore\, 2000; Levy et al. 2009). In particular\, we propose that people understand that the subject will tend to be produced before the object (a near universal cross-linguistically; Greenberg\, 1963). Given this bias\, people will produce SOV word order – the word order that Goldin-Meadow et al. show is the default – when there are cues in the input that tell the comprehender who the subject and the object are. But when the roles of the event participants are not disambiguated by the verb\, then the noisy channel model predicts either (i) a shift to the SVO word order\, in order to minimize the confusion between SOV and OSV\, which are minimally different; or (ii) the invention of case marking\, which can also disambiguate the roles of the event participants. We test the predictions of this hypothesis and provide support for it using gesture experiments in English\, Japanese and Korean. We also provide evidence for the noisy channel model in language understanding in English.
URL:https://www.ilcb.fr/event/the-communicative-basis-of-word-order-by-ted-gibson/
LOCATION:Salle des voûtes\, St Charles\, 3 place Victor Hugo\, Marseille\, 13001\, France
CATEGORIES:Seminars
END:VEVENT
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTART;TZID=Europe/Paris:20121029T100000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20121029T170000
DTSTAMP:20260426T185517
CREATED:20190213T085405Z
LAST-MODIFIED:20190213T085408Z
UID:2355-1351504800-1351530000@www.ilcb.fr
SUMMARY:Sound change and its relationship to variation in production and categorization in perception by Jonathan Harrington
DESCRIPTION:Sound change and its relationship to variation in production and categorization in perception by Jonathan Harrington (Institute of Phonetics and Speech Processing\, Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich\, Germany)\nIn some models (Lindblom et al\, 1995; Bybee\, 2002)\, sound change is associated with the type of synchronic reduction that occurs in prosodically weak and semantically predictable contexts. In other models (Ohala\, 1993)\, sound change can be brought about through listeners’ misperception of coarticulation in speech production. The talk will draw upon both models in order to explore whether coarticulatory misperception is more likely in prosodically weak contexts. In order to do so\, the magnitude of trans-consonantal vowel coarticulation was investigated in /pV1pV2l/ non-words with the pitch-accent falling either on the first or second syllable and in which V1 = /ʊ\, ʏ/ and V2 = /e\, o/. The analysis of these words produced by 20 L1-German speakers showed that prosodic weakening caused vowel undershoot in /ʊ/ but had little effect on V2-on-V1 coarticulation. In a perception experiment\, a V1 = /ʊ-ʏ/ continuum was synthesised and the same speakers made forced choice judgements to the same non-words with the prosody manipulated such that stress was perceived on V1 or on V2. Listeners compensated for V2-on-V1 coarticulation; however\, the magnitude of compensation was less in the prosodically weak than in the strong context. The general conclusion is that segmental context influences both the dynamics of speech production and perceptual categorization\, but not always in the same way: it is this divergence between the two which may be especially likely in prosodically weak contexts and which may\, in turn\, facilitate sound change.\n\nReferencesBybee\, J. (2002). Word frequency and context of use in the lexical diffusion of phonetically conditioned sound change. Language Variation Change\, 14\, 261–290. Lindblom\, B.\, Guion\, S.\, Hura\, S.\, Moon\, S. J.\, and Willerman\, R. (1995). Is sound change adaptive? Rivista di Linguistica\, 7\, 5–36. Ohala\, J. J. (1993). Sound change as nature’s speech perception experiment. Speech Communication\, 13\, 155–161.
URL:https://www.ilcb.fr/event/sound-change-and-its-relationship-to-variation-in-production-and-categorization-in-perception-by-jonathan-harrington/
LOCATION:Salle de conférences\, 5 avenue Pasteur\, Aix-en-Provence\, 13100\, France
CATEGORIES:Seminars
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR