BEGIN:VCALENDAR
VERSION:2.0
PRODID:-//ILCB - ECPv6.15.20//NONSGML v1.0//EN
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
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:20121019T110000
DTEND;TZID=Europe/Paris:20121019T120000
DTSTAMP:20260426T203259
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:20260426T203259
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
END:VCALENDAR