[CaCL] meeting in Oxley 102 this week (Re: Reading for 1/25)

[Schuler, William]

Hi all,

This week CaCL will meet in Oxley 102 because of NACLO,

wm


From: CaCL <cacl-bounces at lists.osu.edu> on behalf of Clark, Christian via CaCL <cacl at lists.osu.edu>
Date: Thursday, January 18, 2024 at 2:35 PM
To: Schuler, William via CaCL <cacl at lists.osu.edu>
Subject: [CaCL] Reading for 1/25
Hi CaCL members,

Our reading for next week will be Piñango 2023.

Solving the elusiveness of word meanings: two arguments for a continuous meaning space for language

Solving the elusiveness of word meanings: two arguments for a continuous meaning space for language
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frai.2023.1025293/full<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/frai.2023.1025293/full__;!!KGKeukY!ydlTsDMAHix86fz1jJR4GkT_lKj-0nU73-7mvfs8XSG4EFWleei86cITlhxB1Gvpk_idASxUi6a7i-S4YN4$>

I explore the hypothesis that the experience of meaning discreteness when we think about the “meaning” of a word is a “communicative” illusion. The illusion is created by processing-contextual constraints that impose disambiguation on the semantic input making salient a specific interpretation within a conceptual space that is otherwise continuous. It is this salience that we experience as discreteness. The understanding of word meaning as non-discrete raises the question of what is context; what are the mechanisms of constraint that it imposes and what is the nature of the conceptual space with which pronunciations (i.e., visual/oral signs) associate themselves. I address these questions by leveraging an algebraic continuous system for word meaning that is itself constrained by two fundamental parameters: control-asymmetry and connectedness. I evaluate this model by meeting two challenges to word meaning discreteness (1) cases where the same pronunciation is associated with multiple senses that are nonetheless interdependent, e.g., English “smoke,” and (2) cases where the same pronunciation is associated with a family of meanings, minimally distinct from each other organized as a “cline,” e.g., English “have.” These cases are not marginal–they are ubiquitous in languages across the world. Any model that captures them is accounting for the meaning system for language. At the heart of the argumentation is the demonstration of how the parameterized space naturally organizes these kinds of cases without appeal for further categorization or segmentation of any kind. From this, I conclude that discreteness in word meaning is epiphenomenal: it is the experience of salience produced by contextual constraints. And that this is possible because, by and large, every time that we become consciously aware of the conceptual structure associated with a pronunciation, i.e., its meaning, we do so under real-time processing conditions which are biased toward producing a specific interpretation in reference to a specific situation in the world. Supporting it is a parameterized space that gives rise to lexico-conceptual representations: generalized algebraic structures necessary for the identification, processing, and encoding of an individual's understanding of the world.

----
Christian Clark
Ph.D. Student
Department of Linguistics
The Ohio State University
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osu.edu/pipermail/cacl/attachments/20240125/c5ba4f7a/attachment.html>