scholarly journals The Influence of Rhizobacteria that Promotes Growth of Plants on the Nutritional Acquisition Process

2022 ◽  
pp. 08-10
Author(s):  
Harsha Sharma ◽  
Avadhesh Kumar Koshal
Keyword(s):  
2006 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jr. Brinson ◽  
Jones Robert W. ◽  
William Jr. ◽  
Patrick Kelly
Keyword(s):  

Perception ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 030100662199149
Author(s):  
Patrick Cavanagh

The descriptions of surfaces, objects, and events computed by visual processes are not solely for consumption in the visual system but are meant to be passed on to other brain centers. Clearly, the description of the visual scene cannot be sent in its entirety, like a picture or movie, to other centers, as that would require that each of them have their own visual system to decode the description. Some very compressed, annotated, or labeled version must be constructed that can be passed on in a format that other centers—memory, language, planning—can understand. If this is a “visual language,” what is its grammar? In a first pass, we see, among other things, differences in processing of visual “nouns,” visual “verbs,” and visual “prepositions.” Then we look at recursion and errors of visual grammar. Finally, the possibility of a visual language also raises the question of the acquisition of its grammar from the visual environment and the chance that this acquisition process was borrowed and adapted for spoken language.


2021 ◽  
pp. 026765832098804
Author(s):  
David Stringer

Westergaard (2019) presents an updated account of the Linguistic Proximity Model and the micro-cue approach to the parser as an acquisition device. The property-by-property view of transfer inherent in this approach contrasts with other influential models that assume that third language (L3) acquisition involves the creation of a full copy of only one previously existing language in the mind. In this commentary, I review Westergaard’s proposal that first language (L1), second language (L2), and L3 acquisition proceed on the basis of incremental, conservative learning and her view of the parser as the engine of the acquisition process. I then provide several arguments in support of her position that crosslinguistic influence in L n acquisition may flow from any previously acquired language.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document