Social and Political Aspects of Generic Language and Speech

Author(s):  
Matthew McKeever ◽  
Rachel Sterken
Keyword(s):  
2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 749-766 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craig G. Chambers ◽  
Susan A. Graham ◽  
Juanita N. Turner
Keyword(s):  

2008 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan A. Gelman ◽  
Peggy J. Goetz ◽  
Barbara W. Sarnecka ◽  
Jonathan Flukes

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (4) ◽  
pp. 517-532
Author(s):  
Susan A. Gelman

ABSTRACTThis article examines two interrelated issues: (i) how considering generics within their social contexts of use contributes to theories of generics, and (ii) how contemporary work on generics provides promising directions for the study of language as an aspect of social life. Examining the function of generics in meaningful interactions stands in contrast to standard treatments, which consider generics as isolated, context-free propositions. Additionally, recent psychological approaches suggest new questions that can enrich sociolinguistic and linguistic anthropological research. These include, for example, when and why generics serve not just negative functions (such as stereotyping) but also positive functions (such as meaning-making), how generics gain their power from what is unstated as opposed to stated, and how generic language distorts academic writing. Ultimately, the study of language in society has the potential to enrich the study of generics beyond what has been learned from their study in linguistics, philosophy, and psychology. (Generics, concepts, categories, stereotyping, induction)*


Author(s):  
Anat Cohen ◽  
Orit Ezra

Mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) is known to be conducive to contextualized language learning. However, the literature lacks an understanding of context. Nor is there a quantitative evaluation tool. The chapter's dependent contextualized variables were the following: real-world context level (one's place), real-life context level (one's life), and device mobility (place diversity). The independent variables were target/non-target country (Taiwan/Israel) and language learning orientation (dedicated/generic). In the target country, the spoken language is the studied language. Dedicated/generic language learning orientation represents the existence/non-existence of pedagogy within activities. Fifty-three Chinese L2 students involved in 296 activities and 519 events were interviewed. Using device mobility and an evaluation index developed to measure real-world/real-life context levels, MALL was found more contextualized in Taiwan only in generic activities. The findings refine our understanding of the benefits of studying in the target country. The index can be used in future studies.


1. Read your work out loud. You will be able to hear rhythm and flow of language this way, and you really cannot hear it when reading silently. 2. Don't be shy. Ask other writers to read a draft for you. Everyone gets too close to the story to see the glitches, and a dispassionate reader is a writer's best friend. Good writers gather readers around them for everything from newspaper stories to whole books (which require really good friends). 3. Think of your lead as seduction. How are you going to get this wary, perhaps uninterested reader, upstairs to see your etchings? You need to begin your story in a way that pulls the reader in. My favorite basic approach goes seductive lead, so-what section (why am I reading this), map section (here are the main points that will follow in this story). That approach leads me to my next tip, which is 4. Have a dear sense of your story and its structure before you begin writing. If you think of a story as an arc, in the shape of a rainbow, then it's helpful to know where it will begin and where it will end so that you know in advance how to build that arc. 5. Use transitions. A story has to flow. Leaping from place to place like a waterstrider on a pond will not make your prose easy to follow. 6. Use analogies. They are a beautiful way to make science vivid and real—as long as you don't overuse them. 7. In fact, don't overwrite at all. And never, never, never use clichés. If you want to write in your voice, generic language will not do. In my class, there are no silver linings, no cats let out of bags, no nights as black as pitch. A student who uses three clichés in a story gets an automatic C from me. 8. Write in English. This applies not only to science writing but to all beats in which a good story can easily sink in a sea of jargon.


Information ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 211 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rigas Kotsakis ◽  
Maria Matsiola ◽  
George Kalliris ◽  
Charalampos Dimoulas

The current paper focuses on the investigation of spoken-language classification in audio broadcasting content. The approach reflects a real-word scenario, encountered in modern media/monitoring organizations, where semi-automated indexing/documentation is deployed, which could be facilitated by the proposed language detection preprocessing. Multilingual audio recordings of specific radio streams are formed into a small dataset, which is used for the adaptive classification experiments, without seeking—at this step—for a generic language recognition model. Specifically, hierarchical discrimination schemes are followed to separate voice signals before classifying the spoken languages. Supervised and unsupervised machine learning is utilized at various windowing configurations to test the validity of our hypothesis. Besides the analysis of the achieved recognition scores (partial and overall), late integration models are proposed for semi-automatically annotation of new audio recordings. Hence, data augmentation mechanisms are offered, aiming at gradually formulating a Generic Audio Language Classification Repository. This database constitutes a program-adaptive collection that, beside the self-indexing metadata mechanisms, could facilitate generic language classification models in the future, through state-of-art techniques like deep learning. This approach matches the investigatory inception of the project, which seeks for indicators that could be applied in a second step with a larger dataset and/or an already pre-trained model, with the purpose to deliver overall results.


2015 ◽  
Vol 43 (6) ◽  
pp. 1231-1244 ◽  
Author(s):  
SUSAN A. GELMAN ◽  
INGRID SÁNCHEZ TAPIA ◽  
SARAH-JANE LESLIE

AbstractGeneric language (Owlseat at night) expresses knowledge about categories and may represent a cognitively default mode of generalization. English-speaking children and adults more accurately recall generic than quantified sentences (All owlseat at night) and tend to recall quantified sentences as generic. However, generics in English are shorter than quantified sentences, and may be better recalled for this reason. The present study provided a new test of the issue in Spanish, where generics are expressed with an additional linguistic element not found in certain quantified sentences (Los búhoscomen de noche ‘Owls eat at night’ [generic] vs. Muchos búhoscomen de noche ‘Many owls eat at night’ [quantified]). Both preschoolers and adults recalled generics more accurately than quantified sentences, and quantified sentences were more often recalled as generic than the reverse. These findings provide strong additional evidence for generics as a cognitive default, in an understudied cultural context.


2013 ◽  
Vol 587 ◽  
pp. 372-378
Author(s):  
Cristian Dobreci ◽  
Alexandru Petre ◽  
Matei Traistaru

An endosteal implant is an alloplastic material surgically inserted into a residual bony ridge primarily as a prosthodontic foundation. Root form implants are the design most often used. Although many names have been applied, the 1988 National Institutes of Health consensus, statement on dental implants and the American Academy of Implant Dentistry recognized the term root form. Misch developed a generic language for endosteal implants in 1992. This language is presented in an order following the chronology of insertion to restoration. In formulating the terminology, five commonly used implant systems in the United States were referenced. Ten years later, the dramatic evolution in the implant market led to reconsideration of the terminology. At the moment, over 3000 different implant systems are on the market, but the comparative evaluation is not done by objective means.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document