This brings me to something else I noticed. Tomasello references the traditional view that language is "the symbol and its referent in the perceptual world," but rejects this by claiming that there is so much in language that does not directly refer to a physical object. This made me wonder how children go from looking at a ball and learning it is a ball, to understanding abstract emotions, to metaphors. I also wondered about how children learn such things as nuance in language, or how to understand sarcasm or irony with regard to language. That may be a totally different subject, but what came to mind for me was how the development of language must be some sort of a building process. This takes me back to the ratchet effect, that each person builds on the knowledge of those before them. It also seems that since language is always changing, that part of communication is simply a quest to accurately portray and express the world, and that our interaction allows us to perfect this.
Mental Models of Purpose of College
2 years ago
No comments:
Post a Comment