Psy1306: Language Psy1306: Language and Thoughtand Thought

Lecture 7: Spatial Frames of Lecture 7: Spatial Frames of ReferenceReference

Spatial Frames of Reference Spatial Frames of Reference (FoR)(FoR)

Spatial Frames of Reference Spatial Frames of Reference (FoR)(FoR)

► ““Where is the girl?”Where is the girl?”

The girl is to the The girl is to the southsouth of the umbrella. of the umbrella.

The girl is to the The girl is to the tiltedtilted side of the umbrella. side of the umbrella.

The girl is to the The girl is to the leftleft of the umbrella. of the umbrella.

Talking about locations & Talking about locations & directionsdirections

Figure(Thing to be located)

Ground(Reference Object)

Terminologies 101Terminologies 101

►Egocentric vs. AllocentricEgocentric vs. Allocentric Ego (self) vs. Non-Ego FoREgo (self) vs. Non-Ego FoR

►Object-centered vs. GeocentricObject-centered vs. Geocentric Moving entities vs. Earth-anchored Moving entities vs. Earth-anchored

EntitiesEntities

►Relative, Intrinsic, AbsoluteRelative, Intrinsic, Absolute

Where is the girl?Where is the girl?

Relative, Intrinsic, AbsoluteRelative, Intrinsic, Absolute

►Figure, Ground, Coordinate SystemFigure, Ground, Coordinate System Relative = 3 place relationsRelative = 3 place relations Intrinsic = 2 place relationsIntrinsic = 2 place relations

►Ground = Coordinate SystemGround = Coordinate System

Absolute = 3 place relationsAbsolute = 3 place relations

Where is the girl?Where is the girl?

Crosslinguistic Variations for Crosslinguistic Variations for small scale arrayssmall scale arrays

► IntrinsicIntrinsic►Relative: always have intrinsicRelative: always have intrinsic►AbsoluteAbsolute

Majid et al.Majid et al.

(Bird’s Eye View)

Step 1: Ss memorize items Step 2: Ss rotated

Step 3: Ss recreate “same” as Table 1. At least 2 possible solutions.

Step 3 egocentric tendencyStep 3 geocentric tendency

Rotation ExperimentRotation Experiment

Subject

Table 1 Table 2

(rig

ht s

ide,

n

orth

sid

e)

(nor

th s

ide)

(nor

th s

ide)

Table 1 Table 2

Table 1 Table 2

(rig

ht s

ide)

Table 1 Table 2

(rig

ht s

ide)

Experimental Paradigm – ANIMALS-IN-A-ROW Task

00

1010

2020

3030

4040

5050

6060

7070

8080

9090

100100

00 11 22 33 44 55Number of Geocentric TrialsNumber of Geocentric Trials

% o

f Sub

ject

s%

of S

ubje

cts

Dutch N = 38Dutch N = 38Tenejapans N = 27Tenejapans N = 27

Brown & Levinson (1993)Brown & Levinson (1993)

* Also reported in Pederson, Danziger, Wilkes, Levinson, Kita, Senft (1998).

% o

f S

ub

ject

s

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5Number of Geocentric Trials

Japanese N=16Longgu N=13 (-3)Arandic N=11 (-5)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5Number of Geocentric Trials

% o

f S

ub

ject

s

Ego Ss N=20 -- urbanGeo Ss N=41 -- rural

Locality of Tamil Ss:

Other Languages reported in Pederson, Danziger, Wilkes, Levinson, Kita, Senft (1998).

Chips TaskChips Task

Maze TaskMaze Task

Inference TaskInference Task

Pederson, Danziger, Wilkes, Levinson, Kita, Senft (1998).

Far more than developing simple habituation, use of the linguistic system, we suggest, actually forces the speaker to make computations he or she might otherwise not make...The linguistic system is far more than an available pattern for creating internal representations; to learn to speak a language successfully requires speakers to develop an appropriate mental representation which is then available for nonlinguistic purposes. (p. 586).

Pederson et al. (1998)’sPederson et al. (1998)’sSummary of their DataSummary of their Data

Levinson et al. 2004Levinson et al. 2004

►Proposed mechanisms of Whorfian Proposed mechanisms of Whorfian EffectsEffects Perceptual ‘tuning’ and attentionPerceptual ‘tuning’ and attention Re-representationRe-representation Structure-mappingStructure-mapping Costs of ComputationCosts of Computation

Perceptual TuningPerceptual Tuning

Re-representationRe-representation

Structure-MappingStructure-Mapping

Cost of ComputationCost of Computation

Taking StockTaking Stock

Data show:Data show:►Experimental finding show ADULT Experimental finding show ADULT

speakers’ “nonlinguistic” behavior speakers’ “nonlinguistic” behavior correlatescorrelates with their linguistic with their linguistic behavior.behavior.

Alternative explanations?Alternative explanations?

Alternative Explanations?Alternative Explanations?

►Other third factor (e.g. culture Other third factor (e.g. culture experience) might be able to explain experience) might be able to explain the language-thought effect?the language-thought effect?

►Translation problems: is Make it the Translation problems: is Make it the “same” same across languages?“same” same across languages?

Eskimos and Snow WordsEskimos and Snow Words

►Eskimos have many snow words.►Eskimos make fine snow

discriminations

►Many snow words fine snow discriminations►Experience Fine snow

discriminations Many snow words

Possible Confounding FactorsPossible Confounding Factors

Abs/Geo: preliterate rural stable

Rel/Ego: literate urban transient

Tenejapan, Arrente, Longgu, Tamil (rural)

Dutch, Japanese, Tamil (urban)

Possible Confounding FactorsPossible Confounding Factors

Abs/Geo: preliterate rural stable

Rel/Ego: literate urban transient

Sending up the patient for his north

eye surgery…

Confounding FactorsConfounding Factors

Abs/Geo: preliterate rural stable

Rel/Ego: literate urban transient

One Potential Problem: Literacy possibly linked to response preferencee.g. Totonac (Intrinsic language): 8 relative responders (men, literate) vs. 8 absolute responders (women, illiterate).

In other studies:Danziger & Pederson (1998). Acceptance of mirror-images as being the “same” is correlated with literacy. d different than b

DeLoache et al. (2000). Reading reinforces orienting pictures and words with respect to self. d different than p

Environmental Circumstances Environmental Circumstances Influencing Spatial ReasoningInfluencing Spatial Reasoning

Abs/Geo: preliterate rural stable

Tzeltal “tree standing downhill of man”Hai||om “man stands in ‘land of soft sand”Longgu “tree standing on side towards sea”

Landmarks and Derivation of Geocentric Directional Terms

Circumstances help support and maintain these spatial frames of reference.

Rel/Ego: literate urban transient

Maze Learning in Rats“Place-vs.-Response” -- which one is dominant?

Rat SetupRat Setup

Place(geocentric)

Response(egocentric)

Teach groups PLACE or RESPONSE . Which is easier to learn?

or

Experimental Variation

1. Training. 2. Test turn preference when maze rotated 180°

Response(egocentric)

Place(geocentric)

or

Experimental Setup

Restle (1957). Discrimination of cues in mazes: A resolution of the place vs. response question., Psychological Review, 64, p. 226.

There is nothing in the nature of a rat which makes it a “place” learner or a “response” learner. A rat in a maze will use all relevant cues, and the importance of any class of cues depends on the amount of relevant stimulation provided as well as the sensory capacities of the animal. In place-response experiments, the importance of place cues depends on the amount of differential extra-maze stimulation.

Restle QuoteRestle Quote

Summary of Rat Literature

Acredolo & Evans (1980)

Egocentric vs. Allocentric Egocentric vs. Allocentric DebateDebate

Varied testing context (to be explained on next slide) using the basic paradigm below:

Step 1: Train infant to turn to look at one window.

Step 2: Rotate infant 180°.Which way does infant turn to look?

Infant & Mother

(allocentric) (egocentric)

Results from 6-11 months-Results from 6-11 months-oldsolds

Found: 6 months, prefer egocentric in any environment 9 months, use direct landmark when available 11 months, additionally to 9 months, use indirect landmark when available

Test Conditions:1. Both Windows Plain2. Fancy Trained Window, Plain Untrained (Direct

Landmark)3. Plain Trained Window, Fancy Untrained Window

(Indirect Landmark)

Bottom-line:Cues in the environment affect spatial behavior

One-shot, No Training

Infant & Mother

Acredolo (1979)

Acredelo SetupAcredelo Setup

Vary Setting Unfamiliar vs. Familiar• bare laboratory• laboratory with clutter• home

Step 1: Hide object in one of two locations.

Step 2: Move infant 180° to other side of the table

Step 3: Where does infant search?

Egocentric vs. Allocentric Egocentric vs. Allocentric DebateDebate

Result on Familiarity of Result on Familiarity of EnvironmentEnvironmentLaboratoryLaboratory

UNFAMILIARUNFAMILIARHomeHome

FAMILIARFAMILIAR

BareBare EgocentricEgocentric

ClutteredCluttered EgocentricEgocentric AllocentricAllocentric

Bottom-line: Environment affects spatial behavior.

SummarySummary

► Experiments with prelinguistic infants and animals (like the previous studies with Penn undergrads) show that environmental contexts affect how the subjects choose to represent the spatial arrays.

► Environment affects how one chooses to think about spatial relationships. As a result, environment could come to influence the kind of language that develops.

Tenejapans tested outdoors on their hill and Dutchmen tested indoors in laboratory.

Shouldn’t spatial performance be influenced by spatial environment?

Question: Perhaps the Tenejapans’ response NOT result of LANGUAGE, BUT result of surrounding environment and available landmarks?

Testing LocationTesting Location

1 2

House

N (Downhill)

S (Uphill)(Tenejapan table setupOutdoor, porch next to house)

Confounding FactorsConfounding Factors

geo resp. ego resp. mixed mono. Total # Ss.

Indoor* 20 58 3 8 89

Outdoor** 46 6 10 0 62

Test Environment

Animals-In-A-Row Task

* Dutch, Japanese, Arrente, Totonac** Tzeltal, Kgalagadi, Hai||om

Indoor vs. OutdoorIndoor vs. Outdoor

Asking experimenters of Pederson, Danziger, Wilkes, Levinson, Kita, Senft (1998)…Where were subjects tested?

Eskimo ProblemEskimo Problem

► Language is tied to the circumstanceLanguage is tied to the circumstance► Disassociate language from circumstanceDisassociate language from circumstance

Move Americans to Vail or AspenMove Americans to Vail or Aspen► Start to think more about snow...Start to think more about snow...► Start to get words like “sugar”, “granule”, “powder” for Start to get words like “sugar”, “granule”, “powder” for

snowsnow Move Eskimos to BermudaMove Eskimos to Bermuda

► Fewer uses of snow words, perhaps?Fewer uses of snow words, perhaps?

LIKEWISE – We Move Americans to “Tenejapa”LIKEWISE – We Move Americans to “Tenejapa” (i.e., outdoors to a gridded city where streets run (i.e., outdoors to a gridded city where streets run

from east to west in increasing cardinality)from east to west in increasing cardinality)► Start to get more geocentric responses…Start to get more geocentric responses…► Start to get more words like “north”, “south”...Start to get more words like “north”, “south”...

Turning Americans into Turning Americans into TenejapansTenejapans

Li & Gleitman (2002)Li & Gleitman (2002)

1 2

WindowWalnut St

Library

N

S

(room)

Condition 2: IRCS Room BLINDS UPPlacing Americans in a setting like the Tenejapans.

Condition 1: IRCS Room BLINDS DOWNPlacing Americans in a setting like the Dutch.

Small Animal SetupSmall Animal Setup

1 2

House

N (Downhill)

S (Uphill)

Tenejapans

(testing location: IRCS -- indoor)

English SpeakersEnglish SpeakersBlinds-Down and Blinds-UpBlinds-Down and Blinds-Up

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5Number of Absolute Trials

% o

f S

ub

ject

s

IRCS Blind Down N =10IRCS Blind Down N =10IRCS Blind Up N =10IRCS Blind Up N =10

Small Animal DataSmall Animal Data

Brown & Levinson (1993) Brown & Levinson (1993)

00

1010

2020

3030

4040

5050

6060

7070

8080

9090

100100

00 11 22 33 44 55Number of Absolute TrialsNumber of Absolute Trials

% o

f S

ub

ject

s%

of

Su

bje

cts

Dutch N = 38Dutch N = 38Tenejapans N = 27Tenejapans N = 27

N

S

HR

N

1 2

Field

Locust Walk

2

Locust Walk

1

Outdoor Location 1

N

S

Big Animal SetupBig Animal Setup

Library

Outdoor Location 2

1 2

House

N (Downhill)

S (Uphill)

Tenejapans

Big Animal DataBig Animal Data

Outdoor ConditionsOutdoor Conditions

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

0 1 2 3 4 5Number of Absolute Trials

% o

f S

ub

ject

s

By HRN N=20By HRN N=20By Library N = 10By Library N = 10

Brown & Levinson (1993) Brown & Levinson (1993)

00

1010

2020

3030

4040

5050

6060

7070

8080

9090

100100

00 11 22 33 44 55Number of Absolute TrialsNumber of Absolute Trials

% o

f S

ub

ject

s%

of

Su

bje

cts

Dutch N = 38Dutch N = 38Tenejapans N = 27Tenejapans N = 27

Increasing Saliency of LandmarksUnmentioned Duck Ponds on the sides of tables as landmark.

Condition 2: Relative Biasing

1 2

WindowWalnut St

Library

N

S

(room)

Condition 1: Absolute Biasing

1 2

WindowWalnut St

Library

N

S

(room)

Ducks SetupDucks Setup

(testing location: IRCS -- indoor)

Brown & Levinson (1993) Brown & Levinson (1993)

00

1010

2020

3030

4040

5050

6060

7070

8080

9090

100100

00 11 22 33 44 55Number of Absolute TrialsNumber of Absolute Trials

% o

f S

ub

ject

s%

of

Su

bje

cts

Dutch N = 38Dutch N = 38Tenejapans N = 27Tenejapans N = 27

Ducks on the TablesDucks on the TablesLandmark ManipulationLandmark Manipulation

00

1010

2020

3030

4040

5050

6060

7070

8080

9090

100100

00 11 22 33 44 55Number of Absolute TrialsNumber of Absolute Trials

% o

f S

ub

ject

s%

of

Su

bje

cts

Relative Bias N=20Relative Bias N=20Absolute Bias N=20Absolute Bias N=20

Ducks DataDucks Data

SummarySummary

►Pre-linguistic infants & rats make use Pre-linguistic infants & rats make use of both frames of referenceof both frames of reference

►Cultural difference or other third factor Cultural difference or other third factor might be able to explain some of the might be able to explain some of the effect.effect. Eskimo AnalogyEskimo Analogy Circumstance Circumstance language & behavior language & behavior

Task AmbiguityTask Ambiguity

►Does the “same” mean the same Does the “same” mean the same across languages?across languages?

► Interpretation of “same” within a Interpretation of “same” within a languagelanguage

requires guessing intent of requires guessing intent of experimenter.experimenter.

Interpretations of “the same”Interpretations of “the same”

NN

180º180º

Task AmbiguityTask Ambiguity

►Does the “same” mean the same across Does the “same” mean the same across languages?languages?

► Interpretation of “same” within a languageInterpretation of “same” within a language

requires guessing intent of experimenter.requires guessing intent of experimenter.►Ambiguous tasks are subjected to Ambiguous tasks are subjected to

contextual influence:contextual influence: Environment change (indoor-outdoor)Environment change (indoor-outdoor) Triggers s.a. holding animalsTriggers s.a. holding animals One table manipulationOne table manipulation

Step 3: Ss recreate “same” as Table 1. At least 2 possible solutions.

Step 3 relative tendencyStep 3 absolute tendency

One Table 180° Rotation – Same Table, Same Frame of Ref.

Step 1: Ss memorize items Step 2: Ss rotated

Reducing Ambiguity – 1 Table vs. 2 Tables

(testing location: IRCS -- indoor, blinds-down)

One-Table SetupOne-Table Setup

Table

(nor

th s

ide)

(left side, north side)

Subject

Table

Table (lef

t sid

e)

Table

Step 1: Ss memorize items Step 2: Ss rotated

Two Tables With Outer 180° Turn – Control Condition

(testing location: IRCS -- indoor, blinds-down)

Two-Tables Outer SetupTwo-Tables Outer Setup

Table 1 Table2

(left side, north side)

Subject

Table 1 Table 2

(north side)

(north side)Table 2Table 1 (l

eft s

ide)

Table 1 Table2

(left side)

Reducing Ambiguity – 1 Table vs. 2 Tables

Step 3: Ss recreate “same” as Table 1. At least 2 possible solutions.

Step 3 relative tendencyStep 3 absolute tendency

English SpeakersEnglish SpeakersOne Table vs. Two TablesOne Table vs. Two Tables

00

1010

2020

3030

4040

5050

6060

7070

8080

9090

100100

00 11 22 33 44 55Number of Absolute TrialsNumber of Absolute Trials

% o

f S

ub

ject

s%

of

Su

bje

cts

One Table N=10One Table N=10

Two Tables N=10Two Tables N=10

One vs. Two Table DataOne vs. Two Table DataBrown & Levinson (1993) Brown & Levinson (1993)

00

1010

2020

3030

4040

5050

6060

7070

8080

9090

100100

00 11 22 33 44 55Number of Absolute TrialsNumber of Absolute Trials

% o

f S

ub

ject

s%

of

Su

bje

cts

Dutch N = 38Dutch N = 38Tenejapans N = 27Tenejapans N = 27

Task AmbiguityTask Ambiguity

►Does the “same” mean the same Does the “same” mean the same across languages?across languages?

►How one’s linguistic community How one’s linguistic community customarily speaks about or responds customarily speaks about or responds to inquiries about locations and to inquiries about locations and directions might come to influence directions might come to influence what appropriately counts as the what appropriately counts as the “same” spatial array. “same” spatial array.

Task AmbiguityTask Ambiguity

►Experimental Q to be answered next Experimental Q to be answered next time.time. Li et al. (under review)Li et al. (under review)

What about Haun et al What about Haun et al (2006) PNAS?(2006) PNAS?

►Common phylogenetic inheritance of a Common phylogenetic inheritance of a preference of allocentric strategypreference of allocentric strategy

►Such preference can be overwritten by Such preference can be overwritten by cultural preference for egocentric cultural preference for egocentric strategystrategy

PP

Levinson (2003)Levinson (2003)

Cited evidence of linguistic relativityCited evidence of linguistic relativity►Gesture DataGesture Data►Pointing to unseen locationPointing to unseen location

PigeonsPigeons Tseltal SpeakersTseltal Speakers Dutch SpeakersDutch Speakers‘‘HOME’HOME’

Slide from PeggySlide from Peggy