text:
User:Ramz Aziz

I am a transfer student from the University of Waterloo entering my 3rd Year in Neuroscience at Dalhousie University. Previously, I had pursued a major in the Biomedical Sciences; my deep and personal interest in the brain, cognition, neural processes and their pathways, and ultimately the general maladies and mysteries of the mind were what enticed me to switch universities and enter the specialized field of Neuroscience. Although I lack the sort of specialized knowledge about the brain due to the generality of my preceding major, I have a sufficient understanding of psychology and physiology to better develop my insight into the complexities of the mind. In terms of psycholinguistics, the subject seems titillating in the vast prospects and sheer potential that it holds. I must say I am very excited to learn more about this new topic, in the hopes that it will lead to a better understanding of the basis of human interaction: communication.

BLOG POSTS

JANUARY 10th -- 14th, 2011
The first real week of classes brought the subject of Psycholinguistics to a fantastic start, raising several intriguing questions while offering multiple avenues of thought and discussion. Although I had enrolled late in the course and unfortunately missed the greater portion of the lectures, the podcasts did an admirable job in conveying the material. There were a few points that immediately stood out to me as I listened, beginning with the section on psychological and linguistic theories. Personally, I felt Noam Chomsky hit the nail on the head via his nativism theory, which stipulates that grammar and language are intrinsic aspects of human beings and that we learn grammar based on a generative pattern. I have a 3 year old nephew, and I could see how true his theory was when applied to the development of my nephew, who demonstrated the same remarkable language-learning ability based on the generative natural and environmental factors that Chomsky mentions. However, the aspect of the lectures which really sent me on a long train of thought was the relation between language and our ability to think. Personally, I feel that language is integral to our humanity, as it dictates human interaction and our own ability to rationalize and think deeply about the world. If language is foreign to a person, or absent from their psyche, how exactly do they think? Surely they must be able to do so, as those who are born deaf are not in any way less human or competent than those who are not. I have a relative who was born deaf, and am trying to get in touch with him to ask him these questions in order to gain a better understanding of the matter. Stemming from the relation between language and thought, I found it very interesting that language has an impact on the way we think, the way we perceive the world and in a sense, raises the question, “Is our understanding of the world or the more complex aspects of life limited or constrained by language?” This point was coincidentally raised by Dr. Crowder in his Sensory Neuroscience class, as he mentioned that bees were able to see ultraviolet light, and hence colours that we could not. If we were able to see those colours, would we be able to comprehend them? How would we define them? Similarly, how can we understand the meaning or purpose of creation or the existence of a higher power when we are restricted in our ability to think by the limited scope of our very language? Or is there a means to circumvent the problem, perhaps thinking laterally and finding alternate means to seek the truth? I am sorry if I am going off tangent by linking psycholinguistics to metaphysics, but it was certainly something that I will spend time reflecting and pondering on. This concept ties into part of Korzybski’s “The map is not the territory quote”, but even though it is true that words are a representation of a deeper concept, how do we even begin to understand or define “the thing defined” when it cannot be limited or brought within the constraints of our language? I am sure the answers to these questions will become clearer as I gain a better understanding of the relationship between psychology and language as we progress through the course. It will be interesting to see if the neurophysiological basis of linguistics holds the key.

Blog Post #2
January 17, 2011 – January 21, 2011

I really did indeed enjoy this past week in lectures, as I felt the material covered was very useful and practical since it pertained most directly to everyday life. In addition, I felt the professor was very wise to cover topics such as imaging techniques (ERP and fMRI characteristics) and how to read a journal article as this knowledge is indispensable when constructing the Wikiversity entry. Beginning with brain organization and lateralization, I felt that this is still a huge area of neuropsychology that needs to be researched. Even though it is stipulated that specific brain areas are responsible for semantics, syntax, speech comprehension and production recent evidence suggests that this is not so. I wonder how valid these early theories of brain organization are if current experiments show that brain activity is not merely localized in one area but utilizes different areas for semantic or syntactic tasks. Should I blindly accept the theory in the presence of such conflicting results? Although it may be true that brain activity is more active in a certain region, I believe more evidence is required before it is concretely determined if it is indeed localized in a neural area. I was also piqued by the concept of brain lateralization, with language stemming primarily from the left hemisphere. I do understand the subtleties of linguistics arise from the right hemisphere, but I was more interested in the left-handed, right-handed aspect of lateralization. At first glance, it seems that right-handed people are more inclined towards strong linguistic skills; however life experience dictates that it is not so. I wonder if any solid conclusions can be drawn from ongoing studies (if there are any), but it will be interesting to see further research done in the area. I also found some aspects of aphasia to be especially intriguing, specifically aphasia in a bi or multilingual person: would such a person experience aphasia in all languages, in a few or only in one? Dr. Newman said research has not been done in that regard, so that is something I will definitely keep in mind for the future. Moving on to lecture 6, Dr. Newman was a lifesaver by clearly explaining the proper methods of tackling those intimidating journal articles. This well-timed lecture certainly came in handy when researching for my Wikipedia entry, Neural Bases of Lexical Access. Although the techniques of making notes, making summaries, reading the abstract and results first etc. were all immensely useful, they are time-consuming. I only hope with more practice, I become more adept at deciphering the cryptic language used in said articles.

Blog Post #3
To begin with, I found this past week of lectures to be most informative and enlightening about the fundamentals of speech perception and the intrinsic differences between phonemes across various languages. Starting with the whole concept of spectrograms, I found it fascinating that with time, human beings could each be identified with the sound of their voices. Would that be possible? Currently, the spectrogram functions to determine the frequency (pitch) of a person’s voice, in effect providing a visual map if you will of a person’s very expression and tone. Imagine if one could interpret spectrograms consciously (though it has been stipulated that the mind does this processing in the auditory cortex subconsciously); but wouldn’t communication be so much easier if the audio information from another person was perhaps interpreted more consciously in our minds, so we were able to discern the persons actual tone and emotional state? I find that miscommunication continues to be a huge inconvenience (and at times peril) in everyday communication and conversation, so perhaps a “visual communication” tool of sorts would go a great way in accurately conveying another individual’s feelings and true message. However, moving back into the realm of reality, I found the different categories of speech perception to be a bit gray in their definition; although I do acknowledge that these categories of speech perception are ultimately useful in distinguishing between the nuances of speech, they lead to an extremely indiscernible area of linguistics: the classification of speech impediments. What defines a speech impediment? From what I can gather, I find that any variance of speech other than the norm can be classified as a speech impediment (I find that particularly terrifying, as its definition is so broad). In that case, if a person has a particular way of speaking, it is demonized and immediately derived as a speech impediment. Perhaps I am blowing an issue out of proportion, but it is definitely a topic I would like to do some more independent research on, just to clarify my own knowledge on the matter. Moving on, I found the McGurk effect to be exceptionally interesting, as I was dumbfounded by the inconceivable notion of COMPLETELY mistaking the syllables being uttered by the man. Lastly, I was most intrigued by the complexity of the processing occurring when a person is reading. What governs a person’s ability to speed read? What dictates an individual’s ability to decipher words that are jumbled up (yet they are still able to read them by using the first and last letter as cues, a form of top-down processing perhaps)? A point of particular interest is that the TRACE model and similar models of reading and interpreting phonemes are extremely similar to the word-processing models (like the spreading activation model and the hierarchical model) so does that imply that reading and speech production go hand in hand? Well there obviously is a connection, but can this relation be quantified and perhaps defined in a concrete manner? So much to know…so much to learn….

January 31st, 2011
Alas, the past week was a dry one for Psycholinguistics in face of the snowy inclement weather; I was also unable to attend the only class on Monday due to a gastral illness. I believe I missed out on a particularly interesting lecture in terms of the morphology of words. I find morphemes to be especially important, as they comprise the basic building blocks of language and their meanings. I would have especially liked to inquire more about the nature of morphemes across languages; would it be possible to discern or isolate morphemes that have migrated with populations over time? I may be confusing my concepts, but are morphemes responsible for the formation of dialects (although that may be more a phoneme phenomenon) or word connotations and meanings along a language? For instance, a certain morpheme in a word found in a certain region may hold a different meaning than the morpheme in another area. Is that even possible? My mind travels to India, which is home to over a thousand dialects last time I heard, has words that mean different things in different areas. Now does that pertain to morphemes, or is it something greater in word semantics that I am missing? I must do some more research in this area. Moving on, I found recursivity to be quite intriguing as well, considering the number of words being invented and added to the English language on a daily basis. The invention of new words must certainly have to do with the incorporation and recursivity of morphemes into existing words. With respect to the finer details of word morphology, I am still attempting to wrap my head around the dual-route models and the associative models; they all seem so plausible it may be difficult to understand the particular circumstances or nuances that they apply to.

February 7th - 11th, 2011
The lectures this week delved right into the one of the most personally anticipated aspects of linguistics that I had been waiting for. The first lecture on words was especially insightful, raising several remarkable points pertaining to words and their meaning: for instance, I appreciated the reference to one of the first lectures of the semester, in terms of the “map is not the territory” quote by Alfred Korzybski. It is truly fascinating how different languages have assigned various arbitrary words to represent not only an idea or object, but a whole range of specific feelings, circumstances and situations. I am of course referring to the Hawaiian and Fuengian languages, though I am sure several of these specific phrases exist in my own native Urdu tongue as well. Were these phrases developed in response to certain situations over time? I guess these words are gradually (due to the recursivity of morphemes I gather) formulated to describe situations, phenomenon or feelings that naturally arise in a society. In addition, Zipf’s Law was both shocking and impressive in its scope and applicability to fields even outside of linguistics. It’s astonishing to think that the frequency of words can be graded to such unnerving accuracy; that the frequency of a word is inversely proportional to its rank on the index. More so, the applicability of Zipf’s law to something like Google searches was especially fascinating; I believe the professor mentioned that the first hit was twice as searched as the second and so forth. And to think, this law follows the principle that “the path of least effort is taken”! Imagine that, a linguist establishing a bonafide mathematical model!! Undoubtedly, it demonstrates that intelligence cannot be constrained to one field. Moving on into the area of lexical access, I found the slew of models to be rather redundant and overly simple (by today’s standards I mean: some are not nearly as fancy as the dual-route model for instance). I personally do not agree that the mind is a dumb sorting machine that organizes words into the syntactic roles (like verb or adjective) before they are being processed somewhere else in the brain a la the Connectionist model. There must be a much more active center for word processing than the one suggested. However, seeing as how the neural bases said lexical access pertains to my topic, I found this area to be profoundly interesting. If anything this part of the lectures gave me a better understanding of my own topic, helping to lift the veil of confusion that enshrouded certain aspects of lexical access. Specifically, I was better able to understand the journal articles that I had previously only half-understood, in terms of their then-obscure references to models and patterns of brain activation which I had no background knowledge for. With respect to syntax, Noam Chomsky’s theory of generative grammar seems to make sense, though there a few hiccups here and there. I understand that grammar does not equate into meaning, and that words play both thematic and syntactical role in sentences. Yet, then how does one explain poetry? If I supposedly possess the marvelous powers of 100% sentence comprehension, then why do I become confused by the numerous examples of cryptic poetry that I struggle to understand? Is there a different explanation for this perhaps? Is it the elaborate use of metaphors, allegories, symbolism and such which add another layer of depth to sentences that are not covered by this theory? It is probable that I am misinterpreting some of the postulates of this theory. A last point that I found interesting also was the head-final and head-first languages having reversed roles in terms of the “players” of a sentence: I am assuming that American Sign Language falls into the head-first category since it is based on English (though I am not sure If I am correct to assume that). But does that mean sign language that stem from their respective languages also adopt the same sentence structure? Just a thought…

February 14th - 18th, 2011
The lectures this week covered some particularly exciting topics like parsing, syntax and my personal favourite, discourse. Although I no longer possess a vivid recollection of the class (since my mind was occupied with…less productive exploits during reading week), my notes resuscitated the dormant cogs of my memory back into action. To begin with, I found parse to be a fascinating lecture due to the variety and complexity of the theories discussed, such as incrementality (which I realized I was guilty of myself many time and have a strong habit of doing) and series vs. parallel processing. I infer that incrementality has a strong relation with finishing other people’s sentences: would it be possible that if two people spend a significant amount of time together, they will eventually be able to discern each other’s parse and thus be able to “read” each other’s minds? Of course I am oversimplifying it and there are a host of other factors, but it still makes for an intriguing idea. Moreover, I was viewing the whole lecture on parse from the perspective of writing: how devilishly wicked (and enticing) would it be to master the use of the intricacies of syntax? Imagine the applications!! I am salivating at the thought of being able to understand the theories (such as those regarding dependency locality and context effect) and utilizing them to lead the reader on a certain stream of thought, or to manipulate sentence structure in such a way as to confuse (but not entirely perplex) the reader in a way to add an extra layer of excitement, depth and meaning to a piece of work. I wish to someday learn how all these concepts tie in together and have a deep, comprehensive understanding of both syntax and parse; this would undoubtedly allow me to write in more creative ways, making my literary endeavours more stimulating for the reader (without being too terribly complex and making said reader feel abashed by my diabolical machinations). Also, it may be frowned upon that I am saying this, but garden path sentences are so much fun!! I especially enjoy reading all the examples Dr. Newman has provided in class, and hope to construct some of my own in my spare time. In an offshoot thought, a point of note was the terribly complex, colossal model for sentence processing proposed by Friederici (2002); although I do acknowledge that it is all very impressive and the entire chart seems plausible, I was wondering how it all tied into the behavioural models we discussed earlier. It would be nice to see how the neural bases of these things translated or related to the other behavioural models such as the network access model. Is there no relation? Or am I getting my ideas mixed up? Moving on to discourse, I especially enjoyed the question: why do we talk? The mini-discussion in class, in which it was proposed that communication was essential for survival, reproduction etc. while Dr. Newman stated that we overlooked the most obvious reason: the need for social interaction. I found this point to be particularly profound: even hermits who desire isolation still feel the need to talk, often speaking to their pets or other inanimate objects like plants to satisfy their intrinsic longing for some sort of social interaction. A last point I would like to make was the variation in discourse among people; how does a person’s discourse define them? Since discourse can vary in its structure, both macro and micro (such as the global structure or even finer details like the use of prepositions), there are many things that could make a person’s style of discourse unique to them. Could personality characteristics, or other factors such as socio-economic or culture of a person determine singularity in a person’s style of speech? Again, I am thinking along the application side of this topic, or more along the lines of how these would play a role in interactions between humans. In terms of neural correlates, we have not as yet discussed speech production in detail, so it remains to be seen what neural centers are responsible for the finer nuances of speech.

Blog Post #7
This week was scarce on lectures for me personally, as I was only able to attend one out of the two lectures conducted. Of these, speech production certainly piqued my interest, as obtaining the proper, pristine, clear majesty of speech is something that I always try to strive for. My own manner of speaking, often characterized as “excessively fast mumbling”, has often led me to question and attempt to understand the nuances behind speech production. In this regard, the lexical bias effect made a lot of sense as it is plausible that mistakes are made on the lexical level, rather than the phonological. However, I feel a better explanation is required in as to why ASL and Spanish have a less likely occurrence of errors. Does the complexity of syntax play a role perhaps? Maybe it is the way the morphemes tie together in sentence construction that may lexically create a mix-up? On a different tangent, I would assume that the type of stimuli would also have some sort of effect on the presence of speech errors; The whole lexical bases of speech errors seems reinforced by the fact that semantic interference can be induced by using distractor words; however, semantic facilitation can occur via pictoral stimuli. The Stroop task also demonstrated this to a certain extent. With respect to music and language, I am immensely impressed by the work done to show the correlations between the syntax of language and music. I wonder though, what is the reason that some prefer one type of music to the other? Is one predisposed to a certain musical palette? Studies show that playing Baby Bach doesn’t really have much of an effect on the fetus or newborn, yet obviously there is some programming occurring from the ages of 5-7 years. Could an eclectic taste in music be cultivated or developed perhaps? I loved how there is a difference in the neural correlates between musicians and non-musicians; I would assume there would be a difference in the motor cortex as well, since guitars, violinists, pianists etc. all have nimble and agile fingers.

Blog Post # 8
Unfortunately, I was not present for classes this past week as pressing matters had drawn me out of the country. Thankfully, the podcasts were of undeniable service since they managed to clear up some of the tricky concepts regarding the speech production models. While the majority of the models discussed seemed to make sense and were straightforward, I found the Weaver model to be most poignant in the way it broke down speech production into three simple steps, which I felt seemed plausible. I agree with the notion that the first stage is where the basic phonemes/morphemes of the word is accessed, the second being the actual formulation of the compound word and the third being the finer touches of prosody to the word. However, I still wonder about how this ties into complex sentence processing, or of whole ideas in a sentence, as opposed to single words that they use in the examples. The early models, such as the Fromkin model, do explain this to a certain extent, but I am not completely satisfied with the explanation of syntactic processing. Even though syntactic processing is done in the initial stages of speech production, my question pertains to the overall theme, purpose and context of a sentence…how do these models account for those? With regards to the tip of the tongue phenomenon, I was particularly excited by its relations to hand gestures. Many people seem to find it amusing that my hands are a dynamic and vibrant extension of my rather active mouthpiece. As such, I found that speaking with my hands really does facilitate lexical access, so to see research reinforce my earlier inferences really clarifies some of my own personal questions. Moreover, I found this relation to be further strengthened via the absence of proper hand gestures in Broca’s and Wernicke’s aphasics. Personally, I was not aware there was such a variation in the types of hand gestures, but I wonder how these tie into American Sign Language…does ASL utilize variations of these gestures in its discourse as well? Do ASL motions fall into this category as well? Lastly, the lecture on writing was especially stimulating, particularly the part which discussed the thought processes behind writing. Creative writing and literature is a beloved hobby of mine, and I could wholeheartedly agree with the notion that the process of transcribing ones thoughts to paper differs in the type of resources being accessed: long-term memory plays a huge role, yet during a test or exam (as in the notorious written section of the MCAT), even the most avid writers tend to falter and experience problems. These problems can be attributed to a lack of planning and ill-preparation (the nagging stress also plays a huge factor I am sure), yet, without the cultivation of writing skills prior to the task it will nary make a difference. However, there is something positive to be gleaned from this conjecture; people who feel writing is “not their thing” simply need to invest the time in establishing the correct skills of thought organization analysis required for a compelling piece. This point leads into the common occurrence of writer’s block, which I was greatly gleeful to have read; having absorbed all the pointers and advice, I found this lecture to be ultimately the most satisfying to have experienced so far.

Blog Post #9
I must say I am simultaneously thrilled and saddened by the fact that we are now covering speech development, but sad that I could not be there in class personally. I have a 3 and a ½ year old nephew myself, and I have been his favourite uncle since the day he was born (I was the first person to hold him besides his parents). Since then, I have had a significant role in his rearing (being the de facto nanny helping out my brother), and have witnessed the stages of his development firsthand. In that respect, I have a tendency of viewing some of the content discussed in the lectures through the context of my nephew, to see if the theory holds true for him as well. To begin with, I found the section on pidgin and creoles to be particularly enjoyable, since I found some aspects of creoles to be prevalent in my own Urdu language here in Pakistan (where I have now started noticing some peculiar things about the Urdu spoken here). The presence of contact languages and the evolution into creoles is unmistakeable here, no doubt left by our lovely British colonial masters who instilled a generous portion of words into the tongue of this country. Urdu is by no means a rudimentary language; it is originally derived from Sanskrit, and over time it has become thoroughly complete; I must confess I have a rather broken and extremely limited mastery of Urdu “Adab”, which is the flowery, high-level “elite” form of the language (similar to Shakespearean English I would assume, which not many people are typically comfortable in using). However, on the streets and in everyday conversation, I find that our regular Urdu has indeed incorporated several English words into our vocabulary, which interestingly most people are unaware of (not surprising, since only 57% of the population is literate). There are numerous examples of English words which are used so commonly, most people don’t realize that there must be an Urdu equivalent, which again none of the people I asked knew about. For instance, the words “bus”, “train”, “phone”, “radio”, “candelabra”, “glue(ing)”, “photocopy(ing)”, “roadblock”, “fax”, “police”, “ball”, “wicket”, “paint(ing)” etc.. are all elements of English incorporated into the Urdu language. Reflexification could be attributed to the transition from pidgin use in the 50’s to a more creole form in the 60’s and 70’s. However, Urdu has shown its resiliency by not being completely dominated with assimilated words. Considering such factors, could it not be possible that modern Urdu is a creole language as well? Moving on to the cuter, cuddlier, part of the lectures, I found it very plausible that babies demonstrate categorical perception early on, as with my nephew who was rather adept at discerning the various pattern of language between English and Urdu (as hard as we tried, I think English will still end up being his native tongue, since we speak it so much more in regular discourse than we realize ourselves). However, going back to the lecture on music and language, which if I remember correctly stated that there was no impact on a baby’s cultural tastes when music was played in the womb; if that is true, then why does the baby show a preference for the mother’s voice. In addition, I guess an Urdu version of Baby Einstein would perhaps instil a greater receptiveness in the child to learn Urdu; yet how does a multi-lingual child not become confused with all the different stresses, phase breaks, patterns and such that are found in each language? This is especially wondrous considering that Urdu and English are so different, especially in syntax and the aforementioned characteristics. On the whole, children are truly mind-boggling, and I find it amusing that they struggle to understand us, while we struggle equally to understand them. Ahh, the seemingly “simple mind” of a child.

Blog Post #10
Blog Post #10 It’s definitely good to be back, as I dearly missed the energy and stimulation that personal lectures can provide; podcasts are serviceable, yet their biggest detriment is the inability to ask questions. Although the other two lectures were engrossing as well, the clear standout winner this week was undoubtedly the class on Friday. Thankfully, I returned from my t just in time for a fantastic lecture on aphasia. The guest lecturer was phenomenal and the lecture was one of the most informative I had ever seen. Aphasia is nothing new to me, as it has been discussed in numerous psychology courses throughout my undergraduate tenure. But truly, this is the first time I have ever felt that I have a much more solid, well-round and ultimately deeper knowledge of what aphasia is really like. The lecturer thoroughly explained the nature of Broca’s, Wernicke’s and Global aphasias in logical progression, but the primary reason her method of explanation was outstanding were the videos and personalized examples of real people who suffered from these ailments. You can read about something all you like, but you won’t have a true understanding of what it is unless you see it or (God-forbid) experience it yourself. In that regard, the lecture was a truly eye-opening experience, and taught me the actual phenotypical or behavioural differences between the kinds of aphasias. I am glad to hear that some of the participants have shown marked improvement, which leads to me the thought: does age of onset influence development of aphasia? Does neuronal plasticity at a certain age affect the chance of improvement? What kind of tasks or measures can one take in everyday life to aid recovery? Obviously therapy is a must; the lecturer stated the earlier the better. However, does this improvement or recovery of language abilities signify strengthening of communication between the dendritic processes? Better communication of neurons in the speech production/comprehension pathway? Is there something happening with the neural circuitry on a physiological level? There must be, since aphasias are brought about by lesions resulting in physical damage to the brain. However, if the recovery of neural pathways is unlikely (since neuroplasticity prevents significant change) is there a re-routing of the language comprehension/production pathway? Since the area previously responsible for this task is damaged due to lesions, are there other regions that have taken up the required processes, like auditory processing, lexical retrieval, grapheme-to-phoneme conversion etc.? Since these patients have been shown to improve and regain somewhat normal functioning, there must be some sort of mechanism or solution to compensate for the damage in a certain brain area.

Needless to say, I am deeply intrigued by this lecture, and will look for other avenues of information to develop my knowledge. Aphasia would certainly make for an enriching research project…

Blog Post #11
It has been a somewhat less intellectually invigorating week thus far, with debates being the focus of the class instead of the always informative lectures. However, I was only able to attend one, as I missed the other debate due to a volunteering commitment; the third debate actually starred me as the participant, and it went well. The debate that I was fortunate enough to be present for was Ebonics: the FOR side argued that Ebonics should be used for instruction in schools located in the Oakland district, while the AGAINST side stated that it shouldn’t. Personally, after witnessing both sides battle it out, I have to side with the AGAINST camp. It is true that a large portion of the students (53% if I remember correctly) conversed primarily in Ebonics, and that it is unique enough to be a language of its own. However, being bilingual myself, I would hesitate to introduce a second language into a school system so hastily. I agree with the AGAINST side on several points. First, 47% of students do not speak Ebonics, and perhaps would not be open to Ebonics being used as the primary mode of instruction. Moreover, English is the official language of the United States, and though they may recognize Ebonics as being a significant minority language, the language of instruction must still be English (if that was not so, then Spanish would have been used in instruction in certain schools already). In addition, if each district or locality were to teach students in the dominant language of the area, that would have an ill-effect on the unity and fabric of the country. While it is true that cultural differences need to be celebrated, they do not need to be reinforced. This would lead to discord in certain parts of the country, much like what is happening in Pakistan or India, where you have disharmony due to exaggerated linguistic and cultural differences which end up dividing a nation instead of being its greatest strength. India, specifically, has over 300 languages which can be further differentiated into an even greater number of dialects; it is to address this very issue that English has been introduced as the unifying language of the country. Even though it is not official, English is used extensively on television, in public addresses and in mass media communication. Again, this is because no matter what district or locality you are in, it is far more likely that you will encounter someone who speaks English as opposed to somebody who speaks in your own unique dialect. Keeping this in mind, it would be a step backwards for Ebonics to replace the sole unifying language of the country; it would set a possibly dangerous precedent for other communities who will campaign for their own language to be taught in their respective localities. However, I must emphasize that Ebonics must certainly be cherished and preserved, either via second language courses or through awareness campaigns, as with any other minority language. But introducing Ebonics to REPLACE English would be a grave misstep, with inevitable ramifications further down the road.

With regards to my own debate, I argued that children with cochlear implants should receive instruction in Oral communication only, as opposed to Total communication (which incorporates sign language and speech). Statistically, it has been shown that children in oral communication have greater speech production and speech perception, along with greater linguistic ability (equal to or better than kids with normal hearing in some cases) and conversational fluency. It has been determined that reliance on oral-aural communication and an emphasis to communicate without depending on sign language has been the primary rehabilitative factor. In short, if the primary goal is to improve a child’s verbal communication and English comprehension skills, then undoubtedly Oral communication is the way to go, although these decisions must obviously be made on an individual basis addressing the needs of the child.

Blog Post #12: The End of an Era
My oh my, where has the time gone? The whole semester seems like a blur before my eyes! Alas, Friday brought the culmination of one of my most favourite classes, and I must say I am sad to see it go. In retrospect, Psycholinguistics has been one of the most fun, satisfying, informative and ultimately rewarding classes I have ever taken. Considering my level knowledge when I first started, I have made leaps and bounds in my understanding of Psycholinguistics and its various aspects. Throughout the course, I have learned about several areas of language which I had questions about, starting with the very first lecture on language and thought. I learned the difference between linguistic relativism and linguistic determinism, learned about the Whorfian hypothesis and the ability of language to constrain one’s thought. Even though that debate has seemed inconclusive, I feel that I lean more on the side of language directing or facilitating thought in a certain way; however, I still do acknowledge that an individual’s thought pattern is also greatly influenced by one’s culture (or society) and the manner of education that one has received. Similarly, I have made several gains in other avenues of language, such as my understanding of garden path sentences, the pitfalls of sentence syntax and structure, and the elements needed for the construction of a functional sentence. Discourse was also a favourite of mine, as it dispelled my previous notions about language being essential for reproduction and survival; it now seems more likely that discourse is essential just for the intrinsic human need for communication. Lastly, I especially enjoyed the debates as well, as some of them covered key aspects of the course, allowing room for discussion at the later stages when everyone was somewhat knowledgeable about the debate topics. I could reminisce all day about those rare yet rewarding moments when one finally has attained an elusive piece of knowledge and understanding; having it nestle in your brain is the definitive “Oh so that’s what it is!” experience, and one that I have had the fortune of experiencing myself on quite a few occasions throughout the course. All in all, I am glum to say goodbye to this course (which does not happen often in undergrad I find), and I have had perhaps the best learning experience under the tutelage of Dr. Newman and his innovative (and effective) teaching techniques. I shall recommend this course highly to anyone else who might be interested, in hopes that they shall undergo the same positive experiences that I have had in this course.

Farewell…

title: User:Ramz Aziz


text:
Psycholinguistics/Neural Bases of Lexical Access

Lexical Access and the Brain
This chapter aims to explore and determine the neurological aspects of lexical access in the brain. Lexical access, or word retrieval, is a process that has undergone significant study and been the focus of debate in psychology for quite some time. Thus far, studies have identified brain regions that are accessed for semantic, syntactic, and phonological lexical tasks. In effect, there are certain neural areas that are activated for processing these tasks. Although the early models of accessing the mental lexicon were formulated in recent decades, relatively recent developments in technology have vastly improved the understanding of the actual neural circuits or basis of this process. The introduction of Event-Related Potentials (ERP) was an integral first step, paving the way for further techniques such as Magnetoencephalography (MEG), Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) and Positron Emission Tomography (PET) scans to provide an unprecedented amount of spatio-temporal information pertaining to neural activation. This chapter aims to demystify the bases of lexical access in the human brain, explaining the intricacies, conditions and factors that affect lexical retrieval, using data to identify neural systems that correlate with their respective brain areas.

Fundamentals of Neuronal Processing
On a neuronal level, it is convergence and divergence from a neuron that determines the direction of the processing that occurs. In other words, the direction of the stimuli that a neuron experiences governs feedforward and feedback responses, which are both unique in the nature of their pathways. Feedforward processing is analogous to bottom-up processing, where the basic elements of the stimulus are interpreted and used as a foundation to construct a response. Essentially, the stimulus is interpreted as “building blocks”, upon which higher processing is then based upon. On the other hand, the feedback pathway can be likened to top-down processing, where the final construct or unit is dissected into its building blocks and information is broken down from a larger concept. Since it primarily operates via the dissection of the stimuli, it is working backwards in relation to feedforward processing; it is thusly referred to as feedback processing. In the context of lexical access, a feedforward response can involve the interpretation of a visual grapheme into a phoneme, after which the phoneme is processed into a morpheme which is then interpreted semantically etc. The process continues until a word is retrieved from the mental lexicon. Conversely, the feedback pathway occurs in the opposite direction, with the word being correctly identified due its semantics being used contextually in a sentence.

ERP Studies
Event-related potential studies have been useful in identifying the time process of lexical access. Most notably, the N400 component of an ERP has been shown to reflect the brain activity during word retrieval. It was found that less frequent words (words found to be used less in the English language) elicited a stronger N400 response than more common and frequent nouns; this suggests that the brain was making a greater effort to perform lexical retrieval of the less frequent word.

As stated above, it has been shown that there is a strong relation between frequency of a word in language and the time and effort taken for lexical retrieval. This general relation states that the less frequent a word is, the greater the time taken for lexical access. In terms of gauging word frequency, the most oft quoted corpus is the Kucera and Francis MRC Psycholingustic Database. This relation has also been shown behaviourally, with eye tracking showing gaze duration as being longer for unfamiliar, less frequent words than their counterparts. Less frequent words (closed class) such as nouns take a few hundred milliseconds longer to process than their more frequent synonyms.

Language comprehension relies on a variety of codes or cues for processing, such as orthographic, thematic, phonological, semantic and syntactic cues; the decoding of each of these cues was thought to be encapsulated into specific modules of the brain. Less frequent words also have weaker orthographic, phonological and thematic cues, all of which have been thought to play a role in lexical retrieval. These cues are interpreted by the brain and are used to facilitate lexical access; hence, weaker cues will result in slower access of words.

fMRI Studies
However, a recent study explores the notion of an inter-related network being drawn upon for lexical processing. An fMRI was conducted on subjects to examine lexical and syntactic processing in reading comprehension using a lexical decision task. Results from the study suggest that a variety of lexical and syntactic factors affected activation of a wide portion of the left hemisphere, including the aforementioned perisylvian areas, as opposed to being localized in a specific area. A similar purported view is that the interaction of different areas of the brain enhances the efficacy of lexical access. From the study of the activation of brain cortical regions using fMRI, it was deemed that several areas were integral for lexical processing, and not just confined to one modality as previously thought. A point of consensus is that the left inferior frontal gyrus is indeed involved, however, its role is in question. Some researchers assert that the left IFG (also containing Broca’s area) is concerned with semantic processing of words, while others stipulate that is involved in the selection of multiple meanings.

In a separate study, it was found that even experienced computer typists were not spared from the frequency effect; low frequency words were typed slower, further establishing the inhibitory effect of low frequency on lexical access.

MEG Studies
Magentoencephalography has shown to be particularly useful in correlating brain activity to lexical access. In particular, there are three MEG response elements that pose the most significant relation to lexical brain activation: the M170, M250 and M350 components. The M170, being the earliest component, is suggested to reflect the earliest occipito-temporal activity in visually processing the word form, chiefly by processing the letter strings that are present. The M250 is at a later latency, and thought to deal with the phonotactic processing, or interpretation of the phonological, orthographic or thematic components as a sort of medial level decoding, as mentioned above. However, is the M350 component that has been subjected to the most scrutiny, as it is believed to coincide with the actual tapping of the mental lexicon in word retrieval. Moreover, studies have shown that M350 can be likened to the N400 component of an ERP, in terms of their representation of the effect of lexical frequency on word retrieval. The M350 latencies, along with their amplitudes, were found to be particularly sensitive to word frequency. Furthermore, it was found that the neighbourhood density, meaning the similarity of certain parts of a word with each other (such as Have and Shave), are thought to elicit greater responses of the M350. As such, it is suggested that the brain indulges a much higher effort in discriminating between words that are in the neighbourhood density, as multiple phonemic variations of the word are accessed, but only one can be selected as the correct form. This strengthens the relation between phonological cues and lexical access, as the similarity or differences between cues and the strength of the cue itself can facilitate or impede lexical retrieval to a certain extent.

With regards to word frequency, the less frequent a word, the higher the amplitude of the M350 response. This is similar to the behaviour of the N400 component. In addition, word repetition, which entails that a word be repeated several times throughout the course of an experiment or sentence, has shown to create a smaller M350 response; this suggests that less mental effort is required to process repeated words. To summarize, neighbourhood density of words is linked to an inhibitory effect on the M350, while word frequency and repetition are suggested to facilitate it.

In another MEG study conducted by Embick and colleagues, a lexical decision task used six frequency word categories, each defined by a one-step decrease in the log frequency; the latencies of the M350 component were analyzed to solidify its relation to word frequency. The word frequencies for this experiment were selected from the Cobuild corpus. The main difference for this experiment was that a single word system was used, as opposed to a sentence structure to present the stimuli. The results however, were similar to the experiments noted above. Three primary peaks were found at 150 ms, 250 ms and 350 ms. The response times for the M350 component ranged from 357 – 593 ms for the most frequent words, while the least frequent words elicited responses ranging from 392 – 732 ms. A point suggested by the researchers was that repetition of words that were presented had a facilitating effect on the M350 latency; semantic priming, achieved by presenting the subject with a single word with a similar meaning to the subsequent word, also had the same effect.

Orthographic/Visual Lexical Retrieval Studies
Initially, word retrieval for vocal or silent verbalization was thought to be in the left cerebral hemisphere, prominently featured in Broca’s area and Wernicke’s area, otherwise known as the classic language areas. It has indeed been shown that Perisylvian structures play a major role in the phonemic representation of word forms, also known as the grapheme to phoneme conversion.

A PET study performed by researchers on patients with brain lesions in their telencephalon regions and normal control individuals identified areas responsible for word retrieval. More specifically, areas of retrieval for unique and non-unique entities were identified. Participants were given a visual naming experiment, with three categories of pictures being presented: well-known persons (unique entity), animals (unique and non-unique) and tools (non-unique).

Regional cerebral blood flow was measured using a PET scan; the experiment yielded strong results indicating the left temporal pole (TP) and left interotemporal (IT) sectors were involved in unique and non-unique items respectively. It was found that the left TP was stimulated in naming persons, while the left IT sector was particularly activated by animal names. However, it is important to note that these regions are not thought to be primarily responsible for storing words; rather, they have an intermediary role in lexical retrieval. It is far more likely that these regions interpret the immediate information being perceived, such as the phonological or orthographic nature of the stimulus.

Role of Ventral Extrastriate Cortex in Visual Word Processing
In terms of interpreting visual data, the ventral extrastriate cortex has been found to play a role in early processing of visual word form, giving rise to subsequent phonological or semantic processing. Studies on orthographic forms of lexical access have specified a number of regions activated by visual lexical decision tasks, including the occipital pole, lateral and basal occipito-temporal lobes, the superior and middle temporal gyri and the inferior parietal lobule.

In particular, the lateral extrastriate cortex was attributed to actively processing the visual information; the left medial extrastriate cortex was found to be most activated by the actual word, and word-like stimuli. It is interesting to note that activation in these regions was seen bilaterally as well; this challenges the notion that language stems solely from the left hemisphere. It can be surmised the right hemisphere plays a role in visual word-form lexical access.

Further expanding upon lexical retrieval from a visual source, it has been shown that brain activity brought about by an orthographical code is variable as well. It has been suggested that hand-writing does indeed inhibit or slow down lexical access to a certain degree, insinuating the brain does indeed discriminate between typeface and hand-writing. The study found faster response times in visual naming tasks for typeface as opposed to cursive hand-writing. This delay can be attributed to the longer time taken for the grapheme to phoneme conversion that occurs during visual naming, as described above. This effect was made even more apparent for words with low frequency.

In terms of the direction of processing, the results indicated that participants were less sensitive to phonological effects when making word/pseudo-word judgements, as they were thought to rely on the familiarity of the word; this entails that they relied on top-down processing to distinguish between the stark differences of words and pseudo-words. However, forward processing was still utilized in discriminating between words in which the differences were less obvious, such as pull and lull. As mentioned previously, an additional factor to be considered is the semantic top-down processing which was most notable when a low frequency word was written in cursive hand-writing. As such, the researchers suggested this was due to the weak orthographic and phonological cues which could be gleaned from the complexity of the cursive hand-writing; the brain then utilized semantic processing for lexical access. In this case, the lateral extrastriate cortex was activated bilaterally, similar to the visual tests done in the aforementioned experiments. A similar study conducted by Hellige and Adamson found that the right hemisphere is indeed more active than usual (since the left hemisphere is typically far more dominant) for reading handwriting than print.

Lexical Ambiguity
A study conducted by Fiebach, Sandra H. Vos and Angela Frederici went further to determine the neural correlates of sentence comprehension (in terms of lexical ambiguity) for readers with high and low working memory capacities. The participants were subjected to a visual sentence comprehension task, where sentences were shown with and without ambiguous parts. An fMRI was done on the participants, with the aim of identifying the neural bases of deciphering syntactic ambiguity. It was found that, as suggested by earlier studies, that the left-dominant network in the perisylvian region was indeed involved in sentence processing of ambiguous words. However, they pointed out that it was the superior region of Broca’s area (BA 44) and the parietal region which showed a proportional activation increase to the length of the ambiguous component of the sentence. Thus, they concluded that the BA44 activation increases as the demands for sentence comprehension increase.

As had been suggested by Just and Carpenter, working memory capacity did indeed affect brain activation; low span readers demonstrated greater activity for the same brain regions as their high span counterparts. It is suggested that these readers place a larger effort on their cognitive mechanisms to process sentences, especially the ambiguous ones. This could be attributed to the lexical accessing of multiple meanings in these regions, with time taken to select the correct word depending upon the context of the sentence. In terms of identifying all the brain regions, Fiebach et al. found that processing for lexically ambiguous words occurred in the left posterior temporal sulcus, the middle temporal gyrus, left anterior superior temporal gyrus and the left superior temporal sulcus. These results are fairly consistent with other studies done investigating lexical ambiguity. Moreover, it was noted that the posterior inferior frontal gyrus (Broca’s area) also underwent greater activation depending on the complexity of the ambiguous sentence. However, since this was a visual experiment, activity was also seen in the right hemisphere in the posterior superior temporal sulcus, posterior third of the inferior frontal gyrus and in the anterior insula, supporting evidence from earlier studies.

Patients with lesions in Broca’s area (pars opercularis and pars triangulis), and in some cases temporal and parietal areas have exhibited weaker ability to discern thematic codes from a lexically ambiguous word in a sentence.

Moving deeper into to the realm of lexical ambiguity, several MEG studies have been conducted to determine the effect of an ambiguous word on brain activity and MEG component latency. A study performed by Ihara et al. utilized MEG and fMRI imaging to identify the neural mechanisms of lexical access of ambiguous words. Subjects were presented with words in the Japanese script, both in sentences and in a single fashion. It was found that the left posterior temporal and inferior parietal area showed significant activation, along with the left anterior middle/inferior temporal area, for sentences containing words which were ambiguous (having more than one meaning). However, the context of the sentence was shown to have been a significant factor in brain activation of these areas, due to greater activation for sentences than single words. In addition, the inferior frontal cortex was activity was influenced by ambiguities, as was seen from fMRIs of ambiguous and clear meaning words. Specifically, the left posterior inferior frontal cortex showed clear context effect for the unambiguous words, but not for ambiguous ones; the activation of the pIFC was larger for related ambiguous words, signifying that multiple meanings of the word had to be accessed.

In addition, the MEG component also demonstrated that response times were delayed for ambiguous words, as opposed to unambiguous ones. This can be explained via a study by Pylkkanen and colleagues which determined that the presentation one homonym (word with same pronunciation and spelling, but different meaning) delayed the M350; this delay can be attributed to the inhibition of the competitor word. Overall, the MEG results did demonstrate differences in latencies (and hence brain activation) for ambiguous and unambiguous words. The 200-300 ms components were larger for ambiguous words compared with unambiguous; the early occurrence of these components suggest that lexical ambiguity is deciphered rather quickly using contextual information found in sentences by the brain. Furthermore, the MEG also showed activity till the 700 ms component, encompassing a variety of peaks, most notably of which occurred at 400 ms. This component was thought to be related to the N400 component. Also explored in the experiment was the effect of semantic priming: the amplitude of MEG components and brain activation seen from the fMRI scans showed less activity for words that were semantically primed. fMRI imaging was correlated with the MEG component to show a timeline of brain activation: the left posterior frontal cortex was activated at roughly 250 ms, followed by the left anterior inferior frontal cortex at 350 ms, which was then succeeded by the anterior medial temporal lobe at 400 ms.

In a related study, it was shown that the distinction between the functions of the anterior and posterior portions of the left inferior frontal cortex were that the former dealt with semantic processing, while the latter was concerned with phonological processing. A further point of note is the role of the right hemisphere, which has shown to also play a important part in the processing of lexically ambiguous words as determined by lesion studies.

Summary Table for Lexical Retrieval
A very brief summary of this chapter is provided in the table below. Please keep in mind that this is information is highly abridged; for a deeper understanding of the underlying concepts and experiments, please refer to the chapter above, or to the actual sources listed in the references section. Due to the high level of research being done in this area, this table may warrant further addition to its content as more theories are being developed; please feel free to edit the table and the chapter or add to it constructively in light of new or updated information.

Learning Exercise
The following learning task is available to be viewed at your convenience, and is intended to facilitate your understanding of the basic concepts discussed in this chapter. Even though some of the content discussed above can be overwhelming, the learning exercise will help you digest the information in a simple, straightforward manner.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Book Reviews/Communication and Identities in Institutional Arenas - Part I/De los Reyes, Paulina & Mulinari, Diana (2005): Intersektionalitet: kritiska reflektioner over (o)jämlikhetens landskap

Summary and reflections on Paulina de los Reyes & Diana Mulinari (2005): Intersektionalitet – Kritiska reflektioner över (o)jämlikhetens landskap
Why this book?

The authors begin by referring to their previous book, (Maktens (o)lika förklädnader…), the purpose of which was to problematize and place on stage how relations of superiority and inferiority are articulated in different historical and spatial ”rooms”. The simultaneous effect of gender, class and ethnic/”race” structures is a central component in the constitution of power, they claim. Intersectionality is thus seen as an alternative for a traditional feminist theory with its focus on the construction of gender, not taking other aspects into consideration. The purpose of the book is to expand the analysis frames and open up for reflections on power and inequality, all in favor of building a critical perspective within science. (7-8)

Among both neo-marxist and poststructuralistic theorists there is an ambition to develop theoretical models that capture present-day social relations, identity formations and material inequality by going beyond one-dimensional power analyses. The authors argue that intersectionality as a concept should not be “locked” within feministic theory or constructed as a feministic concept, as it has bearing for many other theory constructions as well (8).

One of the main aims of the book is to reflect upon inequality that is constructed in the intersection between different levels of society and the specific forms of consensus and suppression that emerges in the intersection of power structures, institutional practices and individual actions. The authors refer to a number of specific phenomena, among which “hedersrelaterat våld”/patriarchal violence within families is named. Through and intersectional analysis of several levels it is possible to see how patriarchal structures in the society are empowered by racist practices on institutional level, which in turn weakens the situation for abused children and women on individual level. (9)

Intersectionality shows also how power is intertwined with whiteness, maleness, gender, heterosexuality, class, and so on, through a re(creation) of the relationship between “us” and “them” through social codes. (9-10) According to the authors, power is articulated in unequal material conditions, linguistic constructions, everyday actions and ideological fundaments that vary both historically and spatially. Power is thus seen as both complex and mobile. (11) Last, but not the least, the book also sheds light on unequal power relation within the academia – in relation to science.

The book consists of 8 chapters and introduction, summarized above. The first chapter argues for the necessity of an intersectional perspective based on a critical tradition where power and inequality are focused. Ch.2 includes a critical review on previous research, discussing the relation between intersectional analyses and feministic traditions. This critical reflection is based on Etienne Balibar’s Race, nation and class as well as Charles Tilly’s Durable inequality. At the end of the chapter both Marx and Foucault are included within the framework of an intersectional analysis. Ch.3 discusses power and inequality through racial processes and historical ways of articulating ideas of race together with gender and class. Stuart Halls Black feminism is also studied in this chapter.

Chapter 4 focuses postcolonial theory, thus identifying intersections between discourses in time and space and different forms of power acts. Postcolonial thinking represents an important shift in paradigm concerning theories on power and inequality. Ch.5 studies “Swedish feminism”. Ch. 6 & 7 analyze how gender, class, sexuality and ethnicity are articulated in different power positions (as seen in interview materials). A central question is: How does intersectionality challenge the idea of the Swedish “folkhem” (people’s home)? The 8 th and final chapter critically discusses the possibilities and limitations of an intersectional analysis from both theoretical and methodological points of view.

In the following, I will comment on some of the ideas presented in the chapters.

Ch 1 The ideological home of intersectional thinking

One of the core questions of the book is: What kind of understanding of power makes it possible to relate the existence of multiple identities to different axes of power asymmetry? (15).

For the authors, intersectionality is not only a perspective through which a complex reality can be described. It is also a theoretical perspective that forces us to look at the reality through a different kind of lens and makes us question the “knowledge” and given social order we live in. (23) Furthermore, power relations are something that is made/created, not given (23).

Intersectionality is based on an epistemology where individuals, ideologies, knowledge, discourses and material conditions are involved in a ever-proceeding construction of power and oppression/suppression (25).

'''Ch 2. Voices on power and inequality'''

An intersectional perspective is applicable also outside the feministic field, as the interest towards a broader and historically situated understanding of power and inequalities is broader than feminism itself. Racism, for instance, is embedded in other social relations such as gender relations. The authors reflect upon these issues through a critical examination of two fundamental works: Race, class, nation (a classic dialogue between Balibar & Wallerstein) and Durable inequality (C. Tilly). Apart from this, the authors make an attempt of creating a “third model of intersectionality through creating dialogue between Marx and Foucault. Race, class and nation is described as macro-structural class analysis where ethnicity and gender make grounds for exclusion from the society, its resources and lack of power and influence. The role of nation in this model is that it is constituted around a territory, a language and a given “original”national population makes it possible to establish (and legitimize) a border between us and those who don’t belong to the nation. National identities, thus, reproduce a system of inequality and exclusion, where the fellowship between us is based on confrontation and distance towards “them”. Relying on a Marxist tradition, Balibar and Wallerstein analyze the inner contradictions and exclusion mechanisms of capitalism and nation states (30-31).

Balibar touches also upon the relation of the concepts race and culture. As previously accepted connections between “racial” superficial differences and social behavior have become politically inadequate/incorrect, the notion of culture has been “fed in” as an explanatory fact (32). (Jfr. Wikan, Mulinari et al, KOIIA 2). There is a risk that essentialism remains despite developments in this line of thought. (32). Operating on categories such as ethnicity, race, class and gender means in some ways that they are locked or trapped within themselves. How can we see individuals or situated social practices instead?

Charles Tilly’s Durable inequality is characterized as a systematic model that focuses on processes creating inequality, based on structural relations and institutional conditions. Tilly claims that creating inequality is relational as it is formed in the social interaction between individuals and groups. Different forms of inequality, especially category-based, are transformed and reformed from one social interaction to another (34). The strength in Tilly’s theory is formulation of an analysis model that connects structural relations to institutional processes, but that doesn’t predetermine the causality between these levels (37). In terms of identity, he is critical of an analysis of social differences based on an identity perspective, because individuals’ identities are formed and reformed by the social relations they are a part of. (38) To see social differences as identity equals according to him reducing social processes to individual actions. Based on Tilly, the authors see studying the connections between identity formation and the society’s forms of exploiting individuals as their central task. (39)

The final section of this chapter is an attempt to merge the thoughts of Foucault and Marx. For Foucault, analysis of power captures the creation of “normality” and stigmatization of “different” as a societal norm. Marx, in his turn, connects the exploitation made possible by private ownership and societal division between work and capital. (42-43) The classic categories class, status and prestige have thus been transformed to class, gender and ethnicity (Bradley 1996). Problematizing this, the authors remind us about the fact that stigmatization and deviation are also associated with individual and collective subversive actions that challenge the societal norms. (44) The authors conclude that it is necessary to keep the processes of exploitation and stigmatization analytically separate in order to be able to study how they interact (45).

'''Ch 3. Intersectional dialogues'''

This chapter introduces a theoretical model consisting of two analytically separate understandings of inequality; socio-economic and cultural/symbolic. The thinker behind this model is Nancy Fraser, a feminist political philosopher. For Fraser, exploitation is defined as not only through the classic contradiction between work and capital, but also through lack of symbolic and discursive power. (48). Pages 49-50 include Judits Butler’s criticism of Fraser; a discussion of the right/left –wing ideals in politics and the fact that the same leftist movement that criticizes the class division and exclusion also can foster homophobic and racist ideas.

The ideas presented in the chapter are a part of a general discussion on “identity politics”, (based on ideas or individuals as carriers of these ideas identity politics has been seen as a way of including different groups’ interests, experiences and capabilities in political decision-making). The authors strive to problematize the concept and react against the phenomena. Instead of identity focus, the authors, in concert with Fraser, argue that one should focus on institutional perspectives (53). Despite its advantages, Fraser’s theory is criticized for being Eurocentric, thus is the perspective of Black feminism raised. The criticism Black Feminism raises against traditional feminism can be described in two central concepts: “making invisible” and “otherness”, of which the former is defined as the process of constructing gender through the experiences of white middle-class females, thus making others’ experiences invisible, the latter being constructed through a “brutal display of the other as defect, strange or suppressed” (55). When introducing Stuart Hall’s thinking (1992), the authors describe the important questions of how race intervenes with class relations and what effects does this have on the stability in capitalist systems. If race is seen as a relational category, not essential, then racified forms of oppression can be connected with the privileges associated with whiteness. (60) Race, or social ideas of race are thus a constitutive part of the inequalities system that simultaneously with class and gender creates suppression and oppression.

Ch 4 Intersections in the postcolonial room

Chapter 4 discusses an important paradigm shift in social sciences, the emergence of postcolonial theory. According to the authors, the postcolonial field offers a critical re-reading of the production of Western knowledge and is interested in the relation between racified forms of power, knowledge production and politics (64). Thus, translation and portraying of experiences and world views through language is an important area of study within this theory. In 1998, Slater listed four different ways of studying the postcolonial: 1) postcolonialism in a specific historical time 2) postcolonialism associated with postmodernism and poststructuralism 3)postcolonialism – interaction/reciprocally constituted roles between the colonizer and the colonized 4) critical examination of hierarchical power relations within knowledge production in academia (65).

Furthermore, postcolonial theory problematizes systematically the cultural, linguistic, historical and psychological borders created by the Western colonialization (75) – a starting point in this thinking is that colonialization has not only carried out a new economic and social order in the world but also promoted the European modernization project as a model for the entire humanity (75). All in all, the chapter emphasizes and discusses a number of interesting postcolonial intersections: knowledge/politics, dominans/hegemony, discourse/materiality, time/space.

'''Ch 5 Hegemonic feminism? An attempt to identify a discoursive field'''

As my interests lie elsewhere than in feminist theory, I will here only leave the reader with the core idea presented in the chapter, namely this: If intersectionality is to be merged within the feminist theory, the entire core of that theory needs to be transformed (87).

Ch 6 Intersectional discourses of resistance

Whereas previous chapters have emphasized that the ideological home of intersectionality lies in diverse backgrounds, chapter 6 shows some empirical (interview) examples reflecting how gender, class, sexuality and ethnicity are articulated in different power positions and strategies. This aim is pursued through portraying some “polyphonous voices” (89) in interview materials on pages 93-97.

The interview extracts show three young women in different positions, engaged in academic studies, union work and other different social contexts where they choose to or are forced to portray their gender, ethnic, sexual and class identities in different ways. Employing the interview examples as a part of their argumentation, the authors claim that if we cannot reform our one-dimensional view on class, gender and ethnicity, the result is only fragmented knowledge of power relations. (90) Gender is transforming and transforms when it encounters class, race and sexuality – therefore also the heteronormativity of our society needs to be contested and problematized (99).

Ch 7 Intersectionality – difference – inequality in “The People’s home” (Folkhemmet) or Sweden in the postcolonial room.

The chapter deals with different areas of society from an intersectional and postcolonial perspective: in terms of e.g. a gender-segregated and etnified labor market, intersectionality is needed in order to make the role of diaspora visible, thus analysing the role of the Swedish nation in the postcolonial room (103).

The authors highlight several societal areas from an intersectional point of view. Examples include access to paid, institutionalized employment as a measurement for fullworthy life (rights) as a citizen (105), labor market in general and the normalization of instability in particular(108). They also problematize the heteronormative family ideals as well as the idea of a society based on a two-parent (heterosexual, cohabiting) model (110). Furthermore, the role of race/ethnicity when being subjected to the sanctions of the legal system is discussed (113), together with the sometimes problematic access to welfare services of the “Folkhem”. Many of the ideas presented in the chapter point to one idea, that of conditional citizenship where access to and membership in society’s institutions is determined by structural dominance which can only be analyzed through an intersectional power analysis.

Ch 8 Intersectional strategies

The aims of the book can be summarized in following: The authors want to challenge existing perceptions on gender relations within feminist theory and pursue critical discussion that includes other theoretical perspectives. Feminist theory is also criticized for lacking depth theoretically, empirically and politically – intersectional perspective is offered as a solution as it raises questions of e.g. gender construction vis-à-vis nation building and highlights the citizens (or non-citizens) differentiated access to social and political rights (123-4).

One of the book’s great concerns is to reflect upon power as intersectional. It is also necessary to connect its constitution to different dimensions, spaces and levels of society, as intersectionality is not a closed theory of oppression and inequality (125). Finally, the authors suggest /summarize four central principles in an intersectional research strategy: Some reflections and questions for further discussion
 * 1) 	Challenge simple/fragmented representations and make multiple identities visible through showing the complexity of categories (class, gender, ethnicity…) (127)
 * 2) 	Connect and articulate the critique against a positivist world order claiming that we have to fragmentize, categorize and separate phenomena in order to be able to understand and talk about how the world and the society are constructed. To connect and articulate is to create spaces/arenas for discussion and collective action. (127-128)
 * 3) 	Raise focus on institutional arenas instead of focusing on already stigmatized groups -> connection between societal structures, institutions and actors (128-129)
 * 4) 	Alternative thinking that challenges hegemonic voices, meaning that power should not just be seen as dominance and hegemony, but also as challenge and resistance. The creation of social identities should be examined through discursive and historical processes, not forgetting the alternative voices that seldom are heard. Finally, ethnocentrism, discriminative structures and exclusion mechanisms within the academia need to be challenged. (129-130)

 * This text evokes in me a problematization of the intertwinedness of politics and academics. I started reading the text as an academic reflection of the concept of intersectionality, but finished the reading as if it was a political pamphlet. Fostering an idea of neutral/independent science is hardly realistic, but I was nevertheless surprised and perplexed by the strong political/ideological undercurrents in the text.The examples are plenty, Black feminism, for instance, is portrayed as an intellectual position in which an academic activity is developed in concert with political activism. (see p. 56 in the book) Thoughts concerning being political/ideological have from time to time been present during my time as an academic scholar. Should one or should one not engage herself in minority debates, political engagements, be prepared to give ideological statements within the field one is studying, and so on? This is a concern I would like to discuss in class.

 * What the book succeeds in discussing is something that has been “disturbing” me in terms of intersectionality, and what perhaps has been a reason for me not fully embracing this kind of analysis as a part of my work. I’m talking about the original base of intersectionality as a part of feminist theory – as well as its focus on inequalities. Not denying the importance of highlighting unequal power relations, I see a risk in the intersectionality perspective focusing too often on “negatives” instead of “possibilities” or adopting an empowerment attitude. Therefore, I am wondering if a change of perspective would demand a maturization of intersectional theory yet not possible. Another part in maturization, as I see it, is to work with intersectional analyses, but starting from other points of departure than feminist theory – pursuing an intersectional analysis means, after all, that the different elements, ethnicity, class, and so on, are balanced against each other.

 * A final comment concerning the book has to do with the limited number of empirical examples in it. A lesser emphasis on empiricism is natural, considering the nature of the text, but at some points I wished that the authors would have reinforced their thoughts and ideas through empirical examples.


text: User:Funandtrvl

title: User:Funandtrvl


text:
User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Egm6341.s11.team4

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/HW1

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/HW2

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/HW3

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/HW4

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/HW5

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/HW6

http://en.wikiversity.org/wiki/User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/HW7

title: User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM


text:
User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/Demo

Hello, World.

$$\int_{a}^{b}f(x)dx$$

title: User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/Demo


text:
User talk:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM

 Hello Egm6341.s11.team4.BM, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.
 * Explore Wikiversity with the links to your left.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.
 * Follow Wikiversity on twitter (http://twiter.com/Wikiversity) and identi.ca (http://identi.ca/group/wikiversity).

You don't need to be an educator to edit. You only need to be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage. See you around Wikiversity! --Ottava Rima (talk) 20:09, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM


text:
HiFi

News

 * Figuring things out

The Sherwood had to be shut down because of a number of noise problems, causing research to move forward to try to exmplain a) how it works and b) how it can be fixed. The research easily explains one of the project amps, a Moviola "Squawk Box," but the Sherwood is to complex. Most recent discussion is here.

The project is underway with the addition of a few significant text contributions and a search for materials are being ordered, and a senior local technologist is offering help. The technologist, a retired teacher with a PhD, confirmed that tube sound is better; he said that he has seen the interferance added by solid-state as "squiggles" along the curves on an oscilloscope, where tubes had shown clear curves. He still seems interested in project-based education, and there would be a significant contribution if we could repeat and document this experiment for this "class."

This is a DIY audio course for those who are interested in restoring vacuum tube, or valve, systems, specifically amplifiers. It is project-oriented, and the simplicity of vacuum tube amplifiers, and other devices, makes the topic idea for electrical engineering novices.

You might have seen AudoFOS. Clearly I am frustrated by the misinformation that is possibly 99% of tube information. So, I was excited to find these explanations (Michael S. McCorquodale) for ideal amplifier design parts (cap, resis, etc); they are part of the Berkeley SPICE emutulation program, which seems like the best reseach direction because it has to make sense--unlike AudioFOS, which is, apparently, self-appointed audio misinformation for marketing.
 * SPICE emulation

HiFi theory

 * 1) Figuring it out
 * 2) Glossary
 * 3) Spice

Most recent strategy
Initially the idea was to build up a glossary describing all the parts (tube, resis, cap, choke, etc) and then assemble them based on what they do. Now it is obvious that "parts" are circuit components, or ideal amps, that presumably can be linked in series linking mic to speaker. This covers one project, the Moviola, which is serial enough to actually give me this idea as soon as I looked at the schematic. The issues surrounding the signal path (frequency, inductance, etc) in apparent relation to current path (NST to PST) create needs that complicate this end-to-end idea such as the push-pull design that splits the signal path; and feedback has not been grokked yet. Also yet to be grokked is ultralinear, which connects the transformer (TOA) internally to the circuit which is said also clarify the sound.

Example of ArtSci
This is appropriate for electrical engineering beginners, because tube devices have fewer components and therefore seem simpler than solid state counterparts in terms of diagram complication. But, as it happens, tube systems require a great deal of theoretical imagination, as their use depends on physics knoweldge, and, as it happens, whole systems theory. What is perhaps most beneficial is that tubes cross the two aspects of intellect: art and science. Historically they represent the art of science, and as musical recording equipment they are the science of art. Comprehending, and implementing them is an art, but it is not subjective as many suggest such as with "pscyhoacoustics." Both aspects are purely objective and touch on physical and artistic reality.
 * What are the different components of an amp?
 * How do they connect together?
 * What do the little things such as the round orange things or the colored block do?

Then a block-model can be created that in turn can be developed into constructed knowledge that can lead to innovation, such as the development of new systems (perhaps built from cast-off equipment), and improvements to create technical inertia.

First project
A Moviola "Squawk Box"

This amp (actually there are two), have easily-obtained tubes (which are here), and is also very easily explained theoretically from the material being developed here.

Second project
Illustrated is an AMI jukebox amp from the 40s that uses generic 6L6 tubes, but has hanging wires. The schematic is here.

I need to know what kind of testing I should do before restoring insulation and crimping the loose metal in the mounts. There are two loose wires coming from the speaker-side transformer (that hang in the breeze w/o insulation), and I cannot imagine what they do as they don't seem to be on the schematic. I am very hopeful for this amp, as it should have a great sound if/when it gets up and running again.

Third project
This will be the revival of a Sherwood 8000 amp, that was one of the last amps built prior to the switch to (much simpler) transistor technology.

Goals for the class
This amp:
 * 1) Identify high-voltage hazards
 * 2) Determine how to test the system prior to startup
 * 3) Fix insulation
 * 4) Identify loose wires
 * 5) Add volume control
 * 6) Find appropriate speaker
 * 7) Power-up

Getting started
Marcus provided material for testing the system: "There are a few things I do when first testing out an amplifier which has not been used for some time.

I check the schematic, as you have done and normally put the wiring back to the standard unless I understand what changes have been made and possibly why. Many valve amplifiers have had a number of modifications before we end up with them many decades later.

I always use a variac to slowly increase the voltage into the amplifier, usually over about five minutes. This prevents blowing up things because the capacitors are not operating correctly. By slowly bringing up the voltage electrolytic capacitors are reformed and will normally operate properly as long as they're not damaged. If you do not have a variac, you can wire a light bulb holder in series with one side of the mains and start off with a 10 W lightbulb in the socket. The light should glow brightly and possibly start dimming a little after a short period of time. Once it is dimmed you can slowly increase the wattage of lightbulbs up to 100 or 200 W. Each lightbulb should slowly dim as the amplifier settles down and then you can go onto the next one. As long as the lightbulbs are not glowing brightly then the amplifier is not drawing too much power and could safely be connected directly to the mains. If by the time you get to somewhere around 50 W, if the light bulb is glowing full brightness then you've got a problem need to figure out why the mains input of the amp is behaving a bit like a short circuit.

I would always fit all of the tubes required into the amplifier because you can't really tell if things are working without everything in place.

Most pieces of electronics over 15 years old, especially if they've been left not operating for some time, require new electrolytic capacitors. I normally replace all of the electrolytics in any old piece of electronics, including semiconductor electronics. Sometimes just doing this sorts out whatever problems and noise that the item may have"

Here is a link to an assembled "dim bulb" tester.

Dave, or dcgillespie, states that this is not so much a HiFi as a PA, or public address, amplifier. The difference, as he says below, is that HiFis limit base to the output, implying that PAs have high bass response. In my opinion, there is no shame in critical base response, as bass is a key component of contemporary music.

"Determining what kind of effort and resources to put into a piece of equipment starts from accurately defining what it is. This amplifier was designed to be a "PA" type of record player amplifier. That is hardly to diminish what it is, as no doubt it did/does it's intended job quite well. But it is also to say that it was not particularly designed to be a high fidelity piece of equipment either, as that term has been established to mean.

As designed, this unit has very minimal tone control facilities, was designed for use with an economic crystal type pickup, has remote volume control capabilities, and has distortion, frequency response, and power bandwidth capabilities and a damping factor in keeping with PA type equipment.

In looking at it from a modification standpoint, you can look at two basic building blocks of the design: The AF amp/tone control section (1st 6SN7), and the power amp section (2nd 6SN7 and 6L6s).

You can certainly place a simple volume control at the input to control high level inputs into the unit. It's value is best determined by what source will be driving it. Use a 100K control for SS sources, and 500K for VT sources. However, a much better approach would be to bypass the AF amp/tone control section all together, use a good outboard mono preamp, and inject it's signal straight into the power amplifier section of this unit. This would bypass all the existing tone switches and crystal pickup equalization built into the unit now, allow for much more versatile use from a more flexible and capable preamplifier, and allow the unit to basically operate as a mono block power amplifier.

In doing that job, one of the biggest differences (i.e. most noticeable differences) between PA type power amplifiers and high fidelity power amplifiers, is that PA amplifiers offer very little electrical damping to the speaker. Therefore, PA type amplifiers often tend to have a larger bass sound than high fidelity amplifiers do. It may be enjoyable, but it is not accurate. However, used with a more flexible preamplifier, this could be addressed to some degree with the bass and/or loudness controls.

Finally, one of the greatest things about this unit is it's size, design, and construction. There's lots of room to work with, it's a straight forward, well proven circuit format, and is a great piece of equipment for you to learn and cut your teeth on. Basically, the sky's the limit as to how much you might want to modify it."

title: HiFi


text:
File:AMI DD amp landscape.JPG

This is a jukebox amp using 3 6l6-G vacuum tubes to create 110 watts of output according to the metal label.

title: File:AMI DD amp landscape.JPG


text: File:AMI DD amp top view.JPG

title: File:AMI DD amp top view.JPG


text: File:AMI DD amp frayed wires.JPG

title: File:AMI DD amp frayed wires.JPG


text:
User:Eml5526.s11.team7

HW 1, Due Wed, 26 Jan 11, 5pm EST

HW 2, Due Wed, 2 Feb 11, 5pm EST

HW 3, Due Wed, 16 Feb 11, 5pm EST

HW 4, Due Wed, 2 Mar 11, 5pm EST

HW 5, Due Wed, 23 Mar 11, 5pm EST

HW 6, Due Wed, 6 Apr 11, 5pm EST

HW 7, Due Wed, 20 Apr 11, 5pm EST

title: User:Eml5526.s11.team7


text: File:Ami dd bottom.JPG

title: File:Ami dd bottom.JPG


text:
User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/Test

$$n=\sqrt{\frac{GM}{a}}$$ $$\mu=\frac{m_{1}+m_{2}}{M}$$

title: User:Egm6341.s11.team4.BM/Test


text:
User talk:Eml5526.s11.team7

 Hello Eml5526.s11.team7, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.
 * Explore Wikiversity with the links to your left.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.
 * Follow Wikiversity on twitter (http://twiter.com/Wikiversity) and identi.ca (http://identi.ca/group/wikiversity).

You don't need to be an educator to edit. You only need to be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage. See you around Wikiversity! --Ottava Rima (talk) 23:43, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Eml5526.s11.team7


text:
User talk:Abyssinia H

 Hello Zachlipton, and welcome to Wikiversity! If you need help, feel free to visit my talk page, or contact us and ask questions. After you leave a comment on a talk page, remember to sign and date; it helps everyone follow the threads of the discussion. The signature icon in the edit window makes it simple. All users are expected to abide by our Privacy policy, Civility policy, and the Terms of Use while at Wikiversity.

To get started, you may

 * Take a guided tour and learn to edit.
 * Visit a (kind of) random project.
 * Browse Wikiversity, or visit a portal corresponding to your educational level: pre-school, primary, secondary, tertiary, non-formal education.
 * Find out about research activities on Wikiversity.
 * Explore Wikiversity with the links to your left.

 * Read an introduction for teachers and find out how to write an educational resource for Wikiversity.
 * Give feedback about your initial observations
 * Discuss Wikiversity issues or ask questions at the colloquium.
 * Chat with other Wikiversitans on #wikiversity-en.
 * Follow Wikiversity on twitter (http://twiter.com/Wikiversity) and identi.ca (http://identi.ca/group/wikiversity).

You don't need to be an educator to edit. You only need to be bold to contribute and to experiment with the sandbox or your userpage. See you around Wikiversity! --Ottava Rima (talk) 23:44, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

title: User talk:Abyssinia H