Si queremos saber cómo sopla el viento podemos mirar la arena. Pensar el desarrollo psicológico observando el movimiento
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Bibliografía Akita, K. (2009), A Grammar of Sound-Symbolic Words in Japanese: Theoretical Approaches to Iconic and Lexical Properties of Mimetics, PH. D. dissertation, Kobe University. Asano, et al. (2011), “Preverbal infants’s sensitivity to sound symbolism: An EEG study”, Neuroscience Research, 71S e108-e415. —. (2015), “Sound symbolism scaffolds language development in preverbal infants”, Cortex, 63, pp. 196-205. Bar-On, D. (2004), “Semantic Eliminativism and the ‘Theory’-Theory of linguistic understanding”, en: Ezcurdia, M. et al., New Essays in Philosophy of Language and Mind, Canadian Journal of Philosophy, Calgary: Univ. of Calgary Press, pp. 159-200. —. (2013), “Origins of Meaning: Must We ‘Go Gricean’?”, Mind & Language, 28, 3, pp. 342-375. Bateson, M. C. (1979), “The epigenesis of conversational interaction: A personal account of research development”, en: Bullowa, M. (ed.), Before speech: The beginning of human communication, London: Cambridge University Press, pp. 63-77. Bavelas, J. (2007), “Face-to-face Dialogue as a Micro-social Context”, en: Levy, E., S. Duncan y J. Casell, Gesture and the dynamical dimension of language, Essays in honor of David McNeill, Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Co., pp. 127-146. Beattie, G. (2003), Visible Thought: The New Language or Body Language, Londres: Routledge. Bergen, B. K. (2004), “The psychological reality of phonaesthemes”, Language, 80: 290-311. Berlin, B. (1994), “Evidence for pervasive synesthetic sound symbolism in ethnozoological nomenclature”, en: Hinton, L., J. Nichols y J. Ohala (eds.), Sound Symbolism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 76-93. Bickerton, D. (2004), “Mothering plus vocalization doesn’t equal language”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 4, pp. 504-505. Bolinger, D. R. (1950), “Assonance and Morpheme Analysis, Word, 23, pp. 117-134. Bortfeld, H. (2004), “Which came first: Infants learning language or motherese?”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 4, pp. 505-506. Bouissac, P. (2004), “How plausible is the motherese hypothesis?”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 4, pp. 506-507. Bråten, S. y C. Trevarthen (2007), “From infant intersubjectivity and participant movements to simulation and conversation in cultural common sense”, en: Bråten, S. (ed.), On Being Moved. From Mirror Neurons to Empathy, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamin Publishing Company, pp. 21-34. Burnham, D., Ch. Kitamura y U. Vollmer-Conna (2002), “What’s new, Pussycat? On Talking to Babies and Animals”, Science, 296 (5572), p. 1435. Cassidy, K. W., M. H. Kelly y L. J. Sharoni (1999), “Inferring gender from name phonology”, J Exp Psychol Gen, 128, pp. 362-381. Chen, Y-C. et al. (2016), “When ‘Bouba’ equals ‘Kiki’: Cultural commonalities and cultural differences in sound-shape correspondences”, Scientific Reports, 6 26681. Chomsky, N. (1975), Reflexiones sobre el lenguaje, Barcelona: Ariel. Davidson, D. (2001), “La aparición del pensamiento”, en: Davidson, D., Subjetivo, Intersubjetivo, Objetivo, Madrid: Cátedra, pp. 176-190. De Jaegher, H., E. Di Paolo y S. Gallagher (2010), “Can social interaction constitute social cognition?”, Trends in Cognitive Science, 14, 10, pp. 441- 447. Dissanayake, E. (2000), “Antecedents of the temporal arts in early mother-infant interaction”, en: Wallin, N. L., B. Merker y S. Brown (eds.), The Origins of Music, Cambridge: MIT Press, pp. 389-410. —. (2004), “Motherese is but one part of a ritualized, multimodal, temporally organized, affiliative interaction”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 4, pp. 512-513. Elias, J. Z. y S. Gallagher (2014), “Word as Object: A View of Language at Hand”, Journal of Cognition and Culture, 14, pp. 373-384. Falk, D. (2004), “Pre-linguistic evolution in early hominins: Whence Motherese?”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 4, pp. 491-541. Fay, N., S. Garrod, L. Roberts y N. Swoboda (2010), “The Interactive Evolution of Human Communication Systems”, Cognitive Science, 34, 3, pp. 351-386. Fernald, A. (1985), “Four-months-old infants prefer to listen to motherese”, Infant Behavior and Development, Vol. 8, 2, pp. 181-195. —. (1989), “Intonation and communicative intent in mother’s speech to infants: is the melody the message?”, Child Development, 60, pp. 1497- 1510. —. (1991), “Prosody in speech to children: Prelinguistic and Linguistic Functions”, Annals of Child Development, 8, pp. 43-80. Fernald, A. et al. (1989), “A cross-language study of prosodic modifications in mothers and fathers’s speech to preverbal infants”, J. Child Lang., 16, pp. 477-501. Fernald, A. y C. Mazzie (1991), “Prosody and focus in speech to infants and adults”, Developmental Psychology, 27, 2, pp. 209-221. Fisher, A. (1999), “What, if anything, is phonological iconicity?”, en: Nänny, M. y O. Fisher (eds.), Form Miming Meaning: Iconicity in Language and Literature, Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing, pp. 123-133. Fitch, T. (2010), The Evolution of Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Gallagher, S. (2009), “Two Problems of Intersubjectivity”, Journal of Consciousness Studies, 16, 6-8, pp. 289-308. —. (2013), “When the problem of inter-subjectivity becomes the solution”, en: Legerstee, M., D. Haley y M. H. Bornstein, The Infant Mind, Origins of the Social Brain, New York, London: The Guildford Press, pp. 48-74. Gallagher, S. y D. Hutto (2008), “Understanding others through primary interaction and narrative practice”, en: Zlatev, J. J., et al. (eds.), The Shared Mind: Perspectives on Intersubjectivity, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company, pp. 17-38. Gogate, L. J., L. E. Bahrick y J. D. Watson (2000), “A study of multimodal motherese: The role of temporal synchrony between verbal labels and gestures”, Child Development, 71, 4, pp. 878-894. Goldin-Meadow, S. (2007), “Pointing sets the stage for learning language – and creating language”, Child Development, 78, 3, pp. 741-745. Gratier, M. y C. Trevarthen (2008), “Musical Narrative and Motives for Culture in Mother-Infant Vocal Interaction”, Journal of Consciousness Studies, 15, 10-11, pp. 122-158. Hauser, M. D., N. Chomsky y T. Fitch (2002), “The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It, and How Did It Evolve?”, Science, 298, pp. 1569- 1579. Imai, M. et al. (2008), “Sound symbolism facilitates early verb learning”, Cognition, 109, 1, pp. 54-65. Imai, M. y S. Kita (2014), “The sound symbolism bottstrapping hypothesis for language acquisition and language evolution”, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B, 369: 20130298. Irvine, E. (2016), “Method and Evidence: Gesture and Iconicity in the Evolution of Language”, Mind & Language, 31, 2, pp. 221-247. Iverson, J. M. (2010), “Multimodality in infancy: vocal-motor and speech-gesture coordinations in typical and atypical development”, Enfance, 3, pp. 257-274. Iverson, J. M. y S. Goldin-Meadow (1998), “Why people gesture when they speak?, Nature, 396, p. 228. Iverson, J. M. et al. (1999), “Gesturing in Mother-Infant Interactions”, Cognitive Development, 14, 1, pp. 57-75. Jespersen, O. (1921), Language: Its Nature, Development, and Origin, London: Allen and Unwin. Karmiloff, K. y A. Karmiloff Smith (2001), Pathways to language: From Fetus to Adolescent, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Kohler, W. (1929), Gestalt Psychology, New York: Liverlight Pub. Corporation. Korta, K. (2002), “Hacer Filosofía del Lenguaje”, Revista de Filosofía, 27, 2, pp. 337-359. Le Cron Forster, M. (1978), “The symbolic structure of primordial language”, en: Washburn, Sherwood L. y Elizabeth R. McCown (eds.), Human Evolution: Biosocial Perspectives, Menlo Park, CA: Benjamin/ Cummings, pp. 77-121. Legerstee, M. (1990), “Infant use of multimodal information to imitate speech sounds”, Infant Behavior and Development, 13, 3, pp. 343-354. Legerstee, M., D. Haley y M. H. Bornstein (2013), The Infant Mind. Origins of the Social Brain, New York, London: The Guildford Press. Levinson, S. C. y J. Holler (2014), “The origin of human multi-modal communication”, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369, 20130302. (doi:10.1098/ rstb.2013.0302). Levy, E., S. Duncan y J. Casell (2007), “The dynamical dimension of language”, en: Levy, E., S. Duncan y J. Casell, Gesture and the dynamical dimension of language, Essays in honor of David McNeill, Amsterdam: John Benjamin Publishing Co., pp. 3-12. Malloch, S. N. (1999), “Mothers and infants and communicative musicality”, Musicae Scientiae, 1999-2000, Special Issue: Rhythm, musical narrative, and the origins of human communication, pp. 29-57. McLuhan, M. (1964), Comprender los medios de comunicación. Las extensiones del ser humano, Barcelona: Paidós. McNeill, D. (2000), Language and Gesture, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. —. (2005), Gesture and Thought, Chicago: University of Chicago Press. —. (2012), How Language Began: Gesture and Speech in Human Evolution, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Mehler, J. et al. (1988), “A precursor of language acquisition in young infants”, Cognition, 29, 2, pp. 143-178. Messinger, D. S. y A. Fogel (1998), “Give and take: The development of conventional infant gestures”, Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 44, 4, pp. 566- 590. Mithen, S. (2005), Los neandertales cantaban rap. Los orígenes de la música y el lenguaje, Barcelona: Crítica. Monaghan, P. et al. (2014), “How arbitrary is language?”, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369: 20130299. Monaghan P., K. Mattock y P. Walker (2012), “The role of sound symbolism in word learning”, J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn., 38, 5, pp. 1152-1164. (doi:10.1037/ a0027747) Nelson, D. G. K. et al. (1989), “How the prosodic cues in motherese might assist in language learning”, Journal of Child Language, 16, 1, pp. 55-68. Nygaard, L. C. et al. (2009a), “The semantics of prosody: acoustic and perceptual evidence of prosodic correlates to word meaning”, Cog. Sci., 33, 1, pp. 127-146. —. (2009b), “Sound to meaning correspondences facilitate word learning”, Cognition, 112, 1, pp. 181-186. Ohala, J. J. (1994), “The frequency code underlies the sound-symbolic use of voice pitch”, en: Hinton, L., J. Nichols y J. J. Ohala (eds.), Sound Symbolism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 325-347. Orr, E. y R. Geva (2015), “Symbolic play and language development”, Infant Behavior and Development, 38, pp. 147-161. Overgaard, S. y J. Michael (2015), “The Interactive Turn in Social Cognition Research: A Critique”, Philosophical Psychology, 28, 2, pp. 160-183. Ozturk, O., M. Krehm y A. Vouloumanos (2013), “Sound symbolism in infancy: evidence for sound-shape cross-modal correspondences in 4-month-olds”, J. Exp. Child Psychol., 114, pp. 173-186. Parault, S. J. y P. J. Schwanenflugel (2006), “Sound Symbolism: A piece in a puzzle of word learning”, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 35, 4, pp. 329-351. Peña, M., J. Mehler y M. Nespor (2011), “The Role of Audiovisual Processing in Early Conceptual Development”, Psychol. Sci., 2, 11, pp. 1419-1421. Perniss P., R. L. Thompson y G. Vigliocco (2010), “Iconicity as a general property of language: evidence from spoken and signed languages”, Front. Psychology 1, 227. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00227. Perniss, P. y G. Vigliocco (2014), “The bridge of iconicity: from the world of experience to the experience of language”, Philos. Tran. R. Soc. Lond. B Biol., 369(1654):20140179. Petito, L. A. et al. (2004), “Baby hands that move to the rhythm of language: hearing babies acquiring sign languages babble silently on the hands”, Cognition, 93, 1, pp. 43-73. Pinker, S. (1994), El instinto del lenguaje, Madrid: Alianza. Premack, D. y G. Woodruff (1978), “Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4, pp. 515-526. Ramachandran, V. S. y E. M. Hubbard (2001), “Synaesthesia – A Window Into Perception, Thought and Language”, Journal of Consciousness Studies, 8, 12, pp. 3-34. Sapir, E. (1929), “A study in phonetic symbolism”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, pp. 225-239. Saussure, F. (1916), Curso de Lingüística General, Buenos Aires: Losada, 1945. Scotto, C. (2002), “Intreracción y atribución mental: la perspectiva de la segunda persona”, Análisis Filosófico, 22, 2, pp. 135-152. Sidhu, D. M. y P. M. Pexman (2015), “What’s in a Name? Sound Symbolism and Gender in First Names”, PLoS ONE, 10(5): e0126809, doi: 10.1371/1/journal.pone.0126809. Sinha, C. y C. Rodríguez (2008), “Language and the signifying object: From convention to imagination”, en: Zlatev et al. (eds.), The Shared Mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity, John Benjamins Publishing Co., pp. 357-378. Small, M. F. (1998), Our Babies, Ourselves: How Biology and Culture Shape the Way We Parent, New York: Anchor Books. Snow, C. E. (1977), “The development of the conversation between mothers and babies”, J. Child Lang, 4, pp. 1-22. Soderstrom, M. (2007), “Beyond babytalk: Re-evaluating the nature and content of speech input to preverbal infants”, Developmental Review, 27, pp. 501-532. Sterelny, K. (2012), The Evolved Apprentice: How Evolution Made Humans Unique, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Thompson, R. L. et al. (2012), “The Road to Language Learning is Iconic: Evidence from British Sign Language”, Psychological Science, 23, 12, pp. 1-6. Tomasello, M. (2000), “A usage-based approach to child language acquisition”, en Bavin, E. L. (ed.), The Cambridge Handbook of Child Language, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 69-87. —. (2003), Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. —. (2008), La evolución de la comunicación humana, Buenos Aires: Katz, 2013. Trainor, L. J., C. M. Austin y R. N. Desjardins (2000), “Is infant-directed speech prosody a result of the vocal expression of emotion?”, Psychological Science, 11, pp. 188-195. Trevarthen, C. (1974), “Conversations with a two-month-old”, New Scientist, 2 May, pp. 230-235. —. (1979), “Communication and cooperation in early infancy: A description of primary intersubjectivity”, en: Bullowa, M. (ed.), Before speech, Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 321-348. —. (1999), “Musicality and the intrinsic motive pulse: Evidence from human psychobiology and infant communication”, Musicae Scientiae, 1999-2000, pp. 155-215. —. (2002), “Making sense of infants making sense”, Intellectica, 1, 34, pp. 161-188. —. (2005a), “Action and emotion in development of the human self, its sociability and cultural intelligence: Why infants have feelings like ours”, en: Nadel, J. y D. Muir (eds.), Emotional development, Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, pp. 61-91. —. (2005b), “First things first: infants make good use of the sympathetic rhythm of imitation, without reason or language”, Journal of Child Psychotherapy, 31, 1, pp. 91-113. —. (2008a), “Shared minds and the science of fiction. Why theories will differ”, en: Zlatev, J. et al. (eds.), The Shared Mind: Perspectives on Intersubjectivity, Amsterdam/Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company. —. (2008b), “The musical art of infant conversation: Narrating in the time of sympathetic experience, without rational interpretation, before words”, en: Imberty, M. y M. Gratier (eds.), Musicae Scientiae, Special Issue: “Narrative in music and interaction”, pp. 15-46. Trevarthen, C. y J. Delafield-Butt, (2013), “Biology of Shared Experience and Language Development: Regulations for the Intersubjective Life of Narratives”, en: Legerstee, M., D. W. Haley y M. H. Bornstein (eds.), The infant mind: origins of the social brain, New York, London: The Guilford Press, pp. 167-199. Trevarthen, C. y K. J. Aitken (2001), “Infant Intersubjectivity: Research, Theory, and Clinical Applications”, J. Child Psychol. Psychiat., 42, 1, pp. 3-48. Trevarthen, C. y P. Hubley (1978), “Secondary intersubjectivity: Confidence, confiding and acts of meaning in the first year”, en: Lock, A. (ed.), Action, gesture and symbol: The emergence of language, London: Academic Press, pp. 183-229. Tsur, R. (2005), “Size-sound symbolism revisited”, Journal of Pragmatics, 38, pp. 905-924. Tylén, K. et al. (2010), “Language as a Tool for Interacting Minds”, Mind & Language, 25, 1, pp. 3-29. Vigliocco, G., P. Perniss y D. Vinson (2014), “Language as a multimodal phenomenon: implications for language learning, processing and evolution”, Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 369: 20130292. Disponible en: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0292 [19/05/2017]. Vygotsky, L. (1978), Mind in Society. The Development of Higher Psychological Processes, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Walker, P. et al. (2010), “Preverbal Infants’ Sensitivity to Synaesthetic Cross-Modality Correspondences”, Psychol. Sci., 21, pp. 21-25. Wittgenstein, L. (1953), Investigaciones Filosóficas, México: UNAM. —. (1967), Zettel, México: UNAM, 1985. —. (1969), Sobre la certeza, Caracas: Tiempo Nuevo. —. (1980), Observaciones sobre la filosofía de la psicología, Vols. I y II, UNAM: México. Zlatev, J. (2008), “The co-evolution of intersubjectivity and bodily mimesis”, en: Zlatev et al. (eds.), The Shared Mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity, John Benjamins Publishing Co., pp. 215-44. Zlatev, J. et al. (2008), “Intersubjectivity: What makes us human?”, en: Zlatev et al. (eds.), The Shared Mind: Perspectives on intersubjectivity, John Benjamins Publishing Co., pp. 1-14.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.072 | 0.042 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it