Journals / Kaygı. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 18 Sayı: 1

Can Language of Thought Hypothesis Provide a Solution to the Problems of Lingusitic Context Dependency in Memory?

Bellekte Dilsel Bağlam Bağımlılığı Sorunlarına Düşünce Dili Hipotezi Bir Çözüm Sunabilir Mi?

Pages
134–153
Publication Date
2019-03-15
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Eventually, we propose Fodor’s Language of Thought Hypothesis as a broader framework which can be helpful in solving these problems and present an alternative explanation for linguistic context dependency in memory.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Information is not encoded and retrieved in isolation in memory.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It is encoded along with its context, and the presence of the same context at retrieval aids memory performance.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Eventually, we propose Fodor’s Language of Thought Hypothesis as a broader framework which can be helpful in solving these problems and present an alternative explanation for linguistic context dependency in memory.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2001 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Bellek · Bağlam Bağımlılığı · Dilsel Bağlam

Abstract

Information is not encoded and retrieved in isolation in memory. It is encoded along with its context, and the presence of the same context at retrieval aids memory performance. This is referred to as context dependency in memory. Environmental, physiological, psychological and linguistic context dependency effects are evident in memory research. A metanalysis was conducted by Smith and Vela in 2001 to investigate the magnitude of environmental context dependency effects in memory. The underlying idea for the hypotheses of the metaanalysis is that in conditions in which one is directed to introspective thought, the magnitude of environmental context dependency effects will be reduced. In the present study, we apply this idea to linguistic context dependency, and reconsider the hypotheses of the metaanalysis. We argue that linguistic context is different from environmental context and present the problems in applications of the hypotheses to linguistic context dependency. Eventually, we propose Fodor’s Language of Thought Hypothesis as a broader framework which can be helpful in solving these problems and present an alternative explanation for linguistic context dependency in memory.

Özet

Bilgi bellekte soyutlanmış bir şekilde kodlanıp geri getirilmez. Bağlamıyla birlikte kodlanır ve aynı bağlamın geri getirilme aşamasında da var olması bellek performansını iyileştirir. Bu durum bellekte bağlam bağımlılığı olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Bellek araştırmalarında çevresel, fizyolojik, psikolojik ve dilsel bağlam bağımlılığı etkileri ortaya konulmuştur. Smith ve Vela tarafından 2001 yılında yapılmış olan bir metaanaliz, bellekte çevresel bağlam bağımlılığı etkisini incelemiştir. Metaanalizin hipotezlerinin ardında yatan düşünce, çevresel bağlam bağımlılığı etkisinin, içgörüsel düşünceye yönelmenin söz konusu olduğu durumlarda azalacağıdır. Bu çalışmada, bu düşünce dilsel bağlam bağımlılığına uygulanarak metaanalizin hipotezleri bir kez daha yorumlanmıştır. Dilsel bağlamın çevresel bağlamdan farklı olduğu iddia edilerek hipotezlerin dilsel bağlama uyarlanmasında karşılaşılan sorunlar dile getirilmiştir. Son olarak, Fodor’un Düşünce Dili Hipotezi bu problemleri çözmeye yardımcı olabilecek genel bir düşünsel çerçeve olarak sunulmuş ve bellekte dilsel bağlam bağımlığı için yeni bir açıklama ortaya atılmıştır.

🔖

Cite This Article

İKİER, S., GÖKEL, N. (2019). Can Language of Thought Hypothesis Provide a Solution to the Problems of Lingusitic Context Dependency in Memory?. Kaygı. Bursa Uludağ Üniversitesi Fen-Edebiyat Fakültesi Felsefe Dergisi, Cilt: 18 Sayı: 1, 134–153. https://ajindex.com/articles/908592

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. ANNAS, Julia (1997). “Aristotle on Memory and the Self”, Essays on Aristotle’s De Anima, ed. Martha Craven Nussbaum & Amélie Rorty, pp. 297-311, Oxford: Clarendon Press.
  2. ANTONY, V. Michael (1991). “Fodor and Pylyshyn on Connectionism”, Minds and Machines, 1(3): 321-341.
  3. ARISTOTELES (2007). “De Memoria et Reminiscentia,” Aristotle on Memory and Recollection: Text, Translation, Interpretation, and Reception in Western Scholasticism, trans. & ed. David Bloch, Leiden; Boston: Brill Publishing. BANICH, Marie T. (2009). “Executive Function: The Search for an Integrated Account”, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18(2): 89-94.
  4. BERNECKER, Sven & Kourken MICHAELIAN (eds.) (2017). The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Memory. London: Routledge. BOWER, Gordon H.; MONTEIRO, Kenneth P.; Stephen G. GILLIGAN (1978). “Emotional Mood as a Context for Learning and Recall”, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 17(5): 573-585.
  5. FODOR, Jerry A. (1975).
  6. The Language of Thought, Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
  7. FODOR, Jerry A. & Zenon W. PYLYSHYN (1988). “Connectionism and Cognitive Architecture”, Cognition, 28(1-2): 3-71.
  8. GLENBERG, Arthur M. (1997). “What Memory is for”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20(1): 1-19.
  9. GODDEN, Duncan R. & Alan D. BADDELEY (1975). “Context‐dependent Memory in Two Natural Environments: On Land and Underwater”, British Journal of Psychology, 66(3): 325-331.
  10. GOODWIN, Donald W., et al. (1969). “Alcohol and Recall: State-dependent Effects in Man”, Science, 163(3873): 1358-1360.
  11. HERNANDEZ, Arturo E. & Iliana REYES (2002). “Within-and Between-Language Priming Differ: Evidence from Repetition of Pictures in Spanish-English Bilinguals”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 28.4: 726. KALISH, D.; MONTAGUE, R. & G. MAR, (1992). Logic: Techniques of Formal Reasoning, London: Oxford University Press.
  12. LOCKE, John (2017). İnsan Anlığı Üzerine Bir Deneme, çev. Vehbi Hacıkadiroğlu, İstanbul,
  13. Kabalcı Yayınevi.
  14. MALCOLM, Norman (1970) “Memory and Representation,” Noûs, 4(1): 59-70.
  15. MARIAN, Viorica & Ulric NEISSER (2000). “Language-dependent Recall of Autobiographical Memories”, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129(3): 361. MICHELIAN, Kourken & John SUTTON (2017). “Memory”, Erişim Tarihi: 15.12.2018, (https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/memory/).
  16. PLATON (2009). Devlet, çev. Sebahatttin Eyüpoğlu & M. Ali Cimcoz. Ankara: Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
  17. PLATON (2012). Phaidon, çev. Nazile Kala