LB095-097惠珍 done on Jan 5’09
The order of corrected neuronal events may yet be different from the three orders discussed so far, although we are entering a realm in which we are almost entirely reduced t speculation. The reason for suspecting a neuronal firing order that is different from the order of motor events is the anatomy of the peripheral nerves that innervate the respective muscle. Figure 3.8 shows diagrammatically the course of some of the nerves that are relevant to this discussion. There is considerable differences in the length of these nerves; notice especially the circuitous course of the recurrent nerve which is more than three times conduction time of impulses does not merely depend upon the distance of peripheral nerve that must be traversed but also upon the diameter of the nerve fibers (the smaller the fiber. the slower the condition). It is possible to measure the average length of the peripheral nerves and also to make microscopic studies of cross sections of these nerves and to measure the size of the diameters of fibers. This has been done (Auriti,1954; Krmpotic, 1958 and 1959), and it has been found that nerves involved in speech muscle innervation vary considerably in their composition of a nerve in terms of a caliber spectrum (a statistical frequency distribution of diameter sizes). Table 3.4 shows a few figures taken from the work of Krmpotic, indicating that there is always some overlap in the distributions but that there are nevertheless, marked differences among the various nerves. It is interesting that the the longest nerve, the recurrent, has statically the smallest fibers which thus aggravates the timing problem, introducing delays from two independent factors.
Kirmpotic, who has been specially interested in the problem of differential innervation time, has computed so-called neuromuscular indexes for all major muscles involved in speech. These indexes are simply the ratio of the average length of the nerve to the mean size of fiber diameter. Since there is still some uncertainty about the physiological interpretation of these determinations, we need not be concerned here with the details. Suffice it ti say that the anatomy of the nerves suggests that innervation time for intrinsic laryngeal muscles may easily be up to 30 msec longer than innervation time for muscles in and around the oral cavity.
Considering now that some articulatory events may last as short a period as 20 msec, it becomes a reasonable assumption that the firing order in the brain stem may at times be different from the order of events occurring at the periphery.
A concrete example will clarify the point. Let us take the words obtain and optimal. If we make spectrograms of these words and measure and durations of the first three phones, we get values such as these:
Duration of Duration of
First vowel the labial stop the aspiration
Obtain 90 msec 170 msec 50 msec
Optimal 110 msec 160 msec 20 msec
Among the acoustic cues for the discussion of certain voiced and unvoiced stops are the duration of the preceding vowel and the duration of the silence during which the lips are closed. Our perceptual acuity is highly sensitized to these temoral factores and , by the same token, our motor coordination is precise enough to times articulation with sufficient presision to bring about these distinctions. In the previous example the duration of the first vowel differs by only 20 msec and that of the labial stops by only 10 msec, and in the second instant, the duration of the aspiration (the only part of the /t/ we hear)lasts only 20 msec. Recent investigation carried out at the Haskins Laboratories have shown that a great variety of phonetic distinctions are entirely dependent upon timing factors of onset, duration, and cessation of voice where magnitudes well below 20 msec are od the essence. (See also the time relationships in the data reported on by Liberman, Delattre, Cooper, 1952; Schatz, 1954; and Liberman, Delatrre, Gerstman, and Cooper, 1956)
It is clear that there must be considerable precision in timing if laryngeal mechanisms are to integrated with oral ones. IN addition, there are hundreds of muscular adjustments to be made every second (that is a new neuromuscular event every few milliseconds) from which we begin to see the magnitude of the timing-ordering problem.
In view of the above we are hardly surprised that we may encounter patients with lesions in the central nervous system who have difficulty in keeping elements of speech and language in the right order. An important theoretical discussion on this subject was contributed by Jakobson and Halle(1956). Patients who have this problem speak very slowly and indicate to the examiner that speaking constitutes a great effort of concentration: the behave as if they had to “think of the right order.” Even so, they will constantly mix up individual sounds; is may become si, task may become taks, syllable may become syballel and they are very hard to understand.*Generally, they tend to anticipate sounds that should come at a later time. The difficulty may occur in every other word, since their rate of production is markedly slow down. The improper anticipation of sounds is usually nit the patient’s only problem of ordering. He will also show a pathological propensity for spoonerism, entire words and phrase s being switched around or produced in advance. The patient’s intention is frequently made known to the examiner because the patient is fully aware if his difficulty and can often make a fresh start and repeat the intended sentence once more and correctly . Ina sever cases the corrected sentence will show new mistakes.
about graduate school,knees(physical therapy), Toastmasters life, photo, and job.
2008年11月26日 星期三
2008年11月20日 星期四
2008年11月12日 星期三
[生物] translation LBT378惠珍
LBT378惠珍 updated on Dec 08
《Biological Foundations of Language》Ch9: Toward a biological of language development
Assigned reading: Page 378
1. Typing
(11) The raw material from which the individual synthesizes building blocks for his own language development cannot be the cause of the developing structure as evidenced by the autochthonous beginnings in the infant’s language acquisition. Primitive stages of language are simply too different from adult language to be regarded as a direct mirroring of the input. Nor is there any evidence that the adults surrounding the child are the causative or shaping agents that determine language onset or his course of development ( see discussion of need as explanation in Chapter Four and of language teaching in Chapter Seven). Purposiveness cannot, logically, be the mainspring for language development.
Page 377～略
邏輯上來說，『有目的性』不可能是語言發展的主軸。
(12) Social settings may be required as a trigger that sets off a reaction. Perhaps a better metaphor still is the concept of resonance. In a given state of maturation, exposure to adult language behavior has an excitatory effect upon the actualization process much the way a certain frequency begins to vibrate in the presence of the sound. In the case of language onset, the energy required for the resonance is, in a sense, supplied by the individual himself; if the trigger-analogy is preferred, we might say that he unwinds himself. The resonance analogy, on the other hand, illustrates more vividly how slight variations in the frequencies that impinge on the resonator affect the quality or nature of the resonance; it is comparable to the child’s hearing of French resulting in his speaking of French, each natural language being a sleeted frequency band from the limited possible frequency range that is capable of eliciting resonance. Once the critical period during which resonance may occur is outgrown, one language is firmly established, and exposure to new and different natural language is no longer resonated to.
社會環境也许需要一種引信（觸發器）來引起反應。 或許，共鳴，仍然是一個比較好的引信的比喻。在實體化的過程中，在任何一個特定的成熟性狀態下，對於暴露在成人言语行为之中，仍是有一定的刺激、引發的作用在。其發生的頻率，就像，對於一些特別的共鳴器而言，在實體化的過程中，有些引發的作用。這種共鳴器，就是一種在聲音出現時，開始振動。
Thus the propagation and maintenance of language behavior in the species are not comparable to cultural tradition which is handed down from generation to generation to generation. The individual does not serve as a passive vehicle or channel through which information is transmitted; instead, he is am autonomous unit constituted in very much the same way as other units around him, ready to behave in the same fashion as they do. His behavior is activated by social contact, and there is some superficial adaptation to the structure of their behavior, but it may be well to remember that he can only function if he can synthesize (recreate might be another word) the entire language mechanism out of the raw material available to him. The raw material is of no use unless it can be broken down as food proteins are broken down into amino-acids and build up again into the pattern of his in-dwelling latent structure. Thus, the individual is seen as functioning by virtue of his own power supply, so to speak; he constructs language by himself (provided ha has the raw material to do with it), and the natural history of his development provides for mechanism by which he will harmonize his function with that if other equally autonomously functioning individuals around him; the outer form of his language will have the outer form of the language of his native community.
在語言開始的時候，就某個程度來說，是每個獨立的個體來提供所需的要震動的能量 ; 如果是採用『共振類比的』方式，我們就可以說：其實是這個個體『解開』這『引信』（能量）。從另一個角度來說，『共振類比』可以很明顯的顯示出：各種打在震動器的不同頻率，非常細微的震動，這種細微的震動，有可能會影響其震動器的品質，或是震動器本身。這種方式，也可用來解釋法國小孩的聽力影響說話的例子。每一種自然語言，都有一種可選擇的、有限的頻率，即『頻率波段』，在這個波段範圍內，就可以『引起』共振。但，曾經有段時間，是共振『過大的』，特別是結構很完整的語言，或是對於『沒有震動反應的』新奇而又不同的自然語言。所以，在各物種之間，語言行為的傳播和維護，是和世代相傳的文化不相容的。 人類並不是『被動的』資訊傳播的器具或是頻道; 反而是，獨立自主的單位，其組成的方式，就像其他身邊的『單位』一樣，會在同一種『流行趨勢』之下。社會接觸影響著人類的行為，也有一些對於人類行為結構的『人為改變』，也許比較好的解說方式是：人類如可能從身邊緣使的材料中，『合成出』整個語言機制：即『重新創造出其他的字』。除非，這些『原始的材料』像蛋白質一樣能夠被分解成氨基酸，而且能再重新組成『潛在的生活樣子』，不然的話，這些原始的材料，是沒用的！所以，看來是可以這麼說：人類是依他自己的力量來運作語言，即：『自己建構語言』（假使有原始的材料提供給他的話）。人類語言的歷史發展，也提供了人類對於環境，自然運作的結果：人類的『外部語言形式』，對於本身的社群來說，是會造成其他的『外部形式』語言。
(13) Even though biological constitution of the individual is a essential replica of its progenitors, there are , naturally, individual variations. In fact, there are two distinct levels that are relevant to language: in the formation of the latent structure and in the actualization process from latent to realized structure. The former may be due to variations in the maturational coursed; the latter is primary due to variations in peripheral function and structure such as the vocal tract or the ears. Variations on these two levels explain the main facts about language constancies, language change, and language universals.
雖然，很自然的，人類的生物組成形式，有其基本複製先前祖先的能力， 意即：人類獨立無二的變化。
2. Definition:
Actualization: 實施Resonator:共鳴器,共鳴體,共振器Excitatory:刺激的;興奮的Resonance:共振Un-wind:打開Impinge: 打、撞Band: (無線電的)波段,頻帶Out-grow: 長得比...快(或大、高)Propagation: 增殖,繁殖,廣傳Autonomous: 獨立
amino-acids: 氨基; 氨基的+酸
In-dwelling latent： Dwelling：生活的Latent：潛伏性的,隱藏的隱約的指印Progenitor: 祖先,先輩,原著
Replica: 複製品
LBT378惠珍
3.Translation
邏輯上來說，『有目的性』不可能是語言發展的主軸。
社會環境也许需要一種引信（觸發器）來引起反應。 或許，共鳴，仍然是一個比較好的引信的比喻。在實體化的過程中，在任何一個特定的成熟性狀態下，對於暴露在成人言语行为之中，仍是有一定的刺激、引發的作用在。其發生的頻率，就像，對於一些特別的共鳴器而言，在實體化的過程中，有些引發的作用。這種共鳴器，就是一種在聲音出現時，開始振動。
在語言開始的時候，就某個程度來說，是每個獨立的個體來提供所需的要震動的能量 ; 如果是採用『共振類比的』方式，我們就可以說：其實是這個個體『解開』這『引信』（能量）。從另一個角度來說，『共振類比』可以很明顯的顯示出：各種打在震動器的不同頻率，非常細微的震動，這種細微的震動，有可能會影響其震動器的品質，或是震動器本身。這種方式，也可用來解釋法國小孩的聽力影響說話的例子。每一種自然語言，都有一種可選擇的、有限的頻率，即『頻率波段』，在這個波段範圍內，就可以『引起』共振。但，曾經有段時間，是共振『過大的』，特別是結構很完整的語言，或是對於『沒有震動反應的』新奇而又不同的自然語言。
所以，在各物種之間， 語言行為的傳播和維護，是和世代相傳的文化不相容的。 人類並不是『被動的』資訊傳播的器具或是頻道; 反而是，獨立自主的單位，其組成的方式，就像其他身邊的『單位』一樣，會在同一種『流行趨勢』之下。 社會接觸影響著人類的行為，也有一些對於人類行為結構的『人為改變』，也許比較好的解說方式是：人類如可能從身邊緣使的材料中，『合成出』整個語言機制：即『重新創造出其他的字』。除非，這些『原始的材料』像蛋白質一樣能夠被分解成氨基酸，而且能再重新組成『潛在的生活樣子』，不然的話，這些原始的材料，是沒用的！所以，看來是可以這麼說：人類是依他自己的力量來運作語言，即：『自己建構語言』（假使有原始的材料提供給他的話）。人類語言的歷史發展，也提供了人類對於環境，自然運作的結果：人類的『外部語言形式』，對於本身的社群來說，是會造成其他的『外部形式』語言。
雖然，很自然的，人類的生物組成形式，有其基本複製先前祖先的能力， 意即：人類獨立無二的變化。
4. Related links
Resonance
Biological Naturalism
語言機制
浅说语言学在物理教学中的渗透
物理 wiki
《女科學家群像 系列》葉乃裳 揚名國際物理界
《Biological Foundations of Language》Ch9: Toward a biological of language development
Assigned reading: Page 378
1. Typing
(11) The raw material from which the individual synthesizes building blocks for his own language development cannot be the cause of the developing structure as evidenced by the autochthonous beginnings in the infant’s language acquisition. Primitive stages of language are simply too different from adult language to be regarded as a direct mirroring of the input. Nor is there any evidence that the adults surrounding the child are the causative or shaping agents that determine language onset or his course of development ( see discussion of need as explanation in Chapter Four and of language teaching in Chapter Seven). Purposiveness cannot, logically, be the mainspring for language development.
Page 377～略
邏輯上來說，『有目的性』不可能是語言發展的主軸。
(12) Social settings may be required as a trigger that sets off a reaction. Perhaps a better metaphor still is the concept of resonance. In a given state of maturation, exposure to adult language behavior has an excitatory effect upon the actualization process much the way a certain frequency begins to vibrate in the presence of the sound. In the case of language onset, the energy required for the resonance is, in a sense, supplied by the individual himself; if the trigger-analogy is preferred, we might say that he unwinds himself. The resonance analogy, on the other hand, illustrates more vividly how slight variations in the frequencies that impinge on the resonator affect the quality or nature of the resonance; it is comparable to the child’s hearing of French resulting in his speaking of French, each natural language being a sleeted frequency band from the limited possible frequency range that is capable of eliciting resonance. Once the critical period during which resonance may occur is outgrown, one language is firmly established, and exposure to new and different natural language is no longer resonated to.
社會環境也许需要一種引信（觸發器）來引起反應。 或許，共鳴，仍然是一個比較好的引信的比喻。在實體化的過程中，在任何一個特定的成熟性狀態下，對於暴露在成人言语行为之中，仍是有一定的刺激、引發的作用在。其發生的頻率，就像，對於一些特別的共鳴器而言，在實體化的過程中，有些引發的作用。這種共鳴器，就是一種在聲音出現時，開始振動。
Thus the propagation and maintenance of language behavior in the species are not comparable to cultural tradition which is handed down from generation to generation to generation. The individual does not serve as a passive vehicle or channel through which information is transmitted; instead, he is am autonomous unit constituted in very much the same way as other units around him, ready to behave in the same fashion as they do. His behavior is activated by social contact, and there is some superficial adaptation to the structure of their behavior, but it may be well to remember that he can only function if he can synthesize (recreate might be another word) the entire language mechanism out of the raw material available to him. The raw material is of no use unless it can be broken down as food proteins are broken down into amino-acids and build up again into the pattern of his in-dwelling latent structure. Thus, the individual is seen as functioning by virtue of his own power supply, so to speak; he constructs language by himself (provided ha has the raw material to do with it), and the natural history of his development provides for mechanism by which he will harmonize his function with that if other equally autonomously functioning individuals around him; the outer form of his language will have the outer form of the language of his native community.
在語言開始的時候，就某個程度來說，是每個獨立的個體來提供所需的要震動的能量 ; 如果是採用『共振類比的』方式，我們就可以說：其實是這個個體『解開』這『引信』（能量）。從另一個角度來說，『共振類比』可以很明顯的顯示出：各種打在震動器的不同頻率，非常細微的震動，這種細微的震動，有可能會影響其震動器的品質，或是震動器本身。這種方式，也可用來解釋法國小孩的聽力影響說話的例子。每一種自然語言，都有一種可選擇的、有限的頻率，即『頻率波段』，在這個波段範圍內，就可以『引起』共振。但，曾經有段時間，是共振『過大的』，特別是結構很完整的語言，或是對於『沒有震動反應的』新奇而又不同的自然語言。所以，在各物種之間，語言行為的傳播和維護，是和世代相傳的文化不相容的。 人類並不是『被動的』資訊傳播的器具或是頻道; 反而是，獨立自主的單位，其組成的方式，就像其他身邊的『單位』一樣，會在同一種『流行趨勢』之下。社會接觸影響著人類的行為，也有一些對於人類行為結構的『人為改變』，也許比較好的解說方式是：人類如可能從身邊緣使的材料中，『合成出』整個語言機制：即『重新創造出其他的字』。除非，這些『原始的材料』像蛋白質一樣能夠被分解成氨基酸，而且能再重新組成『潛在的生活樣子』，不然的話，這些原始的材料，是沒用的！所以，看來是可以這麼說：人類是依他自己的力量來運作語言，即：『自己建構語言』（假使有原始的材料提供給他的話）。人類語言的歷史發展，也提供了人類對於環境，自然運作的結果：人類的『外部語言形式』，對於本身的社群來說，是會造成其他的『外部形式』語言。
(13) Even though biological constitution of the individual is a essential replica of its progenitors, there are , naturally, individual variations. In fact, there are two distinct levels that are relevant to language: in the formation of the latent structure and in the actualization process from latent to realized structure. The former may be due to variations in the maturational coursed; the latter is primary due to variations in peripheral function and structure such as the vocal tract or the ears. Variations on these two levels explain the main facts about language constancies, language change, and language universals.
雖然，很自然的，人類的生物組成形式，有其基本複製先前祖先的能力， 意即：人類獨立無二的變化。
2. Definition:
Actualization: 實施Resonator:共鳴器,共鳴體,共振器Excitatory:刺激的;興奮的Resonance:共振Un-wind:打開Impinge: 打、撞Band: (無線電的)波段,頻帶Out-grow: 長得比...快(或大、高)Propagation: 增殖,繁殖,廣傳Autonomous: 獨立
amino-acids: 氨基; 氨基的+酸
In-dwelling latent： Dwelling：生活的Latent：潛伏性的,隱藏的隱約的指印Progenitor: 祖先,先輩,原著
Replica: 複製品
LBT378惠珍
3.Translation
邏輯上來說，『有目的性』不可能是語言發展的主軸。
社會環境也许需要一種引信（觸發器）來引起反應。 或許，共鳴，仍然是一個比較好的引信的比喻。在實體化的過程中，在任何一個特定的成熟性狀態下，對於暴露在成人言语行为之中，仍是有一定的刺激、引發的作用在。其發生的頻率，就像，對於一些特別的共鳴器而言，在實體化的過程中，有些引發的作用。這種共鳴器，就是一種在聲音出現時，開始振動。
在語言開始的時候，就某個程度來說，是每個獨立的個體來提供所需的要震動的能量 ; 如果是採用『共振類比的』方式，我們就可以說：其實是這個個體『解開』這『引信』（能量）。從另一個角度來說，『共振類比』可以很明顯的顯示出：各種打在震動器的不同頻率，非常細微的震動，這種細微的震動，有可能會影響其震動器的品質，或是震動器本身。這種方式，也可用來解釋法國小孩的聽力影響說話的例子。每一種自然語言，都有一種可選擇的、有限的頻率，即『頻率波段』，在這個波段範圍內，就可以『引起』共振。但，曾經有段時間，是共振『過大的』，特別是結構很完整的語言，或是對於『沒有震動反應的』新奇而又不同的自然語言。
所以，在各物種之間， 語言行為的傳播和維護，是和世代相傳的文化不相容的。 人類並不是『被動的』資訊傳播的器具或是頻道; 反而是，獨立自主的單位，其組成的方式，就像其他身邊的『單位』一樣，會在同一種『流行趨勢』之下。 社會接觸影響著人類的行為，也有一些對於人類行為結構的『人為改變』，也許比較好的解說方式是：人類如可能從身邊緣使的材料中，『合成出』整個語言機制：即『重新創造出其他的字』。除非，這些『原始的材料』像蛋白質一樣能夠被分解成氨基酸，而且能再重新組成『潛在的生活樣子』，不然的話，這些原始的材料，是沒用的！所以，看來是可以這麼說：人類是依他自己的力量來運作語言，即：『自己建構語言』（假使有原始的材料提供給他的話）。人類語言的歷史發展，也提供了人類對於環境，自然運作的結果：人類的『外部語言形式』，對於本身的社群來說，是會造成其他的『外部形式』語言。
雖然，很自然的，人類的生物組成形式，有其基本複製先前祖先的能力， 意即：人類獨立無二的變化。
4. Related links
Resonance
Biological Naturalism
語言機制
浅说语言学在物理教学中的渗透
物理 wiki
《女科學家群像 系列》葉乃裳 揚名國際物理界
2008年11月11日 星期二
2008年11月9日 星期日
2008年11月6日 星期四
2008年11月5日 星期三
[生物] translation LBT449~450惠珍
LBT449~450惠珍 updated on Dec 08
《Biological Foundations of Language》Preface: The history of the biological language
Assigned reading: Page 449-450
1. Typing
A very serious shortcoming of most Roman writers on language was the limitation of their discussions to Latin and Greek, which Steinthal regarded as the chief factor for their failure to formulate a more general language theory. In the writings of Gaius Plinius Secundus (23-79 A.D.) and of Strabo (63 B.C.-24 A.D.) only Greek and Latin are given serious consideration. One of the few to include other languages as well was the Epicurean Diogenes of Oinoanda (2nd century A.D.) who wrote that men created language everywhere quite naturally; it was not a conscious invention or the result of convention. No single man or god could have created it [24].
～略
Epicurean 認為：在任何地方，很自然的，人類都可以創造語言出來，這不是有意識的創作，也不是『社會規範下的』產物，沒有任何人或是神可以創造語言。
The church fathers and Christian thinkers of the first centuries of our era, intent on defining man’s relationship to God, were content to establish God’s rule over language, and language differences were not of primary concern to them.[25] These differences were to become a problem, once church had begun to spread among people with different languages. The study of languages and language theory would receive new impetus whenever a country was to be Christianized.
那些教堂的神父和第西元一世紀的基督教思想家，想要對『人與神的關係』下定義，他們建立起這樣的看法：語言，是上帝操縱的。不同種類的語言，就不是基督徒主要考慮的對象。但是，一旦教堂開始面對著，說著不同語言的人們，傳播福音時，這些『不同的語言』，就變成了問題了。對於任何一個基督教國家來說，研究語言的學科和語言學理論，是可以解決這問題，也可以提供新的解決方案。
In the succeeding 1500 years the interpretation of language in terms of revelation and biblical exegesis stood in the foreground of language theory. The natural basis of language was never completely lost to view, and some of the most important theologians included it in their discussion.
之後的1500年，對於聖經的語言詮釋方面，就是早期語言學的前身。很自然的，基本上，這些架構下的語言，也不會完全的喪失其特定的（宗教）觀點，有些重要的理論家，也有討論這些狀況。
The greater thinker of the fourth century, St. Augustine (394-430), placed the origin of language in man’s reason, as had the stoics, and compared the evolution of language with language development in children.[26]. Boethius (480-525), a Roman statesman and philosopher, who translated Aristotle into Latin, emphasized the difference between language and thought. Articulated language is different everywhere, but tears, mourning, and emotional expression are universally understood. The North African, Fabius Caludius Gordianus Fulgentius (480-550)wrote a world history, in which he expressed the belief that language did not come from God, but had grown from “wild root”. For the Bishop Isidor of Sevilla (565-636) language was an inseparable characteristics of a people; he believed everyone learned the language of his race without any apparent effort.[27]
4世紀偉大的思想家聖.奧斯丁（354-430），從人類理性來看『語言的起源』，就像禁慾主義者（或斯多葛學派哲學家），他把『語言和兒童語言發展』拿來比較。羅馬政治家及哲學家Boothis：他曾把亞理斯多德翻成拉丁文，他則強調『語言與思想』的不同，在任何地方『發音清晰的、可成為系統的語言』和『口語』是不同的。但是，大家都知道什麼是『淚水、悲傷』等情感的表達。 北非的Fabius Caludius，則寫了部世界史，其中，他認為『語言不是從上帝而來的』; 而是從『野外生出來的』。Isidor of Sevilla 主教，則認為：語言是『跟人們不可分離的』，『語言是各個種族都可以輕而易舉得到的』。
After an interval of four centuries in which men were absorbed by the problems of the political intergration of Europe, the interest in the problem in language was revived with the rise of Schola. Its founder, Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109), wrote on language in the years after 1060. Language only approximates reality and is not identical with God’s creation. IT may, therefore, be subjected to analytic study and psychological interpretation. This attitude toward language is also seen in the writings of his student Peter Abelard (1079-1142) who was the most influential language photosphere of his time. He wrote in his “Logia” (ca 1113-1123) that different designation of the same thing- by different languages- did not imply different meanings; men had only assigned a variety of sounds to the same thing. What people meant was everywhere the same, because meaning was a part of nature. Language was not God’s creation; the man of reason is master of his language and never ruled by it, Latin does not provide the basis or limit of human reason; like all knowledge it can be subject to improvement.[28]
在四個世紀的整合後，在歐洲，人們吸收了各種政治上整合的問題，因為Schola的盛行，引起了人們對語言的興趣。Anselm of Centebuary是Schola的創始人，在1060年，寫了這個作品：語言只是「極度的寫實」，而不是「上帝所創造的」，也因此，語言是屬於：「分析性的研究」及「心裡學上的詮釋」。這種對語言的態度，也有在他的學生Peter 的作品中看到， Peter是當代最有影響力的哲學家，以不同的語言來說，他的作品「Logia」，跟其他的作品，有著不一樣的「名稱」，即：不只有不同的意義，對於相同的物件，人們也有賦予各種不同聲音去說明（命名）的能力。各種人類的語言（名稱）都是一樣的，因為「意義」是大自然的一部份。即：語言，不是上帝創造的，是人們理性的主宰，而永不會被上帝控制。 就算拉丁文，也沒提供人類理性的基本架構或是限制，拉丁文，就像其他語言知識一樣，是會改進的。
A few Medieval writers placed even greater emphasis on the emphasis on the natural aspect pf language. Petrus Heliae, who taught grammar in Paris after 1140, suggested that there are ,ore systems of grammar as yet unknown and that all languages including the dialects can be systematically described and rationally understood [29]. A contemporary anonymous opusculum of he Bernardine Monastery of Ceteaux expressed the thought that language is the product of a natural law and attempted to substantiate this claim by the law of primacy for the letter a in all languages known [30]. But the most theories did not go that far. Abelard’s student John of Salisbury (ca 1115-1180), wrote in his “Metalogicon’ of 1160 that man received his reason and his ability to speak from the “natura clementissima parens ominum,’ but that names must have been invented by man. ( Language was given again being considered primarily in terms of names) [31]. This separation between a recognized natural language capacity and ,an-made language was maintained by most medieval authors including Petrus Hispanus (ca 1220-1227) who later became Pope John ⅩⅩⅠ, John de Dacia professor at Paris in 1280 and Thomas Aquians (1225-1274). Roger Bacon (ca 1214-1294) was to write in 1292 that differences between languages were based on physiological and climatic factors but proposed that language was the result of willful human invention [32].
一些中世紀的作家很重視「語言的自然面」， 在1140年後，在巴黎教文法的Petrus Khaliae，認為：還是有很多的「未知的文法系統」，即：語言中，包含各種的方言，能可以被「有系統的描述」，而且，「可以理性的去理解它（方言、語言）。」 同時，Bernadine Monstery of Ceteaux 的小品則認為：「語言是自然世界法則的產物」，他更進一步把這種『天主教中的大主教的偉大法則：認為所有的語言，都該知道「a」這個字母』的想法，具體化。但，大部分的理論都沒有做到這點。 Abelard的學生John of Salisbury，在1160年寫了「Metalogicon」，作品中認為：人們擁有理性，而且可以運用語言的能力。但是，「名稱」，還是由人們創造出來的。（再一次，語言被認為是：還是主要以「名稱」為主）。中世紀的作家，包含Petrus Hispanus, Thomas Aquinas，則可以區別「自然語言的認知能力」和「人類創造的語言」。Petrus Hispanus, 後來變成教宗約翰11世，是在1280年巴黎。而Roger Bacon培根，則在1292年指出：他從「生物學及氣候方面」，來切入語言，他仍認為『語言是人類自由創造出來的』。
According to Ricobald of Ferrara, the separation of language capacity and languages was supported by a miracle he observed in 1293. A deaf-mute acquired hearing and speech after praying at the grave of St. Anthony Padua; he could repeat what was said to him but did not understand the meaning of the words. This proved that the miracle could only establish the God-given physiological language ability but not the knowledge of a particular language which had to be learned [33].
在1293年，根據Richard of Ferrara 的觀察到的「奇蹟」：他支持：把「語言能力」和「語言本身」分開的說法‧在聖安東尼Padua的墓前禱告後，那些有聽力障礙的人，在學習「聽力和語言能力時」，他們就可以「重複」所聽到的東西，但是，他們並不瞭解「字的意義」‧這也證明了「只有上帝給的心理語言學能力」才能建立起這樣的奇蹟‧但是, 跟「特別語言的知識」是不相關的‧
Observes believed that there must a natural language, the direct expression of untutored language ability. Emperor Frederic Ⅱ (1192/3-1250) was seeking this natural language when he repeated Psametichos’ experiment which failed because the children died. William of Shyreswood (died 1267), an Englishman professor at the University of Paris, included the “signs of the sick” and “ natural sounds” in his definition of man’s language. The Dominican and later Archbishop of Caneterbury, Robert Kilwardby )died 1279) proclaimed that grammar should establish rules for language in general. The characteristics of any one language were as irrelevant to a science of grammar as the, material of the measuring rod or the physical characteristics of objects were to geometry [34]. The natural origin and basic similarity of all languages was also emphasized by a contemporary anonymous tractate, “ De modis significandi” and by Thomas of Erfurth at the end of the thirteenth centenary [35].
其他人相信一定有「能直接表達出來的「不受教導的」，而獲得語言能力的「自然語言」」‧Emperor Frederic二世，就在他做的Psammeticho實驗時，希望能證明，這種「自然語言」的存在‧只可惜，這實驗因為小孩子死了，而失敗‧英國人同時也是巴黎的教授，William of Shyreswood，則對他自己對「人類語言」的看法，總結道：語言，是「疾病的跡象」和「自然語言」‧多明尼加人以及Archbishop OF Canterbury, Robert Kilwardby，則認為：「在共同的語言上，必須建立有規則的文法」，這種「任何語言都有的特質性」和「文法的科學性」是不相關的‧ 「科學性」就是把語言認為是「可衡量的」物質，或是向幾何學裡的「物體的物理性」‧當代的不知名小冊子、論文，也強調這種語言的起源，和共同語言間的相似性，就像在Thomas Of Erfurth在13世紀末所寫的「De modis significandi”」
[24] Borst, A., Pp. 164, 178.
[25] ＿＿＿. Pp. 237,356.
[26] ＿＿＿. Pp. 392.
[27] ＿＿＿. Pp. 424,426,450.
[28] ＿＿＿. Pp..450,605,606,632,635
[29] ＿＿＿. Pp.636-7
[30] ＿＿＿. Pp.638
[31] ＿＿＿. Pp..640
[32] ＿＿＿. Pp..797-800,810 et seq., 901-902
[33] ＿＿＿. P.864
[34] ＿＿＿. Pp..756,796,799
[35] ＿＿＿. Pp..798,895
2. Definition
Impetus:促進;推動力;刺激
exegesis: 釋;註釋
statesman: 政治家
mourning:悲傷
designation: 指定;任命
opusculum: 小品;音樂小品;文學小品
Bernardine:西都修會的
Monastery: 男子的)修道院;僧院[C]
Stoic: 禁慾主義者; S-)斯多葛學派哲學家
Articulate: 1. 使成為系統的整體;使相互連貫 ; 2. 發音清晰的,可聽懂的
Interval: 戲劇,音樂會等的)幕間,休息時間
Schola: 1) An intermission of work, leisure for learning, learned conversation, debate, disputation, lecture, dissertation. 2) A meeting place for teachers and pupils, place for instruction, place of learning, school. 3)The disciples of a teacher, body of followers, school, sect. (--Elementary Latin Dictionary, OUP
Approximated reality: This painting approximates reality. ->这幅画逼真
Designation: 命名;稱號
Substantiate: 使實體化
Primacy天主教)宗教的最高權力;大主教(或教皇)的職位
Metalogicon : The Metalogicon of John of Salisbury: A Twelfth-Century Defense of the Verbal and Logical Arts of the Trivium
Physiological 生理的,生理上正常的
Geometry：幾何學
Tractate: 論文;小冊子,短文
3.Translation
See the upper part
《Biological Foundations of Language》Preface: The history of the biological language
Assigned reading: Page 449-450
1. Typing
A very serious shortcoming of most Roman writers on language was the limitation of their discussions to Latin and Greek, which Steinthal regarded as the chief factor for their failure to formulate a more general language theory. In the writings of Gaius Plinius Secundus (23-79 A.D.) and of Strabo (63 B.C.-24 A.D.) only Greek and Latin are given serious consideration. One of the few to include other languages as well was the Epicurean Diogenes of Oinoanda (2nd century A.D.) who wrote that men created language everywhere quite naturally; it was not a conscious invention or the result of convention. No single man or god could have created it [24].
～略
Epicurean 認為：在任何地方，很自然的，人類都可以創造語言出來，這不是有意識的創作，也不是『社會規範下的』產物，沒有任何人或是神可以創造語言。
The church fathers and Christian thinkers of the first centuries of our era, intent on defining man’s relationship to God, were content to establish God’s rule over language, and language differences were not of primary concern to them.[25] These differences were to become a problem, once church had begun to spread among people with different languages. The study of languages and language theory would receive new impetus whenever a country was to be Christianized.
那些教堂的神父和第西元一世紀的基督教思想家，想要對『人與神的關係』下定義，他們建立起這樣的看法：語言，是上帝操縱的。不同種類的語言，就不是基督徒主要考慮的對象。但是，一旦教堂開始面對著，說著不同語言的人們，傳播福音時，這些『不同的語言』，就變成了問題了。對於任何一個基督教國家來說，研究語言的學科和語言學理論，是可以解決這問題，也可以提供新的解決方案。
In the succeeding 1500 years the interpretation of language in terms of revelation and biblical exegesis stood in the foreground of language theory. The natural basis of language was never completely lost to view, and some of the most important theologians included it in their discussion.
之後的1500年，對於聖經的語言詮釋方面，就是早期語言學的前身。很自然的，基本上，這些架構下的語言，也不會完全的喪失其特定的（宗教）觀點，有些重要的理論家，也有討論這些狀況。
The greater thinker of the fourth century, St. Augustine (394-430), placed the origin of language in man’s reason, as had the stoics, and compared the evolution of language with language development in children.[26]. Boethius (480-525), a Roman statesman and philosopher, who translated Aristotle into Latin, emphasized the difference between language and thought. Articulated language is different everywhere, but tears, mourning, and emotional expression are universally understood. The North African, Fabius Caludius Gordianus Fulgentius (480-550)wrote a world history, in which he expressed the belief that language did not come from God, but had grown from “wild root”. For the Bishop Isidor of Sevilla (565-636) language was an inseparable characteristics of a people; he believed everyone learned the language of his race without any apparent effort.[27]
4世紀偉大的思想家聖.奧斯丁（354-430），從人類理性來看『語言的起源』，就像禁慾主義者（或斯多葛學派哲學家），他把『語言和兒童語言發展』拿來比較。羅馬政治家及哲學家Boothis：他曾把亞理斯多德翻成拉丁文，他則強調『語言與思想』的不同，在任何地方『發音清晰的、可成為系統的語言』和『口語』是不同的。但是，大家都知道什麼是『淚水、悲傷』等情感的表達。 北非的Fabius Caludius，則寫了部世界史，其中，他認為『語言不是從上帝而來的』; 而是從『野外生出來的』。Isidor of Sevilla 主教，則認為：語言是『跟人們不可分離的』，『語言是各個種族都可以輕而易舉得到的』。
After an interval of four centuries in which men were absorbed by the problems of the political intergration of Europe, the interest in the problem in language was revived with the rise of Schola. Its founder, Anselm of Canterbury (1033-1109), wrote on language in the years after 1060. Language only approximates reality and is not identical with God’s creation. IT may, therefore, be subjected to analytic study and psychological interpretation. This attitude toward language is also seen in the writings of his student Peter Abelard (1079-1142) who was the most influential language photosphere of his time. He wrote in his “Logia” (ca 1113-1123) that different designation of the same thing- by different languages- did not imply different meanings; men had only assigned a variety of sounds to the same thing. What people meant was everywhere the same, because meaning was a part of nature. Language was not God’s creation; the man of reason is master of his language and never ruled by it, Latin does not provide the basis or limit of human reason; like all knowledge it can be subject to improvement.[28]
在四個世紀的整合後，在歐洲，人們吸收了各種政治上整合的問題，因為Schola的盛行，引起了人們對語言的興趣。Anselm of Centebuary是Schola的創始人，在1060年，寫了這個作品：語言只是「極度的寫實」，而不是「上帝所創造的」，也因此，語言是屬於：「分析性的研究」及「心裡學上的詮釋」。這種對語言的態度，也有在他的學生Peter 的作品中看到， Peter是當代最有影響力的哲學家，以不同的語言來說，他的作品「Logia」，跟其他的作品，有著不一樣的「名稱」，即：不只有不同的意義，對於相同的物件，人們也有賦予各種不同聲音去說明（命名）的能力。各種人類的語言（名稱）都是一樣的，因為「意義」是大自然的一部份。即：語言，不是上帝創造的，是人們理性的主宰，而永不會被上帝控制。 就算拉丁文，也沒提供人類理性的基本架構或是限制，拉丁文，就像其他語言知識一樣，是會改進的。
A few Medieval writers placed even greater emphasis on the emphasis on the natural aspect pf language. Petrus Heliae, who taught grammar in Paris after 1140, suggested that there are ,ore systems of grammar as yet unknown and that all languages including the dialects can be systematically described and rationally understood [29]. A contemporary anonymous opusculum of he Bernardine Monastery of Ceteaux expressed the thought that language is the product of a natural law and attempted to substantiate this claim by the law of primacy for the letter a in all languages known [30]. But the most theories did not go that far. Abelard’s student John of Salisbury (ca 1115-1180), wrote in his “Metalogicon’ of 1160 that man received his reason and his ability to speak from the “natura clementissima parens ominum,’ but that names must have been invented by man. ( Language was given again being considered primarily in terms of names) [31]. This separation between a recognized natural language capacity and ,an-made language was maintained by most medieval authors including Petrus Hispanus (ca 1220-1227) who later became Pope John ⅩⅩⅠ, John de Dacia professor at Paris in 1280 and Thomas Aquians (1225-1274). Roger Bacon (ca 1214-1294) was to write in 1292 that differences between languages were based on physiological and climatic factors but proposed that language was the result of willful human invention [32].
一些中世紀的作家很重視「語言的自然面」， 在1140年後，在巴黎教文法的Petrus Khaliae，認為：還是有很多的「未知的文法系統」，即：語言中，包含各種的方言，能可以被「有系統的描述」，而且，「可以理性的去理解它（方言、語言）。」 同時，Bernadine Monstery of Ceteaux 的小品則認為：「語言是自然世界法則的產物」，他更進一步把這種『天主教中的大主教的偉大法則：認為所有的語言，都該知道「a」這個字母』的想法，具體化。但，大部分的理論都沒有做到這點。 Abelard的學生John of Salisbury，在1160年寫了「Metalogicon」，作品中認為：人們擁有理性，而且可以運用語言的能力。但是，「名稱」，還是由人們創造出來的。（再一次，語言被認為是：還是主要以「名稱」為主）。中世紀的作家，包含Petrus Hispanus, Thomas Aquinas，則可以區別「自然語言的認知能力」和「人類創造的語言」。Petrus Hispanus, 後來變成教宗約翰11世，是在1280年巴黎。而Roger Bacon培根，則在1292年指出：他從「生物學及氣候方面」，來切入語言，他仍認為『語言是人類自由創造出來的』。
According to Ricobald of Ferrara, the separation of language capacity and languages was supported by a miracle he observed in 1293. A deaf-mute acquired hearing and speech after praying at the grave of St. Anthony Padua; he could repeat what was said to him but did not understand the meaning of the words. This proved that the miracle could only establish the God-given physiological language ability but not the knowledge of a particular language which had to be learned [33].
在1293年，根據Richard of Ferrara 的觀察到的「奇蹟」：他支持：把「語言能力」和「語言本身」分開的說法‧在聖安東尼Padua的墓前禱告後，那些有聽力障礙的人，在學習「聽力和語言能力時」，他們就可以「重複」所聽到的東西，但是，他們並不瞭解「字的意義」‧這也證明了「只有上帝給的心理語言學能力」才能建立起這樣的奇蹟‧但是, 跟「特別語言的知識」是不相關的‧
Observes believed that there must a natural language, the direct expression of untutored language ability. Emperor Frederic Ⅱ (1192/3-1250) was seeking this natural language when he repeated Psametichos’ experiment which failed because the children died. William of Shyreswood (died 1267), an Englishman professor at the University of Paris, included the “signs of the sick” and “ natural sounds” in his definition of man’s language. The Dominican and later Archbishop of Caneterbury, Robert Kilwardby )died 1279) proclaimed that grammar should establish rules for language in general. The characteristics of any one language were as irrelevant to a science of grammar as the, material of the measuring rod or the physical characteristics of objects were to geometry [34]. The natural origin and basic similarity of all languages was also emphasized by a contemporary anonymous tractate, “ De modis significandi” and by Thomas of Erfurth at the end of the thirteenth centenary [35].
其他人相信一定有「能直接表達出來的「不受教導的」，而獲得語言能力的「自然語言」」‧Emperor Frederic二世，就在他做的Psammeticho實驗時，希望能證明，這種「自然語言」的存在‧只可惜，這實驗因為小孩子死了，而失敗‧英國人同時也是巴黎的教授，William of Shyreswood，則對他自己對「人類語言」的看法，總結道：語言，是「疾病的跡象」和「自然語言」‧多明尼加人以及Archbishop OF Canterbury, Robert Kilwardby，則認為：「在共同的語言上，必須建立有規則的文法」，這種「任何語言都有的特質性」和「文法的科學性」是不相關的‧ 「科學性」就是把語言認為是「可衡量的」物質，或是向幾何學裡的「物體的物理性」‧當代的不知名小冊子、論文，也強調這種語言的起源，和共同語言間的相似性，就像在Thomas Of Erfurth在13世紀末所寫的「De modis significandi”」
[24] Borst, A., Pp. 164, 178.
[25] ＿＿＿. Pp. 237,356.
[26] ＿＿＿. Pp. 392.
[27] ＿＿＿. Pp. 424,426,450.
[28] ＿＿＿. Pp..450,605,606,632,635
[29] ＿＿＿. Pp.636-7
[30] ＿＿＿. Pp.638
[31] ＿＿＿. Pp..640
[32] ＿＿＿. Pp..797-800,810 et seq., 901-902
[33] ＿＿＿. P.864
[34] ＿＿＿. Pp..756,796,799
[35] ＿＿＿. Pp..798,895
2. Definition
Impetus:促進;推動力;刺激
exegesis: 釋;註釋
statesman: 政治家
mourning:悲傷
designation: 指定;任命
opusculum: 小品;音樂小品;文學小品
Bernardine:西都修會的
Monastery: 男子的)修道院;僧院[C]
Stoic: 禁慾主義者; S-)斯多葛學派哲學家
Articulate: 1. 使成為系統的整體;使相互連貫 ; 2. 發音清晰的,可聽懂的
Interval: 戲劇,音樂會等的)幕間,休息時間
Schola: 1) An intermission of work, leisure for learning, learned conversation, debate, disputation, lecture, dissertation. 2) A meeting place for teachers and pupils, place for instruction, place of learning, school. 3)The disciples of a teacher, body of followers, school, sect. (--Elementary Latin Dictionary, OUP
Approximated reality: This painting approximates reality. ->这幅画逼真
Designation: 命名;稱號
Substantiate: 使實體化
Primacy天主教)宗教的最高權力;大主教(或教皇)的職位
Metalogicon : The Metalogicon of John of Salisbury: A Twelfth-Century Defense of the Verbal and Logical Arts of the Trivium
Physiological 生理的,生理上正常的
Geometry：幾何學
Tractate: 論文;小冊子,短文
3.Translation
See the upper part
[生物] checking LB4-7 New words
New Words: updated on Dec 8
ontogenetically
Ex-machina
Trophic營養的;有關營養的
contiguous連續的
limb 肢;臂;腳;翼; 大樹枝,主枝; 分支;執行者,代理人
vertebrates 脊椎動物
urodele
salamander (傳說中生活在火中的)火蜥蜴,火蛇;火精,火怪
larval anuran, 幼蟲的;幼體的
anuran無尾目動物(蛙、蛤蟆等等)
postmetamorphic
amputated 醫】切斷;鋸掉;截(肢)
stump口】腿;義肢[P]
autograft 醫】自身移植物(如皮膚等)
Morphogenesis, 器官發生
appendage, 生】附屬器官,附屬肢體(如臂、腿、尾等)
mitotic 生】有絲分裂的
cartilage 【解】軟骨原骨,軟骨成骨
shriveled使束手無策;使無能為力;使無用
blastema 【生】胚芽
autonomic【生】自律的
embryology 胚胎學
denervation
atrophy醫】萎縮;發育停止;虛脫
distal 【解】末梢部的;末端的
innervated使(器官、肌肉等)受神經支配
dystrophic (家庭或工業垃圾等對水的)污染
histological 組織學的
retrograde後退的;逆行的;退化的
soma【生】體細胞
chromatolysis【生】【醫】色原溶解;核染質溶解;染色質溶解消失;色素溶解消失
dysfunction. 官能不良;官能障礙
cerebro-hemispheric
parietal【生】腔壁的;【解】顱頂骨的;【植】子房壁的
lobe【解】(腦、 肺等的)葉
lesions紅斑性狼瘡
neonate (未滿月的)嬰兒
infantile幼稚的;嬰兒的
hemiplegia.
contralateral
congenital天生的;先天的
internuncial 【解】(神經細胞間之)聯絡的
furnished 給(房間)配置(傢俱等);裝備[(+with)]
metacarpal【解】掌的;掌部的
Warren’s truss
Aeroplane【英】飛機[C]
Femur解】股骨;【昆】股節
Trabeculae【解】分隔帶
embryonic 胚芽的;胎兒的
prerequisite不可缺的;事先需要的;必修
ontogenetically
Ex-machina
Trophic營養的;有關營養的
contiguous連續的
limb 肢;臂;腳;翼; 大樹枝,主枝; 分支;執行者,代理人
vertebrates 脊椎動物
urodele
salamander (傳說中生活在火中的)火蜥蜴,火蛇;火精,火怪
larval anuran, 幼蟲的;幼體的
anuran無尾目動物(蛙、蛤蟆等等)
postmetamorphic
amputated 醫】切斷;鋸掉;截(肢)
stump口】腿;義肢[P]
autograft 醫】自身移植物(如皮膚等)
Morphogenesis, 器官發生
appendage, 生】附屬器官,附屬肢體(如臂、腿、尾等)
mitotic 生】有絲分裂的
cartilage 【解】軟骨原骨,軟骨成骨
shriveled使束手無策;使無能為力;使無用
blastema 【生】胚芽
autonomic【生】自律的
embryology 胚胎學
denervation
atrophy醫】萎縮;發育停止;虛脫
distal 【解】末梢部的;末端的
innervated使(器官、肌肉等)受神經支配
dystrophic (家庭或工業垃圾等對水的)污染
histological 組織學的
retrograde後退的;逆行的;退化的
soma【生】體細胞
chromatolysis【生】【醫】色原溶解;核染質溶解;染色質溶解消失;色素溶解消失
dysfunction. 官能不良;官能障礙
cerebro-hemispheric
parietal【生】腔壁的;【解】顱頂骨的;【植】子房壁的
lobe【解】(腦、 肺等的)葉
lesions紅斑性狼瘡
neonate (未滿月的)嬰兒
infantile幼稚的;嬰兒的
hemiplegia.
contralateral
congenital天生的;先天的
internuncial 【解】(神經細胞間之)聯絡的
furnished 給(房間)配置(傢俱等);裝備[(+with)]
metacarpal【解】掌的;掌部的
Warren’s truss
Aeroplane【英】飛機[C]
Femur解】股骨;【昆】股節
Trabeculae【解】分隔帶
embryonic 胚芽的;胎兒的
prerequisite不可缺的;事先需要的;必修
2008年11月4日 星期二
2008年11月3日 星期一
2008年11月1日 星期六
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)