I have gotten so far as to download some articles by now (always a good first step!), but haven't had the chance to read them. It looks like some of his recent, lone-authored pieces are the most relevant. I'll attach a few here if anyone is interested. Actually, it turns out that not all of these are lone-authored--but, of interest nonetheless. Happy perusing, Lauren On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 11:38 AM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote: > Seems like just the kind of suggestion a brilliant mind on XMCA such as > yours would suggest, Lauren! Thanks for the pointed pointer. Audience > matters a lot with respect to what is performed and the meaning created. > > From your reading of the written material, what most interested you? > > I'll take a look too. > mike > > > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 10:26 AM, Lauren Zentz <laurenzentz@gmail.com>wrote: > >> With all due respect to all the brilliant minds on this list and in this >> discussion, I have been following along here and there since this >> conversation started and wondering the entire time exactly what research >> and >> knowledge implications we should be worried about based on a 20 minute TED >> Talk. It seems that for us as researchers it is very important to know >> what >> Roy is doing with language acquisition and development research, and who >> will be buying which ideas that he puts forth; but I feel like the >> intended >> message of his talk, which was given to a *very* broad, and generally >> non-linguist, non-cognitivist, and non-social scientist audience, was >> basically to demonstrate how amazing are the technological tools he is >> using >> to do this research, and to generally inspire a larger population of >> listeners regarding how complex and precious is the nature of human >> (language) development. >> I wonder if maybe, if we want to discuss the implications of his research, >> those of us interested could take a look at the actual publications he has >> written, where he has published them, and what audiences read them: >> http://web.media.mit.edu/~dkroy/publications/index.html. >> >> Lauren Zentz >> Doctoral Candidate, Language, Reading and Culture >> College of Education, University of Arizona >> >> >> >> On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:48 AM, mike cole <lchcmike@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I wonder if criticisms of the sort voiced in this company might not >> > influence the subsequent course of inquiry. There are a bunch of >> critical >> > comments below the Roy >> > presentation that could benefit from this discussion. >> > mike >> > >> > On Sat, Mar 19, 2011 at 9:14 AM, Martin Packer <packer@duq.edu> wrote: >> > >> > > >> > > On Mar 16, 2011, at 9:16 PM, David Kellogg wrote: >> > > >> > > > I am not entirely sure I agree with Martin's and Jim's criticisms. >> > First >> > > of all, when I read Halliday's work on early language acquisition, it >> > seems >> > > MORE objective than Deb Roy's "space time worms". Halliday is looking >> at >> > > grammar and especially at function. But I am really not sure at all >> what >> > Deb >> > > Roy is looking at. I can't even understand, when I am looking at the >> > worms, >> > > what is space and what is time, but above all I can't understand how >> it >> > > helps him organize his transcriptions. (I can see how it makes for a >> cool >> > > presentation, though!) >> > > >> > > Like Jim, I'd like to clarify my previous message. I didn't mean to >> sound >> > > as though I were rejecting any use of technology for this kind of >> > research. >> > > Obviously videorecording and other techniques of objectification are >> > crucial >> > > for the study of a phenomenon as fleeting as speech. But any >> > investigation >> > > of children's acquisition of language has to make use of the >> intuitions >> > of >> > > speakers of that language. One needs to be able to recognize the legal >> > > combinations of phonemes, and syllables, and the illegal combinations, >> in >> > > order to plot the movement from one to the other. One needs to >> recognize >> > a >> > > word, and approximations to it, and what it signifies in a specific >> > occasion >> > > of use. The utility of computers, then, to help conduct an analysis of >> a >> > > child's speech depends on ones ability to program them with the >> > equivalent >> > > of these intuitions. The degree of success with which we have been >> able >> > to >> > > program computers to recognize human speech is still very limited, and >> > our >> > > ability to program them to understand context has been even more >> limited. >> > > Yet once one collects massive amounts of data, as Roy has done, the >> use >> > of >> > > computers becomes virtually unavoidable. My point about Halliday's >> > research >> > > was that he drew not only on his speaker/hearer's intuitions, he also >> > drew >> > > on what was available to him as a participant interacting intimately >> with >> > > the child speaker. Roy of course had the same type of interactions, >> but >> > > rather than build on these he chose instead the strategy of massive >> data >> > > collection. There is, presumably as a consequence of, apparently no >> > > attention to semantics in Roy's analysis - not that one would expect >> to >> > find >> > > the child showing an understanding of concepts, but knowing something >> of >> > the >> > > adults' interpretations of his words in context would surely be >> > tremendously >> > > helpful in understanding the acquisition process. >> > > >> > > I assume that the fact that in his presentation Roy could provide only >> > > sound bites of the child's approximations to "water" indicates that >> his >> > > system for automated analysis of the videos was not able to parse >> those >> > > events. Was the computer able to judge these utterances to be tokens >> of a >> > > single type? Or did humans still need to go through the recordings to >> > make >> > > such judgments? If the latter, then it seems to me that the >> accumulation >> > of >> > > massive amounts of data made the researchers' task more difficult, not >> > > easier, and it is not clear to me what the benefit is of Roy's >> approach. >> > > >> > > Martin __________________________________________ >> > > _____ >> > > xmca mailing list >> > > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu >> > > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca >> > > >> > __________________________________________ >> > _____ >> > xmca mailing list >> > xmca@weber.ucsd.edu >> > http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca >> > >> __________________________________________ >> _____ >> xmca mailing list >> xmca@weber.ucsd.edu >> http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca >> > >
Attachment:
Roy 2010 New Horizons Child Lg Acq.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
Roy Reiter 2005 Connecting Lg to the World.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
Roy 2009 3 Facets of Meaning.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
Attachment:
Roy 2010 Semantic Context on Color.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
__________________________________________ _____ xmca mailing list xmca@weber.ucsd.edu http://dss.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/xmca