This thesis investigates non-arbitrariness in novel sets of signs (mappings between signals and meanings). Two common ways of characterizing signs – by the degree of motivatedness they exhibit and by the degree of systematic compositionality they exhibit – are not necessarily orthogonal. Thus, the emergence of arbitrariness and of systematic compositionality in language should be studied together. We focus on a particular interface of the two properties: the systematic re-use of arbitrary elements. Previous work that demonstrates how novel signs can emerge and then evolve to become arbitrary does not measure systematic compositionality. On the other hand, previous work on systematic compositionality proposes a mechanism for the evolution of systematic compositionality and a measure of the property, but does not address the evolution of arbitrariness. We propose a parallel theory of the emergence of the systematic re-use of arbitrary elements. Systematic compositionality emerges in novel, motivated signs and is maintained as the signs become arbitrary. We report a series of experiments that probe how the systematic re-use of arbitrary elements arises in novel communication systems. In Experiment 1, partners must create signs from scratch to communicate about items that share semantic features. The systematic re-use of arbitrary elements emerges. Further, the evolution of arbitrariness and systematic compositionality are parallel: even participants’ first drawings of items are systematically compositional, and this systematic compositionality is maintained as the signs become arbitrary. Experiment 2 demonstrates that naïve participants, who played no role in – indeed, did not even observe – the creation of the sign systems, can nonetheless detect the systematic compositionality in them and generalize from it. Experiment 3 shows that participants actually do make use of the systematic re-use of arbitrary elements that they observe in others’ sign systems, when faced with the task of communicating (rather than learning and reproducing). The systematic compositionality is not only maintained, but appears to be increasing, over generations of participants observing others’ signs. The increase in systematic compositionality occurs when pairs create signs for items they have not observed – presumably, as they generalize using the systematic compositionality they have observed. In sum, we present an alternative mechanism for the emergence of the systematic reuse of arbitrary elements: arbitrariness and systematic compositionality emerge in a parallel fashion within the dyad, and subsequent communicators maintain – or even increase – the structure they have observed. More generally, we demonstrate the importance of examining arbitrariness and systematic compositionality together.

For the majority of the 20th century, one of the central dogmas of linguistics was that, at the level of the lexicon, the relationship between words and meanings is arbitrary: there is nothing about the word ‘dog’ for example that makes it a particularly good label for a dog. However, in recent years it has become increasingly recognized that non-arbitrary associations between words and meanings make up a small, but potentially important portion of the lexicon. This thesis focuses on exploring the effect that non-arbitrary associations between words and meanings have on language learning and the structure of the lexicon. Based on a critical analysis of the existing literature, and the results of a number of experiments presented here, I suggest that the overall prevalence and developmental timing of two forms of non-arbitrariness in the lexicon– systematicity and motivatedness – is shaped by the pressure for languages to be learnable while remaining expressive. The effect of pressures for learnability and expressivity have been recognized to have important implications for the structure of language generally, but have so far not been applied to explain structure at the level of the lexicon. The central claim presented in this dissertation is that features of the perceptual and cognitive organization of humans results in specific types of associations between words and meanings being easier for naïve learners to acquire than others, and that the pressure for languages to be learnable results in lexica that leverage these human biases. Taking advantage of these biases, however, induces constraints on the structure of the lexicon that, left unchecked, might limit its expressivity or penalize subsequent learning. Thus, lexica are structured such that early-acquired words are able to leverage these biases while avoiding the limitations imposed by those biases when they are extended past a certain point.

Como disse Stephen King em seu livro de 1999 "On Writing", a literatura é a comunicação entre mentes distantes no tempo e no espaço, telepatia. Mesmo aqueles que são menos místicos que o escritor reconhecerão que uma das virtudes das criações humanas é a capacidade de serem compreendidas; dentre elas, a Arquitetura. Aquele que procurar na história da disciplina ou na prática atual um modelo seguro de ação, inevitavelmente acabará frustrado. O modo de trabalhar varia muito entre os arquitetos e ainda um mesmo profissional não aborda todo e qualquer projeto da mesma maneira. Mesmo assim, é possível separar a produção arquitetônica em dois grupos: aquele que possibilita refazer os processos mentais de seu autor – que deixa evidente os critérios e decisões geradores da forma – e aquele que não nos oferece essa cortesia; é daquela Arquitetura que este trabalho se ocupa ao explorar o conceito de sistematicidade. Na primeira parte do trabalho, se traz maior clareza ao seu significado através da sua análise, de suas variações e de seus opostos; na segunda parte, se apresenta três projetos que o exemplificam. Se é verdade que não há método seguro para se produzir Arquitetura e que reinam uma multiplicidade de valores contraditórios, ainda assim é possível identificar qualidades naquilo que já foi produzido e tentar replicá-las em projetos futuros. Nesse sentido, o trabalho se vincula à tradição que busca na própria disciplina sua legitimação e promove uma Arquitetura que seja compreensível para o profissional que a estuda e para quem a vive. / As Stephen King said in his 1999 book “On Writing,” literature is the communication of minds distants in time and space, telepathy. Even those who are less mystical than the writer will recognize that one of the virtues of human creations is their ability to be understood; among them, architecture. One who looks at the history of the discipline or current practice for a safe model of action will inevitably become frustrated. The way architects work vary considerably, and yet the same professional does not approach every project the same way. Even so, it is possible to separate architectural production into two groups: one that makes it possible to remake the mental processes of its author - which makes evident the criteria and decisions that generate form - and one that does not offer this courtesy; it is from that architecture that this work occupies itself when exploring the concept of systematicity. In the first part of the work, clarity is brought to its meaning through its analysis, its variations, and its opposites; in the second part, it presents three projects that exemplify it. If it is true that there is no sure method to produce architecture and that a multiplicity of values reign, it is still possible to identify qualities in what has already been produced and try to replicate them in future projects. In this sense, the work is linked to the tradition that seeks in architecture its own legitimation and promotes an architecture that is understandable for the professional who studies it and for those who lives it.

The demarcation problem aims to articulate the boundary between science and pseudoscience. Solutions to the problem have been notably raised by the logical positivists (verificationism), Karl Popper (falsificationism), and Imre Lakatos (methodology of research programmes). Due, largely, to the conclusions drawn by Larry Laudan, in a pivotal 1981 paper which dismissed the problem of demarcation as a “pseudo-problem”, the issue was brushed aside for years. Recently, however, there has been a revival of attempts to reexamine the demarcation problem and synthesize new solutions. My aim is to survey two of the contemporary attempts and to assess these approaches over and against the broader historical trajectory of the demarcation problem. These are the efforts of Nicholas Maxwell (aim-oriented empiricism), and Paul Hoyningen-Huene (systematicity). I suggest that the main virtue of the new attempts is that they promote a self-reflexive character within the sciences. A modern demarcation criterion should be sensitive towards the dynamic character of the sciences. Using, as an example, a case study of Traditional Chinese Medicine, I also suggest that the potential for conflict between demarcation conclusions and the empirical success of a pseudoscientific discipline is problematic. I question whether it is sensible to reject, as pseudoscientific, a discipline which seems to display empirical success in cases where the rival paradigm, contemporary western medicine, is not successful. Ultimately, I argue that there are both good theoretical and good pragmatic grounds to support further investigation into a demarcation criterion and that Laudan’s dismissal of the problem was premature. / Graduate / 0422 / 0402

The demarcation problem aims to articulate the boundary between science and pseudoscience. Solutions to the problem have been notably raised by the logical positivists (verificationism), Karl Popper (falsificationism), and Imre Lakatos (methodology of research programmes). Due, largely, to the conclusions drawn by Larry Laudan, in a pivotal 1981 paper which dismissed the problem of demarcation as a “pseudo-problem”, the issue was brushed aside for years. Recently, however, there has been a revival of attempts to reexamine the demarcation problem and synthesize new solutions. My aim is to survey two of the contemporary attempts and to assess these approaches over and against the broader historical trajectory of the demarcation problem. These are the efforts of Nicholas Maxwell (aim-oriented empiricism), and Paul Hoyningen-Huene (systematicity). I suggest that the main virtue of the new attempts is that they promote a self-reflexive character within the sciences. A modern demarcation criterion should be sensitive towards the dynamic character of the sciences. Using, as an example, a case study of Traditional Chinese Medicine, I also suggest that the potential for conflict between demarcation conclusions and the empirical success of a pseudoscientific discipline is problematic. I question whether it is sensible to reject, as pseudoscientific, a discipline which seems to display empirical success in cases where the rival paradigm, contemporary western medicine, is not successful. Ultimately, I argue that there are both good theoretical and good pragmatic grounds to support further investigation into a demarcation criterion and that Laudan’s dismissal of the problem was premature. / Graduate / 0422 / 0402

Como disse Stephen King em seu livro de 1999 "On Writing", a literatura é a comunicação entre mentes distantes no tempo e no espaço, telepatia. Mesmo aqueles que são menos místicos que o escritor reconhecerão que uma das virtudes das criações humanas é a capacidade de serem compreendidas; dentre elas, a Arquitetura. Aquele que procurar na história da disciplina ou na prática atual um modelo seguro de ação, inevitavelmente acabará frustrado. O modo de trabalhar varia muito entre os arquitetos e ainda um mesmo profissional não aborda todo e qualquer projeto da mesma maneira. Mesmo assim, é possível separar a produção arquitetônica em dois grupos: aquele que possibilita refazer os processos mentais de seu autor – que deixa evidente os critérios e decisões geradores da forma – e aquele que não nos oferece essa cortesia; é daquela Arquitetura que este trabalho se ocupa ao explorar o conceito de sistematicidade. Na primeira parte do trabalho, se traz maior clareza ao seu significado através da sua análise, de suas variações e de seus opostos; na segunda parte, se apresenta três projetos que o exemplificam. Se é verdade que não há método seguro para se produzir Arquitetura e que reinam uma multiplicidade de valores contraditórios, ainda assim é possível identificar qualidades naquilo que já foi produzido e tentar replicá-las em projetos futuros. Nesse sentido, o trabalho se vincula à tradição que busca na própria disciplina sua legitimação e promove uma Arquitetura que seja compreensível para o profissional que a estuda e para quem a vive. / As Stephen King said in his 1999 book “On Writing,” literature is the communication of minds distants in time and space, telepathy. Even those who are less mystical than the writer will recognize that one of the virtues of human creations is their ability to be understood; among them, architecture. One who looks at the history of the discipline or current practice for a safe model of action will inevitably become frustrated. The way architects work vary considerably, and yet the same professional does not approach every project the same way. Even so, it is possible to separate architectural production into two groups: one that makes it possible to remake the mental processes of its author - which makes evident the criteria and decisions that generate form - and one that does not offer this courtesy; it is from that architecture that this work occupies itself when exploring the concept of systematicity. In the first part of the work, clarity is brought to its meaning through its analysis, its variations, and its opposites; in the second part, it presents three projects that exemplify it. If it is true that there is no sure method to produce architecture and that a multiplicity of values reign, it is still possible to identify qualities in what has already been produced and try to replicate them in future projects. In this sense, the work is linked to the tradition that seeks in architecture its own legitimation and promotes an architecture that is understandable for the professional who studies it and for those who lives it.

La philosophie critique de Kant entretient un rapport ambigu à la question du langage. Bien que le système critique ne semble pas contenir de théorie du langage à proprement parler, les effets du registre transcendantal sur la façon d’appréhender le langage en philosophie semblent aussi massifs que souterrains. Pour envisager ce paradoxe, une hypothèse nouvelle est formulée : la philosophie kantienne serait l’expression paradoxale mais particulièrement paradigmatique d’une crise du langage de grande ampleur observable en Allemagne autour de 1800. Ce n’est qu’en replaçant le système critique dans ce contexte de crise que l’on pourra saisir sa portée pour traiter des problèmes du langage. Cela engage paradoxalement à saisir les effets positifs de la mise entre parenthèses du langage. Pour cela, la philosophie critique est d’abord située dans la crise épistémologique de grande ampleur qui accompagne autant un changement de paradigme des théories du langage (de la grammaire générale à la grammaire comparée), que la naissance d’une linguistique « scientifique ». Elle est ensuite située dans un faisceau de symptômes convergeant vers une crise du langage étudiée successivement à travers les exemples des crises poétique, métacritique et de la crise de la langue philosophique. Ces deux contextualisations permettent de poser à nouveaux frais les raisons systématiques qui expliquent un tel travail souterrain du langage par la philosophie critique. La lecture du système kantien comme modélisation topique de la subjectivité permet alors de rendre compte du statut nouveau qu’acquiert le langage et en particulier l’idée de langue naturelle dans le sillage de la philosophie transcendantale. / Kant’s critical philosophy maintains an ambiguous relationship with language. Even though no proper theory of language seems to be found in the critical system, the transcendental method of the Critique has both highly and unexpectedly influenced the philosophical approach to language. Such a paradox can be accounted for by the following hypothesis: Kantian philosophy is the expression of a major language crisis occurring in Germany at the turn of the 18th century, in a paradigmatic but paradoxical way. It is necessary to put the critical system in this context to understand the far-reaching consequences of setting aside language as a philosophical issue. This will lead to analyse the positive effects of Kant’s attitude on new way to deal with language issues. Three steps will be taken in this purpose. The first one examines the meaning of Kant’s critical philosophy in the light of an epistemic crisis mainly embodied by the theoretical shift from “general grammar” to “comparative grammar” and the emergence of scientific linguistics. The second step sheds light on the place of critical philosophy within the framework of a broader language crisis, which will be studied in three fields: 1) Poetry, 2) “Metacritique”, 3) Philosophical language. Systematic reasons for the strong influence of critical philosophy on language will emerge from this double contextualisation. Indeed, understanding the Kantian system as a topical modelling of subjectivity enables to account for the new status of language – and more specifically, for the concept of natural languages – in the wake of transcendental philosophy.

Written and oral material produced by a group of low-achieving learners of English from the 2-year lines of the Swedish upper secondary school was analysed from the perspective of grammatical correctness and communicative ability. The grammatical analysis focussed on the verb phrase and tests included both free production in speech and writing and elicitation tests. Communicative ability was assessed ‘ ‘objectively* ’ by identifying such parameters as fluency, copiousness and span, and “holistically” by using non-expert evaluators.The scores thus obtained were correlated. Grammatical correctness was correlated with communicative ability both in speech and in writing and writing proficiency was correlated with speech proficiency with respect to both grammatical correctness and communicative ability.Our findings are that there is a positive correlation between grammatical correctness and communicative ability. A remarkable finding is that the percentage of correct verb phrases correlates very weakly with communicative ability in written data. In oral data, the correlation is in fact slightly negative. The learner’s competence in grammar is reflected in both his written and oral performance. On the other hand, there is no correlation between communicative ability in writing and communicative ability in speech.The study shows that a working command of a set of syntactic rules is essential for communication. Errors are, however, an integral part of the learning process. The major part of errors are accounted for by the learner’s use of compensatory strategies. Among these low-achievers, communicative ability in conversation is distinct from writing ability. / digitalisering@umu