Search

Circadian rhythms have received increasing attention within the context of mental disorders. Evening chronotype has been associated with enhanced risk to develop anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The classical fear conditioning paradigm is a powerful tool to reveal key mechanisms of anxiety and PTSD. We used this paradigm to study the neurocognitive basis of the association between chronotype and fear responses in healthy humans. 20 participants with evening chronotype and 20 controls (i.e., intermediate chronotype) completed a 2-day Pavlovian fear learning and extinction virtual reality task. Participants received fear conditioning, and extinction learning on day 1. Extinction memory recall was tested on day 2. To address interactions between chronotype and time of day of the fear conditioning, and extinction performance, half of the participants were tested in the morning, and the other half in the evening. Skin conductance response (SCR) and subjective fear ratings were measured as primary outcomes. Chronotype was established via the morningness-eveningness questionnaire (MEQ). We found an overall higher SCR for fear acquisition in participants with the evening chronotype profile, compared to controls. Moreover, the higher the MEQ scores -indicative of less eveningness - the lower the SCR was. No effects of chronotype were found for extinction and extinction recall. The higher vulnerability of the evening chronotype for anxiety and related disorders may thus be explained by enhanced fear acquisition of this group.

When speaking of narrativity, a widely held idea in various disciplinary fields that identity is essentially narrative is often called into question. Numerous linguistic, literary, neuroscientific, and evolutionary studies corroborate this idea. In reality, narrativity in these different fields of study often means different objects of inquiry, which have different definitions and describe different processes and, therefore, different cognitive capacities. In this paper, we will consider the notion of narrativity as a cognitive process, that is, as a component of the human mode of knowledge construction. As such, narrativity would constitute a cognitive universal. From this definition, we will show how narrativity is an eminently linguistic process made possible by the body technology of language and voice in particular. Finally, we will argue for the constitutive and bodily role of language for narrativity in ontogenetic development and inner speech.

Background this study was based on both neurophysiological decelerated activity and communication deficits in Rett Syndrome (RTT). Aims the aim was to examine the neurophysiological and cognitive effects of Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (tDCS) in three girls with RTT with chronic language impairments. Methods and procedures we proposed an integrated intervention: tDCS and cognitive empowerment applied to language in order to enhance speech production (new functional sounds and new words). Because maximal gains usually are achieved when tDCS is coupled with behavioral training, we applied tDCS stimulation on Broca’s area together with linguistic training. Outcomes and results the results indicated a general enhancement in language abilities (an increase in the number of vowel/consonant sounds and words and the production and comprehension through discrimination), motor coordination (functional movements), and neurophysiological parameters (an increase in the frequency and power of alpha, beta and theta bands). Conclusion and implications we assume that tDCS stimulation combined with the cognitive empowerment applied to language can significantly influence a chronic impairment even in genetic syndromes. Our results provide data that support the role of tDCS in fostering brain plasticity and in particular in empowering speech production and comprehension in girls with RTT.

The purpose of this work is to define performativity as a natural component of human cognition. The notion of performativity has many applications in various fields from performance studies to pragmatics, but in the recent years it has been introduced within cognitive science studies, where it is currently a subject of great debate. A working definition of performativity as a central component of the human mind that determines the relationship between the individual and the world is proposed. This definition is intentionally general, because it works for every species, not only for humans. Performativity, in fact, is a capacity present in all cognitive systems that have a body because it allows the utilization of those cognitive abilities that evolutionary history has delivered to a species. The concept of performativity with a naturalistic and biologically based approach is analysed taking into account both evolutionary continuity and species-specific functions. In conclusion, an application of the natural performativity of language, a uniquely human function characterized by species-specific morphological structures that constitute constraints for language performativity, is proposed.

Introduction -- Part I: Philosophical Approaches -- On the social praxis of indirect reporting; Alessandro Capone -- semantics and what’s said; Una Stojnic, Ernie Lepore -- Immunity to Error through Misidentification and (Direct and Indirect) Experience Reports; Denis Delfitto, Anne Reboul, Gaetano Fiorin -- Representing Representations: The Priority of the De Re; Kenneth Taylor -- Intuitions and the semantics of indirect reports; Jonathan Berg -- Irony as indirectness cross-linguistically: On the scope of generic mechanisms; Herbert Colston -- When a speaker is reported as having said so; Sanford Goldberg -- Topics are (implicit) indirect reports; Edoardo Lombardo Vallauri -- Part II: Linguistic Applications -- Direct and indirect speech revised: Semantic universals and semantic diversity; Anna Wierzbicka, Cliff Goddard -- Reporting conditionals; Magdalena Sztencel, Sarah E. Duffy -- On the social praxis of indirect reporting: pronominals and presuppositions in that-clauses; Alessandro Capone, Alessandra Falzone -- Discourse Markers in Different Types of Reporting; Peter Furko, Andras Kertesz, Agnes Abuczki -- Indirect reports in Modern Eastern Armenian; Alessandra Giorgi, Sona Haroutyunian -- Relinquishing control: what Romanian de se attitude reports teach us about Immunity to Error through Misidentification; Marina Folescu -- Accuracy in reported speech: Evidence from masculine and feminine Japanese language; Hiroko Itakura; The Grammaticalization of Indirect Reports: The Cantonese Discourse Particle wo5; John Wakefield, Hung Yuk Abby Lee -- Context-shift in Indirect Reports in Dhaasanac; Sumiyo Nishiguchi -- Part III: Discourse Analysis and Pragmatics -- Law and Indirect Reports: Citation and Precedent; Brian Butler -- The Translatorial Middle Between Direct and Indirect Reports; Douglas Robinson -- Historical Trends in the Pragmatics of Indirect Reports in Dutch Crime News Stories; Kobie van Krieken, Jose Sanders -- Indirect speech in dialogues with schizophrenics. Analysis of the dialogues of the CIPPS corpus; Grazia Basile -- Pragmatic disorders and indirect reports in psychotic language; Antonino Bucca.

In this paper we put forward an evolutionary hypothesis on the role of pragmatics. We are perfectly aware that the definition of the term “evolutionary” is controversial. The matter gets worse when we apply the term to pragmatics, which in turn is not a homogeneous area of research.

Over the last years, the debate about language evolution has been dominated by functionalist models looking for continuity among various animal species to understand language evolution and its nature. In this work, I analyze the theoretical mistakes of such approach, that ignoring structural body transformation does not allow the application of evolutionary methods to the study of functions. Here I propose a naturalistic approach, based on Evo-Devo perspective, which considers biological constraints as the necessary “mechanical trigger” upon which language function could have evolved. This framework, through the examination of the comparative study of the peripheral and central structures of vocal articulation, allows us to both avoid functional leap in language evolution and at the same time, guarantee species-specificity of language.

In this paper, after outlining the general problem of the pragmatics of indirect reports, we dwell on two notoriously thorny problems: a) how do we interpret the pronominals contained in that-clauses of indirect reports; b) how do we interpret the presuppositions of that-clauses of indirect reports? (These two problems appear to us to be connected either through the specific nature of the solutions or through some general format of the problem). Theoretical considerations lead us in the direction of the idea that if two pragmatic principles clash, one should give way, but since we do not know which one has to give way, we should be prepared to accept that the strongest or highest-ranking principle will defeat (in the sense of temporarily suspending) the other (see Huang 2014). Here we encounter a Principle, which Capone (2006) brought our attention to, that is not usually discussed in pragmatic theories, but which seems to play a crucial role, at least sometimes: Do not expect the hearers and the speakers to do what is not possible for them to do. In this paper, we recognize that the problem of opacity is connected with the problem of voices: who is responsible for a given section of the utterance. Given the presence of polyphony (the presence of two or more voices in the same utterance or section of the utterance (see Macagno and Capone 2016), this problem can be resolved either through contextual clues or through pragmatic principles (see Huang 2014; Douven 2010; Kecskes 2013). We prefer to see the interplay of principles and contextual clues as one in which the interpretation process is pretty orderly, with general principles providing the defaults, while contextual clues occasionally defeat the defaults in certain problematic cases. However, the issue of responsibility, which we try to regiment through the Paraphrasis/Form-style principle, does not only concern the issue of opacity but also the issue of how to find a referent for indexical expressions contained in the that-clause of a report and and how to satisfy the presuppositions of the that-clause. In this case the Paraphrasis/Form-style Principle makes wrong predictions, which have to be rectified thanks to a different principle. The pragmatic theory we apply certainly needs some flexibility (see Huang 2014 on the hierarchy of pragmatic principles), but a flexibility which is not injected into the theory by a mechanical ordering of the rules (that makes pragmatics similar to a generative apparatus), but by explaining why a certain principle takes precedence over another in terms of considerations of rationality (see Capone and Poggi 2016).

In this chapter, on the basis of the previous ones, the authors discuss the limits of the applicability of biolinguistics as a Darwinian science. In particular, it excludes that biolinguistics is designed to specifically study the products of the language faculty. Since DBM deals with biological structures, we must exclude expertise in the history of grammar, syntax, vocabulary, etc., and cultural developments of the historical-natural languages from the DBM. From a functional point of view, biolinguistics should only deal with universal biological principles present in the cognitive linguistic procedures that result directly from verbal articulation. Basically, this chapter, will deal with ontogeny performance events and the pragmatic exercise of the language.

This chapter is devoted to the reconstruction of the criticisms and internal reviews of Chomskyan biolinguistics. In particular, it deals with Balari and Lorenzo’s positions, who support the often extreme acceptance of the Evo-Devo, and those of Cedric Boeckx. The latter, especially, deeply reflects the need for the pre-existence of the lexicon so that one is able to apply the computational mechanisms provided by the minimalist position.

Beginning from the agreement between CBM and DBM on the species-specificity of human language, in this chapter the authors will discuss the strictly technical interpretation with which the evolutionary approach defines this notion and which has been much abused particularly in philosophical speculation. In particular, they connect with the notion of the origin of Lorenzian ethology to grasp the “coercive” content of the very idea of species-specificity. For Darwinian biolinguistics, the species-specificity of language is first and foremost the recognition of its biological constraints and the cognitive limitations. It follows a naturalistic linguistic philosophy emphasizing the special formatting of human linguistic cognition, as conditioned by a specific bodily language technology, and tecnomorphic characteristics of thought arising from it.

In this short chapter, using a deliberately schematic form, the authors summarize all the points of agreement, dissonance and possible integration of the two models compared here: the Chomskyan Biolinguistic Model (CBM) and Darwinian Biolinguistic Model (DBM). The schematic content anticipates the detailed discussions which will follow in the chapters in the second part of the book and which are dedicated to the exposition of the main biolinguistics issues interpreted through an evolutionary approach.

In this chapter, the authors discuss the developments of Chomskyan biolinguistics within the minimalist framework. In particular, they discuss the Chomskyan descriptions of sensorimotor and conceptual externalization devices and the computational processes Merge and Move. This chapter covers aspects related to the application of the minimalism-inspired revision of evolutionistic positions, starting from the saltation origin of language.

In this chapter we discuss the possible applications of pragmatics to biolinguistic issues. In particular, it notes that pragmatics as a discipline is related to the absolute variability of cultural content and can be considered foreign to biolinguistics. On the contrary, as a living form of linguistic performativity – with its generation rules and stabilization of inferences that occur when speech is being produced – pragmatics becomes an essential element of biolinguistics. In particular, it highlights that there are already many pragmatic naturalistic studies that perfectly match the Darwinian approach as they reveal pre-linguistic and linguistic behaviour very similar in humans and non-human animals.

This chapter reconstructs a possible alternative history of Chomskyan biolinguistics hinging on the embodiment of language, whose precursors are identified in Aristotle, Vico, Darwin and Broca. The recent re-reading of Aristotle, given by Franco Lo Piparo, is used to reconstruct a biolinguistics independent of the cerebrocentric hypothesis and, therefore, entirely focused on the primacy of linguistic articulation and of the relevant cognitive properties. Vico reconstructs the glottogonic dimension as the first truly linguistic evolutionary epistemology. Darwin’s position on language is critically discussed in great detail in its functionalist aspects, often influenced by Lamarckian residues. However, we emphasize the decisive importance of gradualism of structures and the populational thought as elements of an irreversible biolinguistics turn materializing in the birth of neuroscience with the discoveries of Broca’s aphasia.

This article illustrates the first steps of a research project concerning the “Subjective Experience and Estimation of Moving-Image Time” (SEEM_IT). After introducing the theoretical background of the research, that links time perception to the embodied experience of movement, the article presents the main empirical results of an experiment aimed at assessing how spectators’ time perception is affected by the style of editing and the type of represented action in short video clips. Though the style of editing played a major role in influencing SEEM_IT, it also significantly interacted with the type of represented action. The article reassesses these findings by discussing them within the theoretical framework of the research.