MIDDLE EXAM

Name : Kamelia Santika

NIM : 1812180012

Semester : IV

Study Program : English Education Study Program

Lecturer : Kurniati, M.Pd

Question :

1. Explain, what is psycholinguistics?

2. Explain about language and speaking (language use), and there are two processes of
speaking planning process that are called “encode” and “decode”, explain what are
they?
3. Explain the theories about linguistics!
4. Explain about animal and language learning and some experiments done!

Answer :

1. A branch of both linguistics and psychology, psycholinguistics is part of the field of

cognitive science. Psycholinguistics is the study of the mental aspects of language and
speech. It is primarily concerned with the ways in which language is represented and
processed in the brain. Psycholinguistics is the study of the mental mechanisms that
make it possible for people to use language. It is a scientific discipline whose goal is a
coherent theory of the way in which language is produced and understood.

2. Language is central to all our lives and is arguably the cultural tool that sets humans
apart from any other species. And on some accounts, language is the symbolic
behaviour that allowed human singularities—art, religion, and science—to occur.
Language allows us to make friends and enemies, to pass the time of day, and so on.
In our everyday lives, we produce and comprehend language with such apparent ease
that we take it for granted. In basic terms, humans communicate through a process of
 encoding and decoding. The encoder is the person who develops and sends the
message. The encoder must determine how the message will be received by the
audience, and make adjustments so the message is received the way they want it to be
received.

 Encoding is the process of turning thoughts into communication. The encoder

uses a ‘medium’ to send the message — a phone call, email, text message, face-
to-face meeting, or other communication tool. The level of conscious thought that
goes into encoding messages may vary. The encoder should also take into
account any ‘noise’ that might interfere with their message, such as other
messages, distractions, or influences.
 The audience then ‘decodes’, or interprets, the message for themselves. Decoding
is the process of turning communication into thoughts. For example, you may
realize you’re hungry and encode the following message to send to your
roommate: “I’m hungry. Do you want to get pizza tonight?” As your roommate
receives the message, they decode your communication and turn it back into
thoughts to make meaning.

3. The theory of linguistics is :

a) Leonard Bloomfield (1887 -1949)
He made significant contributions to Indo-European historical linguistics, the
description of Austronesian languages, and description of languages of the
Algonquian family. Bloomfield’s approach to linguistics was characterized by its
emphasis on the scientific basis of linguistics, adherence to behaviorism
especially in his later work, and emphasis on formal procedures for the analysis
of linguistic data. The influence of Bloomfieldian structural linguistics declined
in the late 1950s and 1960s as the theory of Generative Grammar developed by
Noam Chomsky came to predominate. the theory Bloomfield we can see and
more understanding from anecdotes "jack and jill"

b) Ferdinand de Saussure (1857-1913)

In Linguistics, Saussure's focus on the synchronic dimension and on language
as an interrelated system of elements was maintained through the American
Structuralist period (Bloomfield, Hockett), and also in the Generative period
 (Chomsky, Bresnan). But the focus on the synchronic has nevertheless been
essentially maintained in modern Cognitive theories of language, in keeping with
the synchronic view of the human mind in the Cognitive Sciences, notably
Psychology and Neuroscience.
They still exert a very strong intellectual force in all these disciplines
(probably most in Linguistics and the disciplines most influenced by literary
theory; less so now in traditional Anthropology, Sociology, and Psychology). He
is called the Father of linguistics. His book famous are course de linguistique
generale(1916) publication from there students " Charles Bally and Albert
Schehaye".De Saussure differentiate between parole,langue,and language. Parole
are solid language out from mout speaker. Language are certain language,
example only Java language or just English language. And last langage is human
tool interactions such as sentence "Human have language and animals don't have
language,langage have quality abstract.

c) Avram Noam Chomsky

American theoretical linguist whose work from the 1950s revolutionized the
field of linguistics by treating language as a uniquely human, biologically based
cognitive capacity. Chomsky argues that language is a unique evolutionary
development of the human species and distinguished from modes of
communication used by any other animal species. Chomsky's nativist, internalist
view of language is consistent with the philosophical school of "rationalism" and
contrasts with the anti-nativist, externalist view of language consistent with the
philosophical school of "empiricism", Which contends that all knowledge,
including language, comes from external stimuli.
The basic of Chomsky linguistics theory lies in biolinguistics, the linguistic
school that hold that the principles underpinning the structure of language are
biologically preset in the human mind and hence genetically inherited. As such he
argues that all humans share the same underlying linguistic structure, irrespective
of sociocultural difference.

d) John Rupert Firth

In theory firth any context fonology, morphology, leksicon,and situation,
language are composition from that contexts. His approach can be considered as
 resuming that of Malinowski's anthropological semantics, and as a precursor of
the approach of semiotic anthropology. Anthropological approaches to semantics
are alternative to the three major types of semantics approaches: linguistic
semantics, logical semantics, and General semantics. Other independent
approaches to semantics are philosophical semantics and psychological
semantics.

4. We are missing many opportunities. The possibilities of studying nonhumans as

models for our ancestral abilities or for how convergent evolution might have led to
similar language-like abilities in birds, humans, and marine mammals has
significantly decreased—as is the possibility of beginning studies with other vocal
learners such as elephants (note Stoeger et al., 2012).
Fortunately, the field of animal cognition still has pockets of strength, and questions
abound: What are the differences in imitative ability (in all its complexity—e.g.,
mimicry vs. emulation vs. imitation) that might be important for human–nonhuman
communication systems and acquisition of cognitive concepts (e.g., Nielsen, Subiaul,
Galef, Zentall, & Whiten, 2012)?
Given that we know more now about signed languages, their parallels to spoken
languages, and how they can evolve over time (e.g., Goldin-Meadow et al., 2015), and
more about language pedagogy (e.g., Golinkoff, Can, Soderstrom, & Hirsh-Pasek,
2015). How much might apes learn if trained appropriately? Given the research on
using computer-based communication training and portable systems for children on
the autistic spectrum (Ramdoss et al., 2011).
Where might such training have led with apes and marine mammals? Given that we
know more about human languages and are continuing to learn more (e.g., Levinson
& Gray, 2012), are the criteria we once used for nonhuman acquisition fair? With data
on those fronts, not to mention knowledge of brain structures and connectivity, and
the striking parallels between primate and nonprimate and even nonmammalian
communication systems, what might we be able to deduce about the precursors to
modern human languages? Might studies of avian vocal learning—with respect to
possible avian “missing links,” such as bellbirds (flycatchers technically classified as
suboscines—nonvocal learners—that nevertheless do learn simple songs; Kroodsma
et al., 2013)—tell us, through investigations of convergent evolution, something about
what types of brains our ancestors might have been developing? The list can go on,
and the implications are clear.
Those, although interspecies communication studies may not have taught nonhumans
to use “language,” nonhumans (and those who studied them) had learned quite a bit.
Clearly, some common neural architecture enabled disparate nonhuman species to
achieve a level of symbolic representation and rule-governed behavior, suggesting
that some such abilities were likely in their natural communication systems and had
evolved for that purpose—it was unlikely that researchers instilled such behavior
entirely de novo. Nevertheless, grants for such studies became more and more
difficult to obtain, subjects began to die off, and the next generation of students
seemed more intrigued by human neurobiology and fMRIs.
And, in a somewhat unnerving turn of events, animal rights leaders began using the
data obtained by researchers in the animal language/animal cognition field to push for
rules and regulations prohibiting apes and marine mammals from being available for
such studies in the future.

THANKYOU