Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
71 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
2 kinds of phonetics:
|
1. Acoustic phonetics
2. Auditory phonetics |
|
Acoustic Phonetics
|
Production of Sound
|
|
Auditory phonetics
|
reception of words
|
|
phonetics/phonology
|
language as sound in human speech or natural languages
|
|
morphology
|
language as internal structure of words...study of internal structure of words
|
|
morpheme
|
smallest meaningful unit in language grammar
ex: (pre-exist-ence = 3 morphemes) |
|
root/free
|
type of morpheme
a meaningful word that cannot be split into smaller units ex: exist, ful, pre |
|
bound
|
type of morpheme
cannot occur by itself must be attached to root morpheme |
|
3 kinds of affixes
|
1. suffix
2. prefix 3. inifix |
|
2 types of morphemes
|
1. root/free
2. bound |
|
Syntax
|
the structures of parts of speech
rules for the arrangements of parts of speech in language ex: noun phrase>verb phrase>prepositional phase>object>verb phrase |
|
Lexical vs Syntactic
|
Lexical is the smaller unit within the syntactic phrase
|
|
Semantics
|
The study of how meaning is created in language
|
|
2 parts of meaning (semantic meaning)
|
1. referent
2. symbol |
|
Referent
|
any actual object/event/idea referred to by words
ex: picture of a dog |
|
symbol
|
the words used to describe any object/event/idea
the word assigned to the referent ex: dog: used to describe the picture of the dog |
|
4 types of meaning
|
1. denotative
2. connotative 3. stylistic 4. affective |
|
denotative
|
literal meaning of a word (dictionary definition)
|
|
connotative
|
denotative meanin and other associated meanings (the associated meaning is usually and emotional aspect to the word)
|
|
stylistic
|
denotative meaning and connotative meaning and register...
register is the variation in language used depending on the situation or social setting |
|
affective
|
denotative meaning and connotative meaning and very strong emotional sentiment...all words have denoative and connotative meaning but only some have AFFECTIVE meaning
ex: Nazi, terrorist, killer, God, etc. |
|
pragmatics
|
specific meaning within a particular context.
there is a hidden layer of meaning that you will only understand if you are familiar with a given context ex: D'oH (simpsons) |
|
2 kinds of phonetics/phonological ambiguity
|
1. unclear pronunciation
2. similar sounding words |
|
similar sounding words
|
two words sound the same
ex: two, too |
|
unclear pronunciation
|
includes things like herb, oregano, tomato: being said differently depending on where you're from
|
|
structural ambiguity
|
where the meaning is ambiguous (open to more than one interpretation) because structural category is unclear
ex: 2 or more meanings because of different lexical categories |
|
phonetic/phonological ambiguity
|
unclear meaning due to the sound of words
|
|
2 kinds of structural ambiguitys
|
1. lexical
2. syntactic |
|
lexical
|
lack of clarity in a single word (within the phrase)
ex: run (multiple meanings: run as in jog or run as in stockings) |
|
syntactic
|
lack of clarity in phrase
ex: visiting the dentist (what are you doing there?) |
|
Semantic Uncertainty
|
meaning is ambiguous (open to more than one interpretation) because of unclear relationship between referent and symbol
ex: what we are talking about (referent) and the word we use to refer it to (symbol) may be different cause some semantic uncertainty |
|
what is moral disengagement?
|
disengagement from the social world how humans act in society
|
|
what are the three steps in the process (self-regulatory mechanisms)
|
1. proactive: active, selective and social agents
2. vicarious learners: learn through observing others 3. self reflexive and self regulatory: constantly monitoring actions/ behaviors depending on social contexts |
|
what are the three types of moral disengagement?
|
1. reprehensible conduct
2. detrimental effects 3. victiim |
|
reprehensible conduct
|
step one
|
|
detrimental effects
|
step two
|
|
victim
|
step three
|
|
3 parts to reprehensible conduct:
|
1. moral justification
2. euphemistic labeling 3. advantageous comparison |
|
moral justification
|
inhuman act but for a noble/worth cause
ex: heroes in violent movies |
|
euphemistic labeling
|
inhumane act but renamed/labeled to not seem as bad
|
|
semantic ambiguity
|
connection between referent and symbol is unclear
multiple possible relations between referent (object) and symbol (word) ex: single symbol >multiple referents or multiple symbols > single referent |
|
2 kinds of ambiguitys
|
1. single symbol
2. multiple symbols |
|
single symbol
|
single symbol -> multiple referents
one word refers to many objects ex: ukraine leader sleeps with arms (what kind of arms?) |
|
multiple symbols
|
multiple symbols -> single referent
many words refer to the same object |
|
pragmatic ambiguity
|
ambiguity because context is unclear
a deeper meaning that is only obvious if you know the background or cultural meaning ex: sleeps with the fishes (got to watch sopranos to get it) |
|
structural vs semantic ambiguity
|
structural ambiguity are those who's words' structural category is unclear (stolen painting found by a tree...did the tree steal it? (adverb) or was it just found by the tree (preposition)
vs semantic ambiguity where different meanings but both with the same category (the andersons saw ducks when THEY were flying to seattle (is THEY the ducks or the andersons???) |
|
rhetoric definition and 3 parts
|
making persuasion possible
it is the counterpart of dialectic one person addressing many 1. deomonstration of truth 2. practical questions (what are some alternatives....) 3. outcome = probability |
|
dialectic definition and 3 parts
|
one on one discussion
1. search for the truth 2. philosophical questions (what is human nature) 3. outcome = certainty |
|
rhetoric vs. dialectic
|
rhetoric is one person addressing many
dialectic is one on one discussion |
|
3 types of speeches
|
1. forensic
2. Epideictic 3. Deliberatative |
|
Forensic
|
courtroom speaking (informative speeches)
concerned with issues of the past |
|
Deliberatative
|
political speaking (persuasive speeches)
concerned with the future |
|
3 rhetorical proofs
|
ethos
pathos logos |
|
ethos
|
proofs of ethics (credibility)
|
|
logos
|
proofs of logic
|
|
pathos
|
proofs of emotion
|
|
3 parts of ethos that a speaker must demonstrate
|
1. intelligence: practical wisdom and value
2. virtue:honesty 3. goodwill: positive intention |
|
2 logos proofs
|
inductive
deductive |
|
deductive proofs
|
1.top down
argumentative structure is presented before evidence/examples 2. absolute: once proved, they cannot be refuted |
|
2 parts to deductive logos proof
|
1.syllogism
2. enthymeme |
|
syllogism
|
structure: major premise ->minor premise -> conclusion
ex: all humans are mortal ->socrates is human --> socrates is mortal 2 common formats: if/then and either/or |
|
Enthymeme
|
incomplete syllogism: either major or minor premise is implicit (not directly stated)...the assumption that the audience already agrees about it
ex: all men are created equal, i deserve to be treated like anyone else (missing the fact that this person is a man) clinton lied, he cannot be trusted (missing; those who lie cannot be trusted) |
|
5 canons of rhetoric
|
1. invention
2. arrangement 3. style 4. memory 5. delivery |
|
invention
|
optimal mix of reasoning
(inductive/deducting + specialized knowledge) |
|
arrangement
|
make structure of argument easy to follow (a logical pattern of argument)
|
|
style
|
use of vivid language for imagery (metaphor)
|
|
memory
|
draw on/reinforce ideas which are memorable (roadmap for success)
|
|
delivery
|
relaxed yet memorable manner of delivery (includes vocal modulation, gestures, body language, etc)
|
|
2 critiques of aristotles rhetoric
|
1. audience as passive
2. does not address importance of situation |
|
what is figurative language
|
using a word in another way other than its denotative (literal) meaning
|
|
simile vs. metaphor
|
simile: an explicit comparison of two unlike objects using "like" or "as"
metaphor: implicit comparison of two unlike things |