To refute this kind of argument, I would suggest that since the notion, of ‘neural computation’ is married to the technical notion of informat, ulable thing external to the nervous system which does the ‘processing’, it is simply, empirically untenable and, therefore, misleading. John Benjamins, Amsterdam, Lamb, S., 2006. Then, define yours. Jackendoff, R., 2002. Love, N., 2007. There is much more to be said about the unity in diversity of human languages. ), Bridges and Walls in Metalinguistic Discourse, Peter Lang, Frankfurt, pp. Within the verb phrase, all languages have transitive verbs with an object, which again is usually a noun phrase, exactly the same as the subject in its basic internal structure. the context of every word’s being, or its environmental medium. In traditional linguistics, signs are routinely characterized as form, with certain content (‘meaning’). (functional styles) The term ‘intermingling languages’ is sometimes replaced with ‘code switching’ or ‘code mixing’, and the latter two treated as synonyms, although their meaning differs in multiple aspects. intentionality. ’s interactions with its own descriptions. Mark Aronoff, Department of Linguistics, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY. The study of phonetics, for example, deals with the more physical properties of speech, its relation to both acoustics and physiology, while phonology treats sounds more as abstractions, but there is no way to draw a sharp line between them. Autopoiesis and a biology of intentionality. (brain). It is a theory about living organization and at the same time a theory about, ); autopoietic principles, therefore, are essential in making sen, , beliefs that ‘‘our minds contain words that we use when we, on ‘talking together’ as outlined by Hodges in this issue (, as the first to offer an ecological account of langu, . This is primarily conducted by rhizobia (nitrogen fixing bacteria) in association with legume plants. Language is, on this view, simultaneously enacted and interpreted across the, time-scales of biological and cultural events: language is integrated with brain and behav-, ior, linguistic behavior results from the real-time, that serve as signs. But let go we must, for the child has grown. It is generally the case that there is no “natural” connection between a linguistic form and its meaning. To challenge the entrenched perspectives on language as a code for information transfer, we must learn to speak differently, realizing that the ability to think is not an innate feature of the human brain. From something visible to something conceptual.//Language independent. ture determined and mediated by intentionality. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. ‘traditional/philosophic’, and ‘autopoietic’. But in. has at least three distinctly different readings – in Peirce’s semiotics, (including linguistic signs), that is, their cognitive dynamics, the one aspect that until, observes, ‘‘indexicality extends beyond the, Words like ‘water’ have an unnoticed indexical com-, Fodor, 1975; Newell, 1990; Pylyshyn, 1999, ). The regularity of this sound change is demonstrated by the fact that there are no or words in which the first letter is pronounced. The results indicate that measuring creativity using the constructed coefficients has greater reliability and validity than the CAT, which could be the consequence of the higher degree of objectivity of the metric. Kravchenko, A.V., 2003b. From individual. Language universals and linguistic typology: Syntax and morphology.