ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Steven Pinker - Psychologist
Steven Pinker is a professor of cognitive science (the study of the human mind) who writes about language, mind and human nature.

Why you should listen

Steven Pinker grew up in the English-speaking community of Montreal but has spent his adult life bouncing back and forth between Harvard and MIT. He is interested in all aspects of human nature: how we see, hear, think, speak, remember, feel and interact.

To be specific: he developed the first comprehensive theory of language acquisition in children, used verb meaning as a window into cognition, probed the limits of neural networks and showed how the interaction between memory and computation shapes language. He has used evolution to illuminate innuendo, emotional expression and social coordination. He has documented historical declines in violence and explained them in terms of the ways that the violent and peaceable components of human nature interact in different eras. He has written books on the language instinct, how the mind works, the stuff of thought and the doctrine of the blank slate, together with a guide to stylish writing that is rooted in psychology.

In his latest book, Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress, he writes about progress -- why people are healthier, richer, safer, happier and better educated than ever. His other books include The Language InstinctHow the Mind Works, The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human NatureThe Stuff of Thought, and The Better Angels of Our Nature.

More profile about the speaker
Steven Pinker | Speaker | TED.com
TEDGlobal 2005

Steven Pinker: What our language habits reveal

史蒂芬·平克谈语言和思想

Filmed:
2,457,061 views

在他所著《思想的实质》的独家新书介绍会上,史蒂芬·平克探讨了语言如何表达内心的思想--以及我们的遣词用句中透露出多少鲜为人知的信息
- Psychologist
Steven Pinker is a professor of cognitive science (the study of the human mind) who writes about language, mind and human nature. Full bio

Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.

00:26
This is a picture图片 of Maurice莫里斯 Druon德吕翁,
0
1000
2000
照片里的人是Maurice Druon
00:28
the Honorary名誉 Perpetual永动的 Secretary秘书 of L'AcademieL'琪 francaise法兰西,
1
3000
4000
L'Academie francaise的荣誉终身秘书长--
00:32
the French法国 Academy学院.
2
7000
2000
也就是法兰西学院
00:34
He is splendidly华丽地 attired穿着 in his 68,000-dollar-美元 uniform制服,
3
9000
5000
穿着价值六万八千美元的豪华制服
00:39
befitting合适 the role角色 of the French法国 Academy学院
4
14000
3000
对法兰西学院来说倒很适合
00:42
as legislating立法 the
5
17000
3000
因为它规范着
00:45
correct正确 usage用法 in French法国
6
20000
2000
法语的正确用法
00:47
and perpetuating延续 the language语言.
7
22000
2000
使这门语言永世长存
00:49
The French法国 Academy学院 has two main主要 tasks任务:
8
24000
3000
法兰西学院有两个主要任务
00:52
it compiles编译 a dictionary字典 of official官方 French法国.
9
27000
3000
它编纂官方的法语词典--
00:55
They're now working加工 on their ninth第九 edition,
10
30000
3000
他们目前在编第九部
00:58
which哪一个 they began开始 in 1930, and they've他们已经 reached到达 the letter P.
11
33000
3000
从1930年就开始了,现在编到了P字头。
01:02
They also legislate立法 on correct正确 usage用法,
12
37000
3000
他们还规范正确的用法
01:05
such这样 as the proper正确 term术语 for what the French法国 call "email电子邮件,"
13
40000
4000
比如,电子邮件(email)在法语里的正确说法
01:09
which哪一个 ought应该 to be "courrielcourriel."
14
44000
2000
应该是"courriel"
01:11
The World世界 Wide Web卷筒纸, the French法国 are told,
15
46000
2000
他们告诉法国人,万维网(World Wide Web)
01:13
ought应该 to be referred简称 to as
16
48000
2000
应该被叫做
01:15
"la toile棉质印花布 d'araigneeD'araignee mondiale服务社" -- the Global全球 Spider蜘蛛 Web卷筒纸 --
17
50000
4000
"la toile d'araignee modiale"--“环球蜘蛛网”
01:19
recommendations建议 that the French法国 gaily华丽地 ignore忽视.
18
54000
4000
诸如此类法国人民欣然忽略的建议
01:24
Now, this is one model模型 of how language语言 comes to be:
19
59000
4000
这是语言产生的众多模型之一:
01:28
namely亦即, it's legislated立法 by an academy学院.
20
63000
3000
也就是说,由一个学院来进行规范
01:31
But anyone任何人 who looks容貌 at language语言 realizes实现
21
66000
3000
但任何懂得语言的人都意识到
01:34
that this is a rather silly愚蠢 conceit自负,
22
69000
4000
这是愚蠢的自负
01:38
that language语言, rather, emerges出现 from human人的 minds头脑 interacting互动 from one another另一个.
23
73000
3000
语言产生于人类心灵间的互动
01:41
And this is visible可见 in the unstoppable势不可挡 change更改 in language语言 --
24
76000
4000
而在语言的不停变化中,这是显而易见的
01:45
the fact事实 that by the time the Academy学院 finishes饰面 their dictionary字典,
25
80000
3000
事实上,当法兰西学院完成他们的词典时
01:48
it will already已经 be well out of date日期.
26
83000
2000
它早已经过时了。
01:50
We see it in the
27
85000
2000
我们看到
01:52
constant不变 appearance出现 of slang俚语 and jargon行话,
28
87000
4000
俗语和术语不断产生
01:56
of the historical历史的 change更改 in languages语言,
29
91000
2000
历史上语言在变化
01:58
in divergence差异 of dialects方言
30
93000
2000
方言在分支
02:00
and the formation编队 of new languages语言.
31
95000
3000
新的语言在形成
02:03
So language语言 is not so much a creator创造者 or shaper整形 of human人的 nature性质,
32
98000
3000
所以语言并不只是创造、塑造人性之物
02:06
so much as a window窗口 onto human人的 nature性质.
33
101000
3000
同样是反映人性的窗口
02:09
In a book that I'm currently目前 working加工 on,
34
104000
3000
我正在写的一本书中
02:12
I hope希望 to use language语言 to shed light on
35
107000
3000
我希望能阐明
02:15
a number of aspects方面 of human人的 nature性质,
36
110000
2000
人性的一些方面
02:17
including包含 the cognitive认知 machinery机械
37
112000
2000
包括认知机能
02:19
with which哪一个 humans人类 conceptualize概念化 the world世界
38
114000
3000
人们靠这个把世界概念化
02:22
and the relationship关系 types类型 that govern治理 human人的 interaction相互作用.
39
117000
3000
还有掌管人类互动的各类关系。
02:25
And I'm going to say a few少数 words about each one this morning早上.
40
120000
3000
今天早上,我将对它们逐一简要介绍。
02:28
Let me start开始 off with a technical技术 problem问题 in language语言
41
123000
2000
让我从一个语言中的技术性问题开始
02:30
that I've worried担心 about for quite相当 some time --
42
125000
2000
我研究这个问题已经有一段时间了
02:32
and indulge放纵 me
43
127000
4000
希望你们能包涵一下,
02:36
in my passion for verbs动词 and how they're used.
44
131000
3000
包涵我对动词,和它们用法的热情
02:39
The problem问题 is, which哪一个 verbs动词 go in which哪一个 constructions建设?
45
134000
3000
问题在于,哪个动词用于哪个构式?
02:42
The verb动词 is the chassis机壳 of the sentence句子.
46
137000
3000
动词是句子的基座,
02:45
It's the framework骨架 onto which哪一个 the other parts部分 are bolted狂奔.
47
140000
4000
其他部分都安在这个基座上。
02:49
Let me give you a quick reminder提醒
48
144000
2000
让我提醒你们一下
02:51
of something that you've long forgotten忘记了.
49
146000
2000
这是你们早已忘记的东西。
02:53
An intransitive不及物动词 verb动词, such这样 as "dine用餐," for example,
50
148000
3000
不及物动词,比如“用餐”(dine)
02:56
can't take a direct直接 object目的.
51
151000
2000
不能带有直接的宾语
02:58
You have to say, "Sam山姆 dined吃了饭," not, "Sam山姆 dined吃了饭 the pizza比萨."
52
153000
3000
你得说:“山姆用餐了(Sam dined)",而不是“山姆用餐了比萨饼(Sam dined the pizza."
03:01
A transitive及物 verb动词 mandates任务
53
156000
2000
一个及物动词要求
03:03
that there has to be an object目的 there:
54
158000
2000
必须有宾语:
03:05
"Sam山姆 devoured吞噬 the pizza比萨." You can't just say, "Sam山姆 devoured吞噬."
55
160000
3000
“山姆吞吃比萨饼(Sam devoured the pizza)”。你不能只是说“山姆吞吃(Sam devoured)”。
03:08
There are dozens许多 or scores分数 of verbs动词 of this type类型,
56
163000
4000
有许许多多这类的动词
03:12
each of which哪一个 shapes形状 its sentence句子.
57
167000
2000
每个都塑造着句子。
03:14
So, a problem问题 in explaining说明 how children孩子 learn学习 language语言,
58
169000
4000
所以在解释孩子们如何学习语言时候,有一个问题
03:18
a problem问题 in teaching教学 language语言 to adults成年人 so that they don't make grammatical语法的 errors错误,
59
173000
5000
同样也是教成人学外语语法时的一个问题
03:23
and a problem问题 in programming程序设计 computers电脑 to use language语言 is
60
178000
3000
以及给电脑编使用语言的程序时--
03:26
which哪一个 verbs动词 go in which哪一个 constructions建设.
61
181000
2000
在哪个构式里该用哪个动词?
03:29
For example, the dative construction施工 in English英语.
62
184000
2000
比如,英语中的与格构式--
03:31
You can say, "Give a muffin松饼 to a mouse老鼠," the prepositional前置词的 dative.
63
186000
3000
可以说“Give a muffin to a mouse”,前置词与格,
03:34
Or, "Give a mouse老鼠 a muffin松饼," the double-object双宾语 dative.
64
189000
3000
或者“Give a mouse a muffin”,双宾语与格,
03:37
"Promise诺言 anything to her," "Promise诺言 her anything," and so on.
65
192000
4000
"Promise anything to her“,”Promise her anything“,等等。
03:41
Hundreds数以百计 of verbs动词 can go both ways方法.
66
196000
2000
上百的动词可以两用。
03:43
So a tempting诱人的 generalization概括 for a child儿童,
67
198000
2000
对于孩子,很容易去做的一个归纳--
03:45
for an adult成人, for a computer电脑
68
200000
2000
对于大人和电脑来说也一样--
03:47
is that any verb动词 that can appear出现 in the construction施工,
69
202000
2000
就是任何可以在下面这个构式中出现的动词
03:49
"subject-verb-thing-to-a-recipient主语 - 动词 - 事到一个收件人"
70
204000
3000
“主语-动词-物体-to-a 接受者”
03:52
can also be expressed表达 as "subject-verb-recipient-thing主语 - 动词 - 接收者的事情."
71
207000
3000
也可以表达成“主语-动词-接受者-东西”。
03:55
A handy便利 thing to have,
72
210000
2000
这是很顺手的事
03:57
because language语言 is infinite无穷,
73
212000
2000
因为语言是无穷的
03:59
and you can't just parrot鹦鹉 back the sentences句子 that you've heard听说.
74
214000
3000
对于你学过的句子不能只是鹦鹉学舌。
04:02
You've got to extract提取 generalizations概括
75
217000
2000
你必须得做出归纳
04:04
so you can produce生产 and understand理解 new sentences句子.
76
219000
3000
这样你才能制造、理解新句子。
04:07
This would be an example of how to do that.
77
222000
2000
这就是这样做的一个例子
04:09
Unfortunately不幸, there appear出现 to be idiosyncratic特质 exceptions例外.
78
224000
3000
不幸的是,这方面有例外。
04:12
You can say, "Biff比夫 drove开车 the car汽车 to Chicago芝加哥,"
79
227000
3000
你可以说,“Biff drove the car to Chicago”。
04:15
but not, "Biff比夫 drove开车 Chicago芝加哥 the car汽车."
80
230000
3000
但不是“Biff drove Chicago the car”。
04:18
You can say, "Sal萨尔 gave Jason贾森 a headache头痛,"
81
233000
3000
你可以说:“Sal gave Jason a headache”,
04:21
but it's a bit odd to say, "Sal萨尔 gave a headache头痛 to Jason贾森."
82
236000
2000
但“Sal gave a headache to Jason”就很别扭了。
04:24
The solution is that these constructions建设, despite尽管 initial初始 appearance出现,
83
239000
3000
原因是这些构式,尽管一开始相似
04:27
are not synonymous代名词,
84
242000
2000
但并不是同义句。
04:29
that when you crank曲柄 up the microscope显微镜
85
244000
2000
当你搬出显微镜
04:31
on human人的 cognition认识, you see that there's a subtle微妙 difference区别
86
246000
2000
对准在人类认知上,你会看到很多微妙的差别
04:33
in meaning含义 between之间 them.
87
248000
2000
存在于它们的意思里。
04:35
So, "give the X to the Y,"
88
250000
2000
所以“Give the X to the Y”--
04:37
that construction施工 corresponds对应 to the thought
89
252000
3000
这个构式对应的想法是:
04:40
"cause原因 X to go to Y." Whereas "give the Y the X"
90
255000
3000
“Cause X to go to Y”,而“Give the Y the X”
04:43
corresponds对应 to the thought "cause原因 Y to have X."
91
258000
4000
对应的想法是“cause Y to have X”。
04:47
Now, many许多 events事件 can be subject学科 to either construal建构,
92
262000
4000
许多时候我们都有理解偏差
04:51
kind of like the classic经典 figure-ground图底 reversal翻转 illusions幻想,
93
266000
3000
类似于经典的“形象-背景”颠倒的幻术
04:54
in which哪一个 you can either pay工资 attention注意
94
269000
3000
你要么吧注意力放在
04:57
to the particular特定 object目的,
95
272000
2000
某个物体上
04:59
in which哪一个 case案件 the space空间 around it recedes回落 from attention注意,
96
274000
4000
使周围的空间从注意力中退去
05:03
or you can see the faces面孔 in the empty space空间,
97
278000
2000
要么你集中注意观察空间的构造
05:05
in which哪一个 case案件 the object目的 recedes回落 out of consciousness意识.
98
280000
4000
这样前景中的物体就从意识中退去
05:09
How are these construals构念 reflected反射的 in language语言?
99
284000
2000
这些理解如何反应在语言当中?
05:11
Well, in both cases, the thing that is construed解释 as being存在 affected受影响
100
286000
4000
在两种情况里,那个被解释为受影响的东西
05:15
is expressed表达 as the direct直接 object目的,
101
290000
2000
被表达成了直接宾语:
05:17
the noun名词 after the verb动词.
102
292000
2000
动词之后的名词。
05:19
So, when you think of the event事件 as causing造成 the muffin松饼 to go somewhere某处 --
103
294000
4000
当你想到“使蛋糕去某处”时
05:23
where you're doing something to the muffin松饼 --
104
298000
2000
当你对蛋糕实施动作时
05:25
you say, "Give the muffin松饼 to the mouse老鼠."
105
300000
2000
你说:“Give the muffin to the mouse.”
05:27
When you construe诠释 it as "cause原因 the mouse老鼠 to have something,"
106
302000
3000
当你理解成“使老鼠拥有某物”
05:30
you're doing something to the mouse老鼠,
107
305000
2000
你对老鼠实施动作
05:32
and therefore因此 you express表现 it as, "Give the mouse老鼠 the muffin松饼."
108
307000
3000
所以你把它表达成:“Give the mouse the muffin.”
05:35
So which哪一个 verbs动词 go in which哪一个 construction施工 --
109
310000
2000
所以,在哪个构式里用哪个动词
05:37
the problem问题 with which哪一个 I began开始 --
110
312000
2000
我一开始提出的问题
05:39
depends依靠 on whether是否 the verb动词 specifies指定 a kind of motion运动
111
314000
4000
取决于动词是否指出某种运动
05:43
or a kind of possession所有权 change更改.
112
318000
2000
或者某种所有权的变化
05:45
To give something involves涉及 both causing造成 something to go
113
320000
3000
"给出某物“当中包含"使某物前往"
05:48
and causing造成 someone有人 to have.
114
323000
2000
也包含”使某人拥有“
05:50
To drive驾驶 the car汽车 only causes原因 something to go,
115
325000
3000
开车只能使某物走开
05:53
because Chicago's芝加哥 not the kind of thing that can possess具有 something.
116
328000
2000
因为芝加哥不是那种能拥有某物的东西。
05:55
Only humans人类 can possess具有 things.
117
330000
3000
只有人才能拥有东西。
05:58
And to give someone有人 a headache头痛 causes原因 them to have the headache头痛,
118
333000
2000
“令人头痛”使人具有头痛
06:00
but it's not as if you're taking服用 the headache头痛 out of your head
119
335000
3000
但你并不会把头痛从手里给出去
06:03
and causing造成 it to go to the other person,
120
338000
2000
让它到另一个人那里去
06:05
and implanting植入 it in them.
121
340000
2000
然后再放进对方脑袋里。
06:07
You may可能 just be loud or obnoxious厌恶,
122
342000
2000
你只可能是说话太大声,或者讨人厌
06:09
or some other way causing造成 them to have the headache头痛.
123
344000
2000
或者用其他的方法使对方头疼。
06:11
So, that's
124
346000
4000
所以
06:15
an example of the kind of thing that I do in my day job工作.
125
350000
2000
这是我工作内容的一个例子。
06:17
So why should anyone任何人 care关心?
126
352000
2000
那为什么有人要在乎这工作呢?
06:19
Well, there are a number of interesting有趣 conclusions结论, I think,
127
354000
3000
这是因为有许多有趣的结论
06:22
from this and many许多 similar类似 kinds of analyses分析
128
357000
4000
从这个例子,还有类似的
06:26
of hundreds数以百计 of English英语 verbs动词.
129
361000
2000
对很多英语动词的分析中可以得出。
06:28
First, there's a level水平 of fine-grained细粒度 conceptual概念上的 structure结构体,
130
363000
3000
首先,存在着一个精细的概念结构
06:31
which哪一个 we automatically自动 and unconsciously不知不觉 compute计算
131
366000
3000
我们自动、无意识地计算产生它
06:34
every一切 time we produce生产 or utter说出 a sentence句子, that governs共治 our use of language语言.
132
369000
4000
每当我们想到或者说出一个主导我们对语言的使用的句子
06:38
You can think of this as the language语言 of thought, or "mentalese心理语."
133
373000
4000
你可以把它理解成“思想的语言”,或者“思想语”。
06:42
It seems似乎 to be based基于 on a fixed固定 set of concepts概念,
134
377000
3000
它看上去是建立在一套固定的概念之上
06:45
which哪一个 govern治理 dozens许多 of constructions建设 and thousands数千 of verbs动词 --
135
380000
3000
这套概念管理着数十个构式和数千个动词
06:48
not only in English英语, but in all other languages语言 --
136
383000
3000
不仅仅是英文的,而是所有语言的
06:51
fundamental基本的 concepts概念 such这样 as space空间,
137
386000
2000
最基本概念,比如空间
06:53
time, causation因果关系 and human人的 intention意向,
138
388000
3000
时间、因果以及人的意愿
06:56
such这样 as, what is the means手段 and what is the ends结束?
139
391000
3000
比如,什么是手段,什么是目的?
06:59
These are reminiscent让人联想起 of the kinds of categories类别
140
394000
2000
这些跟康德所主张的,
07:01
that Immanuel伊曼纽尔 Kant康德 argued争论
141
396000
2000
构成人类思想的基本框架的
07:03
are the basic基本 framework骨架 for human人的 thought,
142
398000
3000
那些范畴很相似
07:06
and it's interesting有趣 that our unconscious无意识 use of language语言
143
401000
3000
很有趣的是,我们对语言的无意识的使用
07:09
seems似乎 to reflect反映 these Kantian康德 categories类别.
144
404000
3000
好像在折射着这些康德主义的范畴--
07:12
Doesn't care关心 about perceptual知觉的 qualities气质,
145
407000
2000
不在乎感官的性质
07:14
such这样 as color颜色, texture质地, weight重量 and speed速度,
146
409000
2000
比如颜色、材质、重量和速度
07:16
which哪一个 virtually实质上 never differentiate区分
147
411000
2000
上述这些都几乎从不区分
07:18
the use of verbs动词 in different不同 constructions建设.
148
413000
2000
动词在不同构式中的用法。
07:21
An additional额外 twist is that all of the constructions建设 in English英语
149
416000
3000
此外,英语中的所有构式
07:24
are used not only literally按照字面,
150
419000
2000
不仅仅有字面意义
07:26
but in a quasi-metaphorical准隐喻 way.
151
421000
3000
还有准隐喻的用法。
07:29
For example, this construction施工, the dative,
152
424000
2000
就拿与格来说,
07:31
is used not only to transfer转让 things,
153
426000
2000
不仅用来转移事物,
07:33
but also for the metaphorical隐喻 transfer转让 of ideas思路,
154
428000
3000
还用来比喻思想的转移,
07:36
as when we say, "She told a story故事 to me"
155
431000
2000
比如,"She told a story to me"
07:38
or "told me a story故事,"
156
433000
2000
或者"told me a story"
07:40
"Max马克斯 taught Spanish西班牙语 to the students学生们" or "taught the students学生们 Spanish西班牙语."
157
435000
3000
"Max taught Spanish to the student"或者"taught the students Spanish."
07:43
It's exactly究竟 the same相同 construction施工,
158
438000
2000
这都是完全一样的构式
07:45
but no muffins松饼, no mice老鼠, nothing moving移动 at all.
159
440000
4000
但里面没有蛋糕或者老鼠。完全没有运动。
07:49
It evokes唤起 the container容器 metaphor隐喻 of communication通讯,
160
444000
3000
这使人想起语言交流中的"容器隐喻"
07:52
in which哪一个 we conceive构想 of ideas思路 as objects对象,
161
447000
2000
在这里面我们把想法理解成实物
07:54
sentences句子 as containers集装箱,
162
449000
2000
句子就像容器
07:56
and communication通讯 as a kind of sending发出.
163
451000
2000
语言交流就像快递
07:58
As when we say we "gather收集" our ideas思路, to "put" them "into" words,
164
453000
3000
当我们说"gather"(收集)我们的想法,并"'put' them 'into' word"(把它们付诸语言)
08:01
and if our words aren't "empty" or "hollow空洞,"
165
456000
2000
如果我们说的话并不"empty"(空)或者"hollow"(空洞)
08:03
we might威力 get these ideas思路 "across横过" to a listener倾听者,
166
458000
3000
我们就可以把意思传达“过去”(“across")
08:06
who can "unpack解压" our words to "extract提取" their "content内容."
167
461000
3000
让一个能够”拆解“("unpack")我们的语言而提取“内涵”("content")
08:09
And indeed确实, this kind of verbiage罗嗦 is not the exception例外, but the rule规则.
168
464000
3000
诸如此类的修辞法不是个例,而是广泛规则
08:12
It's very hard to find any example of abstract抽象 language语言
169
467000
3000
想找到纯抽象的
08:15
that is not based基于 on some concrete具体 metaphor隐喻.
170
470000
3000
而非实物隐喻的表达的例子难之又难
08:18
For example, you can use the verb动词 "go"
171
473000
3000
譬如说,你可以用动词"go"
08:21
and the prepositions介词 "to" and "from"
172
476000
2000
以及介词"to"和"from"
08:23
in a literal文字, spatial空间的 sense.
173
478000
2000
来表达字面意思:
08:25
"The messenger信使 went from Paris巴黎 to Istanbul伊斯坦布尔."
174
480000
2000
“信使从巴黎去了伊斯坦布尔。”("The messenger went from Paris to Istanbul.")
08:27
You can also say, "Biff比夫 went from sick生病 to well."
175
482000
3000
你也可以说,”比夫从病中康复。("Biff went from sick to well." )
08:30
He needn't不用 go anywhere随地. He could have been in bed the whole整个 time,
176
485000
3000
他哪里都没”去“,而是可能一直呆在床上
08:33
but it's as if his health健康 is a point in state space空间
177
488000
2000
但是我们说话时仿佛他的健康状况是空间中的点
08:35
that you conceptualize概念化 as moving移动.
178
490000
2000
你给它一种动的概念
08:37
Or, "The meeting会议 went from three to four,"
179
492000
2000
或者,“会从3点一直开到4点,”("The meeting went from three to four,")
08:39
in which哪一个 we conceive构想 of time as stretched拉伸 along沿 a line线.
180
494000
3000
这里我们把时间想成分布在一条直线上
08:42
Likewise同样, we use "force" to indicate表明
181
497000
3000
与此相似地,我们用力的概念来表示
08:45
not only physical物理 force,
182
500000
2000
不仅仅是物理的力
08:47
as in, "Rose玫瑰 forced被迫 the door to open打开,"
183
502000
2000
比如,"Rose forced the door to open,"(罗斯用力把门打开)
08:49
but also interpersonal人际交往 force,
184
504000
2000
也包括人际间的作用力
08:51
as in, "Rose玫瑰 forced被迫 Sadie塞迪 to go," not necessarily一定 by manhandling粗暴对待 her,
185
506000
4000
比如,"Rose forced Sadie to go"(罗斯把萨蒂逼走了)--不一定要推推搡搡的
08:55
but by issuing发行 a threat威胁.
186
510000
2000
而是通过威胁--
08:57
Or, "Rose玫瑰 forced被迫 herself她自己 to go,"
187
512000
2000
或者"Rose forced Sadie to go"(罗斯逼她自己离开)
08:59
as if there were two entities实体 inside Rose's罗斯 head,
188
514000
2000
仿佛罗斯的头脑里有两个东西
09:02
engaged订婚 in a tug拖船 of a war战争.
189
517000
2000
在进行拔河
09:04
Second第二 conclusion结论 is that the ability能力 to conceive构想
190
519000
3000
第二个结论是用不同方式
09:07
of a given特定 event事件 in two different不同 ways方法,
191
522000
3000
构思同一事件的能力
09:10
such这样 as "cause原因 something to go to someone有人"
192
525000
2000
比如,“使某物到某人那里,”
09:12
and "causing造成 someone有人 to have something,"
193
527000
2000
和“使某人拥有某物,”
09:14
I think is a fundamental基本的 feature特征 of human人的 thought,
194
529000
4000
我认为这是人类思维的基本特点
09:18
and it's the basis基础 for much human人的 argumentation论证,
195
533000
3000
而且是人类论辩的基础
09:21
in which哪一个 people don't differ不同 so much on the facts事实
196
536000
3000
论辩中人们争议的一般不是事实
09:24
as on how they ought应该 to be construed解释.
197
539000
2000
而是应该如何理解它们
09:26
Just to give you a few少数 examples例子:
198
541000
2000
这里是一些例子:
09:28
"ending结尾 a pregnancy怀孕" versus "killing谋杀 a fetus胎儿;"
199
543000
2000
是“终止怀孕”还是“杀死胚胎”
09:30
"a ball of cells细胞" versus "an unborn腹中 child儿童;"
200
545000
3000
“一个细胞聚合的小球”还是“一个尚未出生的孩子”
09:33
"invading入侵 Iraq伊拉克" versus "liberating解放 Iraq伊拉克;"
201
548000
2000
“侵略伊拉克”或是“解放伊拉克”
09:35
"redistributing重新分配 wealth财富" versus "confiscating没收 earnings收益."
202
550000
4000
“收入重新分配”抑或“没收财产”
09:39
And I think the biggest最大 picture图片 of all
203
554000
2000
而整个图景中最显著的一部分
09:41
would take seriously认真地 the fact事实
204
556000
3000
是要看到一点:
09:44
that so much of our verbiage罗嗦 about abstract抽象 events事件
205
559000
3000
就是我们对抽象事件的描述
09:47
is based基于 on a concrete具体 metaphor隐喻
206
562000
2000
大多都是基于实体的隐喻
09:49
and see human人的 intelligence情报 itself本身
207
564000
2000
这反映出人类智能本身
09:51
as consisting of a repertoire剧目 of concepts概念 --
208
566000
3000
是由一整套概念组成
09:54
such这样 as objects对象, space空间, time, causation因果关系 and intention意向 --
209
569000
3000
比如物体、空间、时间,因果关系与意图--
09:57
which哪一个 are useful有用 in a social社会, knowledge-intensive知识密集型 species种类,
210
572000
4000
对我们这种群居的、知识密集型的种群非常有用
10:01
whose谁的 evolution演化 you can well imagine想像,
211
576000
2000
我们能想象人类的进化
10:03
and a process处理 of metaphorical隐喻 abstraction抽象化
212
578000
3000
和语言的隐喻抽象化过程齐轨并行
10:06
that allows允许 us to bleach漂白 these concepts概念
213
581000
2000
慢慢地这些概念里
10:08
of their original原版的 conceptual概念上的 content内容 --
214
583000
3000
原先的实际内容就淡化了
10:11
space空间, time and force --
215
586000
3000
空间、时间和力--
10:14
and apply应用 them to new abstract抽象 domains,
216
589000
2000
而它们却被用在全新的抽象领域里
10:16
therefore因此 allowing允许 a species种类 that evolved进化
217
591000
3000
如此就使得我们这个原本是进化出来
10:19
to deal合同 with rocks岩石 and tools工具 and animals动物,
218
594000
2000
和石头、工具与动物打交道的种群
10:21
to conceptualize概念化 mathematics数学, physics物理, law
219
596000
3000
能够形成数学、物理、法律等等概念
10:24
and other abstract抽象 domains.
220
599000
3000
涉足其他抽象的领域
10:27
Well, I said I'd talk about two windows视窗 on human人的 nature性质 --
221
602000
3000
我曾说过我要谈谈人性的两扇窗户
10:30
the cognitive认知 machinery机械 with which哪一个 we conceptualize概念化 the world世界,
222
605000
3000
我们用来概念化世界的知性机能
10:33
and now I'm going to say a few少数 words about the relationship关系 types类型
223
608000
2000
现在我要说说几种人际关系
10:35
that govern治理 human人的 social社会 interaction相互作用,
224
610000
2000
它们支配着人类的社交活动
10:37
again, as reflected反射的 in language语言.
225
612000
2000
同样,这些都体现在语言里
10:40
And I'll start开始 out with a puzzle难题, the puzzle难题 of indirect间接 speech言语 acts行为.
226
615000
4000
我要从间接话语行为这个谜题开始
10:44
Now, I'm sure most of you have seen看到 the movie电影 "Fargo法戈."
227
619000
2000
我相信你们中大多数人都看过《冰血暴》(或译为法哥镇)这部电影
10:46
And you might威力 remember记得 the scene现场 in which哪一个
228
621000
2000
你们可能还记得其中的一段:
10:48
the kidnapper绑匪 is pulled over by a police警察 officer,
229
623000
3000
一个警官要绑匪把车开到路边
10:51
is asked to show显示 his driver's司机 license执照
230
626000
2000
叫他出示驾照
10:53
and holds持有 his wallet钱包 out
231
628000
2000
绑匪把钱包拿出来
10:55
with a 50-dollar-美元 bill法案 extending扩展
232
630000
3000
有一张50美元的钞票
10:58
at a slight轻微 angle角度 out of the wallet钱包.
233
633000
2000
以一个小角度从钱包里伸出来
11:00
And he says, "I was just thinking思维
234
635000
2000
然后绑匪说,“我在想
11:02
that maybe we could take care关心 of it here in Fargo法戈,"
235
637000
2000
或许在法哥镇这个鬼地方我们俩得共同保管这个”--
11:04
which哪一个 everyone大家, including包含 the audience听众,
236
639000
3000
每个人,包括观众
11:07
interprets解释 as a veiled含蓄 bribe贿赂.
237
642000
3000
都理解为含蓄地提出贿赂
11:10
This kind of indirect间接 speech言语 is rampant猖獗 in language语言.
238
645000
4000
这种间接表意在语言中泛滥
11:14
For example, in polite有礼貌 requests要求,
239
649000
2000
比如说在礼貌地提要求时
11:16
if someone有人 says, "If you could pass通过 the guacamole鳄梨,
240
651000
2000
如果有人说,“如果你把鳄梨色拉酱递过来
11:18
that would be awesome真棒,"
241
653000
2000
就太棒了”
11:20
we know exactly究竟 what he means手段,
242
655000
2000
我们太清楚他是什么意思了
11:22
even though虽然 that's a rather bizarre奇异的
243
657000
2000
尽管字面上表达出来是个
11:24
concept概念 being存在 expressed表达.
244
659000
2000
很别扭的概念
11:26
(Laughter笑声)
245
661000
3000
(笑)
11:29
"Would you like to come up and see my etchings蚀刻?"
246
664000
2000
“您愿意来看一下我的蚀刻版画吗?”
11:31
I think most people
247
666000
2000
我想大多数人
11:33
understand理解 the intent意图 behind背后 that.
248
668000
3000
理解这么说的意图
11:36
And likewise同样, if someone有人 says,
249
671000
2000
同样的,倘若有人说
11:38
"Nice尼斯 store商店 you've got there. It would be a real真实 shame耻辱 if something happened发生 to it" --
250
673000
3000
“呦,你的店真不错。要是发生了点什么事儿可就不好了”--
11:41
(Laughter笑声) --
251
676000
1000
(笑)
11:42
we understand理解 that as a veiled含蓄 threat威胁,
252
677000
2000
我们知道这是个委婉的威胁
11:44
rather than a musing沉思 of hypothetical假想 possibilities可能性.
253
679000
3000
而不是在思考假设的可能性
11:47
So the puzzle难题 is, why are bribes行贿,
254
682000
3000
所以我们说的谜题就是:为什么贿赂
11:50
polite有礼貌 requests要求, solicitations募捐 and threats威胁 so often经常 veiled含蓄?
255
685000
3000
礼貌的要求、恳请、威胁经常要遮遮掩掩的?
11:53
No one's那些 fooled上当.
256
688000
2000
没人是傻子
11:55
Both parties派对 know exactly究竟 what the speaker扬声器 means手段,
257
690000
3000
双方都知道谈话人说的是什么
11:58
and the speaker扬声器 knows知道 the listener倾听者 knows知道
258
693000
2000
谈话人也知道听者心里清楚
12:00
that the speaker扬声器 knows知道 that the listener倾听者 knows知道, etc等等., etc等等.
259
695000
3000
谈话人知道听者心里清楚,等等,等等
12:03
So what's going on?
260
698000
2000
所以这是在干嘛呢?
12:05
I think the key idea理念 is that language语言
261
700000
2000
关键是在于语言
12:07
is a way of negotiating谈判 relationships关系,
262
702000
2000
是磋商人际关系的一种途径
12:09
and human人的 relationships关系 fall秋季 into a number of types类型.
263
704000
3000
而人际关系分为许多种
12:12
There's an influential有影响 taxonomy分类 by the anthropologist人类学家 Alan艾伦 Fiske费斯克,
264
707000
4000
人类学家Alan Fiske给出了一个关于影响力的分类法
12:16
in which哪一个 relationships关系 can be categorized分类, more or less,
265
711000
3000
其中人际关系可以被或多或少地归为
12:19
into communality共同性, which哪一个 works作品 on the principle原理
266
714000
2000
“公社性”,它的作用原则是
12:21
"what's mine is thine, what's thine is mine,"
267
716000
3000
“我的就是你的,你的就是我的”--
12:24
the kind of mindset心态 that operates操作 within a family家庭, for example;
268
719000
4000
家庭内部的一种心态,例如--
12:28
dominance霸主地位, whose谁的 principle原理 is "don't mess食堂 with me;"
269
723000
3000
统治心态,其原则就是“别惹我,”
12:31
reciprocity互惠, "you scratch my back, I'll scratch yours你的;"
270
726000
4000
互惠心态:“你帮我挠背,我帮你挠背,”
12:35
and sexuality性欲, in the immortal不朽 words of Cole油菜 Porter搬运工, "Let's do it."
271
730000
5000
性心理:如Cole Porter的不朽名言所说,“来吧”
12:40
Now, relationship关系 types类型 can be negotiated.
272
735000
3000
人际关系的类型是可以通过磋商决定的
12:43
Even though虽然 there are default默认 situations情况
273
738000
3000
尽管经常有某种默认情况
12:46
in which哪一个 one of these mindsets心态 can be applied应用的,
274
741000
2000
指定了上面心态中的一种
12:48
they can be stretched拉伸 and extended扩展.
275
743000
3000
人际关类型可以被拉伸、调整
12:51
For example, communality共同性 applies适用 most naturally自然
276
746000
3000
比如说“公社性”
12:54
within family家庭 or friends朋友,
277
749000
2000
在家庭和朋友们中最自然
12:56
but it can be used to try to transfer转让
278
751000
2000
但它可以被用来
12:58
the mentality心理 of sharing分享
279
753000
2000
把分享的心态转移给
13:00
to groups that ordinarily按说 would not be disposed处置 to exercise行使 it.
280
755000
4000
平时并不习惯于分享的群体--
13:04
For example, in brotherhoods兄弟, fraternal兄弟 organizations组织,
281
759000
4000
例如帮派或者男生联谊会
13:08
sororities联谊会, locutions惯用语 like "the family家庭 of man,"
282
763000
3000
女生联谊会,像“男人之家”这样的表达法
13:11
you try to get people who are not related有关
283
766000
2000
这样就让非亲非故的人们
13:13
to use the relationship关系 type类型 that would ordinarily按说
284
768000
4000
能够采用一般都是
13:17
be appropriate适当 to close kin亲属.
285
772000
2000
近亲之间才有的关系类型
13:19
Now, mismatches不匹配 -- when one person assumes假设 one relationship关系 type类型,
286
774000
3000
可是当一方采用某一种关系类型
13:22
and another另一个 assumes假设 a different不同 one -- can be awkward尴尬.
287
777000
3000
而另一方用了另一种-- 搭配错误的时候就尴尬了
13:25
If you went over and you helped帮助 yourself你自己
288
780000
2000
假如你走过去随手就
13:27
to a shrimp off your boss'老板' plate盘子,
289
782000
2000
从你老板的盘子里弄了一只虾吃
13:29
for example, that would be an awkward尴尬 situation情况.
290
784000
2000
打个比方的话,这就是一个尴尬的情况
13:31
Or if a dinner晚餐 guest客人 after the meal膳食
291
786000
2000
或者是餐后有一位客人
13:33
pulled out his wallet钱包 and offered提供 to pay工资 you for the meal膳食,
292
788000
3000
掏出钱包说要付钱给你
13:36
that would be rather awkward尴尬 as well.
293
791000
2000
这也会相当尴尬
13:38
In less blatant明显的 cases,
294
793000
3000
在不那么明显的例子中
13:41
there's still a kind of negotiation谈判 that often经常 goes on.
295
796000
3000
还是有一种磋商在进行着
13:44
In the workplace职场, for example,
296
799000
2000
比如说在工作场所
13:46
there's often经常 a tension张力 over whether是否 an employee雇员
297
801000
2000
在员工是否能和老板套近乎这一点上
13:48
can socialize应酬 with the boss老板,
298
803000
2000
都有一点紧张不安
13:50
or refer参考 to him or her
299
805000
2000
或者是称呼他或她
13:52
on a first-name名字 basis基础.
300
807000
2000
首名(而不是叫XX先生或女士)
13:54
If two friends朋友 have a
301
809000
2000
如果两个朋友
13:56
reciprocal倒数 transaction交易, like selling销售 a car汽车,
302
811000
2000
进行一笔交易,比如卖一辆车
13:58
it's well known已知 that this can be a source资源
303
813000
2000
大家都知道这可能是
14:00
of tension张力 or awkwardness重仓股.
304
815000
2000
紧张和尴尬的来源
14:02
In dating约会, the transition过渡
305
817000
2000
比如约会中
14:04
from friendship友谊 to sex性别
306
819000
2000
从友谊到性关系的过度
14:06
can lead to, notoriously臭名昭著, various各个 forms形式 of awkwardness重仓股,
307
821000
3000
众所周知,可能导致各种各样的尴尬局面
14:09
and as can sex性别 in the workplace职场,
308
824000
2000
工作场所的性也是
14:11
in which哪一个 we call the conflict冲突 between之间 a
309
826000
2000
我们把两种关系类型--
14:13
dominant优势 and a sexual有性 relationship关系 "sexual有性 harassment骚扰."
310
828000
4000
支配关系和性关系--间的冲突叫做“性骚扰”
14:17
Well, what does this have to do with language语言?
311
832000
2000
这个和语言有什么关系呢?
14:19
Well, language语言, as a social社会 interaction相互作用,
312
834000
2000
语言作为一种社会相互作用
14:21
has to satisfy满足 two conditions条件.
313
836000
2000
必须满足两个条件
14:23
You have to convey传达 the actual实际 content内容 --
314
838000
3000
你得传达内容--
14:26
here we get back to the container容器 metaphor隐喻.
315
841000
2000
这里我们又回到容器的隐喻
14:28
You want to express表现 the bribe贿赂, the command命令, the promise诺言,
316
843000
3000
你想表达贿赂、命令、许诺的意思
14:31
the solicitation征集 and so on,
317
846000
2000
恳请以及其他
14:33
but you also have to negotiate谈判
318
848000
2000
但是你还得磋商
14:35
and maintain保持 the kind of relationship关系
319
850000
2000
并保持
14:37
you have with the other person.
320
852000
2000
你和那个人的关系
14:39
The solution, I think, is that we use language语言 at two levels水平:
321
854000
3000
我认为解决的答案是我们在两个层面上使用语言
14:42
the literal文字 form形成 signals信号
322
857000
2000
字面意思表达的是
14:44
the safest最安全 relationship关系 with the listener倾听者,
323
859000
2000
与听者的最安全的关系
14:46
whereas the implicated牵连 content内容 --
324
861000
2000
而引伸义
14:49
the reading between之间 the lines线 that we count计数 on the listener倾听者 to perform演出 --
325
864000
2000
我们留给听者自己去领会的言外之意--
14:52
allows允许 the listener倾听者 to derive派生 the interpretation解释
326
867000
2000
则使他发掘出
14:54
which哪一个 is most relevant相应 in context上下文,
327
869000
2000
这个语境中最恰当的解释
14:56
which哪一个 possibly或者 initiates同修 a changed relationship关系.
328
871000
3000
而这有可能促成一种新的人际关系
14:59
The simplest简单 example of this is in the polite有礼貌 request请求.
329
874000
4000
最简单的例子出自于礼貌的要求
15:03
If you express表现 your request请求 as a conditional有条件的 --
330
878000
3000
倘若你用一个条件句表达请求:
15:06
"if you could open打开 the window窗口, that would be great" --
331
881000
3000
“您要是能开一下窗子就太好了,”
15:09
even though虽然 the content内容 is an imperative势在必行,
332
884000
2000
尽管内容是祈使句
15:11
the fact事实 that you're not using运用 the imperative势在必行 voice语音
333
886000
2000
仅仅因为你没有用祈使语态
15:14
means手段 that you're not acting演戏 as if you're in a relationship关系 of dominance霸主地位,
334
889000
3000
就显示出你并没有按照一种支配的人际关系行事
15:18
where you could presuppose臆断 the compliance合规 of the other person.
335
893000
3000
你并没有假设他人必须服从
15:21
On the other hand, you want the damn该死的 guacamole鳄梨.
336
896000
2000
可另一方面,你想要那个该死的鳄梨沙拉酱
15:23
By expressing表达 it as an if-thenIF-THEN statement声明,
337
898000
3000
用一个“如果—那么”巨型,
15:26
you can get the message信息 across横过
338
901000
2000
你把意思说清楚了
15:28
without appearing出现 to boss老板 another另一个 person around.
339
903000
4000
却不会让人觉得你在指使他
15:32
And in a more subtle微妙 way, I think, this works作品
340
907000
2000
我认为这样挺微妙,效果也不错
15:34
for all of the veiled含蓄 speech言语 acts行为
341
909000
2000
种种含蓄的言行
15:36
involving涉及 plausible似是而非 deniability推诿:
342
911000
2000
保留了拒绝的可能:
15:38
the bribes行贿, threats威胁, propositions命题,
343
913000
2000
贿赂、威胁、提议
15:40
solicitations募捐 and so on.
344
915000
2000
恳请等等
15:42
One way of thinking思维 about it is to imagine想像 what it would be like
345
917000
2000
有一种理解方式就是想象
15:44
if language语言 -- where it could only be used literally按照字面.
346
919000
3000
当语言只能表达字面义
15:47
And you can think of it in terms条款 of a
347
922000
2000
你可以把它当作
15:49
game-theoretic博弈论 payoff付清 matrix矩阵.
348
924000
3000
博弈论中的得失矩阵来思考
15:52
Put yourself你自己 in the position位置 of the
349
927000
2000
把你放在
15:54
kidnapper绑匪 wanting希望 to bribe贿赂 the officer.
350
929000
3000
那个想贿赂警官的绑匪的位置上
15:57
There's a high stakes赌注
351
932000
2000
全部的赌注
15:59
in the two possibilities可能性
352
934000
3000
都压在这两种可能性上:
16:02
of having a dishonest不诚实 officer or an honest诚实 officer.
353
937000
3000
警官不老实或者他是老实人
16:05
If you don't bribe贿赂 the officer,
354
940000
3000
假如你不贿赂他,
16:08
then you will get a traffic交通 ticket --
355
943000
2000
你得吃罚单--
16:10
or, as is the case案件 of "Fargo法戈," worse更差 --
356
945000
2000
或者,就像《冰风血》中的情况一样,那更糟
16:12
whether是否 the honest诚实 officer
357
947000
2000
不管那个警官
16:14
is honest诚实 or dishonest不诚实.
358
949000
2000
到底老实不老实:
16:16
Nothing ventured冒险, nothing gained获得.
359
951000
2000
爱拼才会赢
16:18
In that case案件, the consequences后果 are rather severe严重.
360
953000
3000
这种情况下,后果很严重
16:21
On the other hand, if you extend延伸 the bribe贿赂,
361
956000
2000
换一方面,你要是掏出钱来
16:23
if the officer is dishonest不诚实,
362
958000
2000
如果警官吃贿赂,
16:25
you get a huge巨大 payoff付清 of going free自由.
363
960000
3000
你全身而退,讨了个大巧
16:28
If the officer is honest诚实, you get a huge巨大 penalty罚款
364
963000
3000
如果警官是老实人,你因为行贿
16:31
of being存在 arrested被捕 for bribery受贿.
365
966000
2000
被逮起来
16:33
So this is a rather fraught误人子弟 situation情况.
366
968000
2000
所以情况挺复杂的
16:35
On the other hand, with indirect间接 language语言,
367
970000
2000
然而,你要是含沙射影地说
16:37
if you issue问题 a veiled含蓄 bribe贿赂,
368
972000
2000
如果你含蓄地提出给钱
16:39
then the dishonest不诚实 officer
369
974000
2000
那么不老实的警官
16:41
could interpret it as a bribe贿赂,
370
976000
2000
可以把它理解为你要使银子
16:43
in which哪一个 case案件 you get the payoff付清 of going free自由.
371
978000
3000
你就可以走了
16:46
The honest诚实 officer can't hold保持 you to it as being存在 a bribe贿赂,
372
981000
3000
而诚实的警官也不能硬说你贿赂他
16:49
and therefore因此, you get the nuisance滋扰 of the traffic交通 ticket.
373
984000
3000
因此你领一张讨厌的罚单
16:52
So you get the best最好 of both worlds世界.
374
987000
3000
不过你两种可能中都受益最大化了
16:55
And a similar类似 analysis分析, I think,
375
990000
2000
我觉得同样的分析方法
16:57
can apply应用 to the potential潜在 awkwardness重仓股
376
992000
2000
可以用在可能出现尴尬的
16:59
of a sexual有性 solicitation征集,
377
994000
2000
提出性的要求的时候
17:01
and other cases where plausible似是而非 deniability推诿 is an asset财富.
378
996000
3000
以及其他的当保留拒绝可的能性对你有利的情况
17:04
I think this affirms申明
379
999000
2000
这就应证了
17:06
something that's long been known已知 by diplomats外交官 --
380
1001000
2000
一个外交官们早已深谙的秘密--
17:08
namely亦即, that the vagueness模糊 of language语言,
381
1003000
2000
那就是:语言的模糊
17:10
far from being存在 a bug窃听器 or an imperfection缺陷,
382
1005000
3000
根本不是什么故障或缺憾
17:13
actually其实 might威力 be a feature特征 of language语言,
383
1008000
3000
而很可能是语言的特征
17:16
one that we use to our advantage优点 in social社会 interactions互动.
384
1011000
3000
一个我们能在社交中善加利用的特征
17:19
So to sum up: language语言 is a collective集体 human人的 creation创建,
385
1014000
3000
总而言之:语言是人类的集体发明
17:22
reflecting反映 human人的 nature性质,
386
1017000
2000
它折射出人性--
17:24
how we conceptualize概念化 reality现实,
387
1019000
2000
我们如何用概念理解现实世界
17:26
how we relate涉及 to one another另一个.
388
1021000
2000
如何互相沟通交流--
17:28
And then by analyzing分析 the various各个 quirks怪癖 and complexities复杂性 of language语言,
389
1023000
4000
通过分析语言的许多微妙、繁复之处
17:32
I think we can get a window窗口 onto what makes品牌 us tick.
390
1027000
3000
我认为我们能向着人类的生存之道打开一扇窗户
17:35
Thank you very much.
391
1030000
1000
谢谢大家.
17:36
(Applause掌声)
392
1031000
1000
(掌声)
Translated by Miao Li
Reviewed by Tony Yet

▲Back to top

ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Steven Pinker - Psychologist
Steven Pinker is a professor of cognitive science (the study of the human mind) who writes about language, mind and human nature.

Why you should listen

Steven Pinker grew up in the English-speaking community of Montreal but has spent his adult life bouncing back and forth between Harvard and MIT. He is interested in all aspects of human nature: how we see, hear, think, speak, remember, feel and interact.

To be specific: he developed the first comprehensive theory of language acquisition in children, used verb meaning as a window into cognition, probed the limits of neural networks and showed how the interaction between memory and computation shapes language. He has used evolution to illuminate innuendo, emotional expression and social coordination. He has documented historical declines in violence and explained them in terms of the ways that the violent and peaceable components of human nature interact in different eras. He has written books on the language instinct, how the mind works, the stuff of thought and the doctrine of the blank slate, together with a guide to stylish writing that is rooted in psychology.

In his latest book, Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress, he writes about progress -- why people are healthier, richer, safer, happier and better educated than ever. His other books include The Language InstinctHow the Mind Works, The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human NatureThe Stuff of Thought, and The Better Angels of Our Nature.

More profile about the speaker
Steven Pinker | Speaker | TED.com