Book contents
- How to Talk Language Science with Everybody
- How to Talk Language Science with Everybody
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Why Bother?
- 2 You Can Be the Expert
- 3 Cooperative Conversations
- 4 Conversational Goals
- 5 Know Your Audience
- 6 Creating Relevance by Generating Interest
- 7 Creating Relevance by Making Connections
- 8 Quality and Credibility
- 9 Quality vs Quantity
- 10 Learn to Listen
- 11 Information Structure
- 12 The Curse of Knowledge
- 13 Start with Examples
- 14 What’s New?
- 15 From Given to New
- 16 The Three-Legged Stool Approach
- 17 Working with a Range of Different Audiences
- 18 Where Can I Go?
- 19 Being a Good Partner
- 20 Finale
- Appendix Teaching with This Book
- References
- Index
- References
References
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 May 2023
Book contents
- How to Talk Language Science with Everybody
- How to Talk Language Science with Everybody
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- 1 Why Bother?
- 2 You Can Be the Expert
- 3 Cooperative Conversations
- 4 Conversational Goals
- 5 Know Your Audience
- 6 Creating Relevance by Generating Interest
- 7 Creating Relevance by Making Connections
- 8 Quality and Credibility
- 9 Quality vs Quantity
- 10 Learn to Listen
- 11 Information Structure
- 12 The Curse of Knowledge
- 13 Start with Examples
- 14 What’s New?
- 15 From Given to New
- 16 The Three-Legged Stool Approach
- 17 Working with a Range of Different Audiences
- 18 Where Can I Go?
- 19 Being a Good Partner
- 20 Finale
- Appendix Teaching with This Book
- References
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- How to Talk Language Science with Everybody , pp. 254 - 261Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2023
References
Allen, S., & Gutwill, J. (2009). Creating a program to deepen family inquiry at interactive science exhibits. Curator: The Museum Journal, 52(3), 289–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allopenna, P. D., Magnuson, J. S., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory and Language, 38(4), 419–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allum, N., Sturgis, P., Tabourazi, D., & Brunton-Smith, I. (2008). Science knowledge and attitudes across cultures: A meta-analysis. Public Understanding of Science, 17, 35–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alpert, C. L. (2013). A guide to building partnerships between science museums and university-based research centers. Nanoscale Informal Science Education Network. www.nisenet.org/partner_guideGoogle Scholar
Babineau, M., de Carvalho, A., Trueswell, J., & Christophe, A. (2021). Familiar words can serve as a semantic seed for syntactic bootstrapping. Developmental Science, 24(1), e13010. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.13010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baez, B., & Boyles, D. (2009). The politics of inquiry: Education research and the “culture of science.” SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Bell, A. (1984). Language style as audience design. Language in Society, 13(2), 145–204.Google Scholar
Berko, J. (1958). The child’s learning of English morphology. Word, 14(2–3), 150–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/00437956.1958.11659661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Besley, J., Dudo, A., & Shupei, Y. (2018). Scientists’ views about communication objectives. Public Understanding of Science, 27(6), 708–730.Google Scholar
Birch, S. A., & Bloom, P. (2007). The curse of knowledge in reasoning about false beliefs. Psychological Science, 18(5), 382–386.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, B. A., & Ryoo, K. (2008). Teaching science as a language: A “content‐first” approach to science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(5), 529–553.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byun, T. M., Hitchcock, E. R., & Swartz, M. T. (2014). Retroflex versus bunched in treatment for rhotic misarticulation: Evidence from ultrasound biofeedback intervention. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 57(6), 2116–2130. https://doi.org/10.1044/2014_JSLHR-S-14-0034CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Callanan, M., Cervantes, C., & Loomis, M. (2011). Informal learning. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2(6), 646–655.Google Scholar
Carroll, L. (2010). Through the looking glass and what Alice found there. Penguin UK. (Original work published 1871.)Google Scholar
Caselli, N. K., & Pyers, J. E. (2020). Degree and not type of iconicity affects sign language vocabulary acquisition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46(1), 127–139.Google Scholar
Caswell, E. (2016, May 19). Rapping, deconstructed: The best rappers of all time. Vox. www.vox.com/2016/5/19/11701976/rapping-deconstructed-best-rhymers-of-all-timeGoogle Scholar
Cépeda, P., Kotek, H., Pabst, K., & Syrett, K. (2021). Gender bias in linguistics textbooks: Has anything changed since Macaulay & Brice (1997)? Language, 97(4), 678–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1993). Lectures on government and binding: The Pisa lectures. Mouton de Gruyter. (Original work published 1981.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chute, E. (2009, February 9). STEM education is branching out. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. www.post-gazette.com/news/education/2009/02/10/STEM-education-is-branching-out/stories/200902100165Google Scholar
Cimpian, A., & Leslie, S. J. (2017). The brilliance trap: How a misplaced emphasis on genius subtly discourages women and African-Americans from certain academic fields. Scientific American, 317, 60–65.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22, 1–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clawson, J. G. (2008). Managing discussions (Darden Case No. UVA-PHA-0049). https://ssrn.com/abstract=1283345Google Scholar
Clemens, L., & Coon, J. (2018). Deriving verb-initial word order in Mayan. Language, 94(2), 237–280.Google Scholar
Condit-Schultze, N., & Huron, D. (2017). Word intelligibility in multi-voice singing: The influence of chorus size. Journal of Voice, 31(1), 121.e1–121.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvoice.2016.02.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cowie, B., Jones, A., & Otrel-Cass, K. (2011). Re-engaging students in science: Issues of assessment, funds of knowledge, and sites for learning. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 9, 347–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crystal, D. (2007). How language works: How babies babble, words change meaning, and languages live or die. Penguin.Google Scholar
Curzan, A. (2014). Fixing English: Prescriptivism and language history. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dalchand, N. (2021, February 25). How I transformed myself into a confident presenter – thanks to Lady Gaga. Science. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.caredit.abh2491Google Scholar
Dawson, E. (2014). “Not designed for us”: How science museums and science centers socially exclude low‐income, minority ethnic groups. Science Education, 98(6), 981–1008.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dawson, E. (2019). Equity, exclusion and everyday science learning: The experiences of minoritized groups. Routledge.Google Scholar
Dawson, H., & Phelan, M. (2016). Language files: Materials for an introduction to language and linguistics (12th ed.). The Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
Degen, J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2019). Constraint-based pragmatic processing. In Cummins, C & Katsos, N (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of experimental semantics and pragmatics (pp. 21–38). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Denham, K., & Lobeck, A. (2010). Linguistics at school: Language awareness in primary and secondary education. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dorfner, T., Förtsch, C., & Neuhaus, B. J. (2020). Use of technical terms in German biology lessons and its effects on students’ conceptual learning. Research in Science & Technological Education, 38(2), 227–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duncan, S., Manners, P., & Miller, K. (2017). Reviewing public engagement in REF 2014: Reflections for shaping the second REF. University of Bristol/National Co-ordinating Centre for Public Engagement. www.publicengagement.ac.uk/sites/default/files/publication/reviewing_pe_in_ref_2014_final.pdfGoogle Scholar
Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2010). The 95 percent solution. American Scientist, 98(6), 486–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Falk, J. H., & Storksdieck, M. (2010). Science learning in a leisure setting. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 47(2), 194–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fenichel, M., & Schweingruber, H. A. (2010). Surrounded by science: Learning science in informal environments. The National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Ferreira, V. S. (2019). A mechanistic framework for explaining audience design in language production. Annual Review of Psychology, 70, 29–51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fox, M. (2013, April 2). John J. Gumperz, linguist of cultural interchange, dies at 91. New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2013/04/03/education/john-j-gumperz-linguist-of-cultural-interchange-dies-at-91.htmlGoogle Scholar
Fredrickson, B. L., & Branigan, C. (2005). Positive emotions broaden the scope of attention and thought‐action repertoires. Cognition & Emotion, 19(3), 313–332.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fromkin, V., Rodman, R., & Hyams, N. (2018). An introduction to language. Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Fuls, A. (2019). Deciphering the Phaistos Disk and other Cretan hieroglyphic inscriptions: Epigraphic and linguistic analysis of a Minoan enigma. Tredition.Google Scholar
Gann, T. M., & Barr, D. J. (2014). Speaking from experience: Audience design as expert performance. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 29(6), 744–760.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1990). Language comprehension as structure building. LEA Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González, N., Amanti, C., & Moll, L. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities, and classrooms. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Greenberg, J. B. (1989, April). Funds of knowledge: Historical constitution, social distribution, and transmission [Paper presentation]. Meeting of the Society for Applied Anthropology, Santa Fe, NM.Google Scholar
Grepstad, O. (Ed.). (2018). Language museums of the world. Centre for Norwegian Language and Literature. www.nynorsk.no/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/814-20180314-Language-museums-OG.pdfGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, R. & Morgan, J. (Eds.), Syntax and semantics: Speech acts. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gutwill, J., & Allen, S. (2012). Deepening students’ scientific inquiry skills during a science museum field trip. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 21(1), 130–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heath, C., & Heath, D. (2007). Made to stick: Why some ideas survive and others die. Random House.Google Scholar
Hendriks, F., Kienhues, D., & Bromme, R. (2015). Measuring laypeople’s trust in experts in a digital age: The Muenster Epistemic Trustworthiness Inventory (METI). PloS ONE, 10(10), e0139309. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0139309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houston, S. D. (1988). The phonetic decipherment of Mayan glyphs. Antiquity, 62(234), 126–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
James, V. (2020). Science communication efforts and identity at popular culture conventions. Science Communication, 42(3), 395–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jensen, E., & Buckley, N. (2014). Why people attend science festivals: Interests, motivations and self-reported benefits of public engagement with research. Public Understanding of Science, 23(5), 557–573.Google Scholar
Jurafsky, D. (2014). The language of food: A linguist reads the menu. W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Kensinger, E. A. (2009). Remembering the details: Effects of emotion. Emotion Review, 1(2), 99–113.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keysar, B., Lin, S., & Barr, D. J. (2003). Limits on theory of mind use in adults. Cognition, 89(1), 25–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
King, A. (1993). From sage on the stage to guide on the side. College Teaching, 41, 30–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koenecke, A., Nam, A., Lake, E., Nudell, J., Quartey, M., Mengesha, Z., Troups, C., Rickford, J. R., Jurafsky, D., & Goel, S. (2020). Racial disparities in automated speech recognition. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117(14), 7684–7689.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
Landau, B., & Gleitman, L. R. (1985). Language and experience: Evidence from the blind child. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Martínez, A., & Mammola, S. (2021). Specialized terminology reduces the number of citations of scientific papers. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 288(1948), 20202581. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2020.2581CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCulloch, G. (2020). Because internet: Understanding the new rules of language. Riverhead Books.Google Scholar
McGurk, H., & MacDonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature, 264, 746–748. https://doi.org/10.1038/264746a0CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McKee, C., Zimmer, E., Fountain, A., Huang, H. Y., & Vento, M. (2015). Public outreach in linguistics: Engaging broader audiences. Language and Linguistics Compass, 9(9), 349–357.Google Scholar
Metz, C. (2020, March 23). There is a racial divide in speech recognition systems, researchers say. New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2020/03/23/technology/speech-recognition-bias-apple-amazon-google.htmlGoogle Scholar
Meyer, M., Cimpian, A., & Leslie, S. J. (2015). Women are underrepresented in fields where success is believed to require brilliance. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 235. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00235CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Michel, J.-B., Kui Shen, Y., Aiden, A. P., Veres, A., Gray, M. K., Brockman, W., The Google Books Team, Pickett, J. P., Hoiberg, D., Clancy, D., Norvig, P., Orwant, J., Pinker, S., Nowak, M. A., & Aiden, E. L. (2010). Quantitative Analysis of Culture Using Millions of Digitized Books. Science (Published online ahead of print: 12/16/2010).Google Scholar
Mielke, J., Baker, A., & Archangeli, D. (2010). Variability and homogeneity in American English /r/ allophony and /s/ retraction. Laboratory Phonology, 10, 699–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moll, L. C., & Greenberg, J. (1990). Creating zones of possibilities: Combining social contexts for instruction. In Moll, L. C. (Ed.), Vygotsky and education (pp. 319–348). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, L. C. (2021). Building partnerships and expanding repertoires of practice: Working with and in museums to improve informal science education for linguistically diverse young children. Extending Applied Linguistics for Social Impact: Cross-Disciplinary Collaborations in Diverse Spaces of Public Inquiry, 35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, L. C., Seilstad, B., Ridley, J., & Kim, S. (2019). Engaged second language research: Studying stakeholders’ perspectives on preschool DLLs’ science and language learning. In 2017 Second Language Research Forum (pp. 127–143). Cascadilla Proceedings Project.Google Scholar
National Research Council. (2009). Learning science in informal environments: People, places, and pursuits. The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/12190Google Scholar
Nordquist, R. (2020, August 26). Definition and examples of mondegreens. ThoughtCo. www.thoughtco.com/what-is-a-mondegreen-1691401Google Scholar
Okrent, A. (2009). In the land of invented languages: Esperanto rock stars, Klingon poets, Loglan lovers, and the mad dreamers who tried to build a perfect language. Random House.Google Scholar
Oxford University Press. (2013). Audience. In Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Retrieved April 1, 2020, from https://www.oed.com/Google Scholar
Oxford University Press. (2013). Mondegreen. In Oxford English Dictionary (3rd ed.). Retrieved April 1, 2020, from https://www.oed.com/Google Scholar
Pullum, G. (2014). Fear and loathing of the English passive. Language & Communication, 37, 60–74.Google Scholar
Rakedzon, T., Segev, E., Chapnik, N., Yosef, R., & Baram-Tsabari, A. (2017). Automatic jargon identifier for scientists engaging with the public and science communication educators. PloS One, 12(8), e0181742. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0181742Google Scholar
Rapp, C. (2010). Aristotle’s rhetoric. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Spring ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2010/entries/aristotle-rhetoric/Google Scholar
Raupp, A. B. (2020, June 19). Defining moment: The STEM and EdTech convergence that will change everything. Forbes. www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2020/06/19/defining-moment-the-stem-and-edtech-convergence-that-will-change-everything/?sh=4e4d24d764f6Google Scholar
Reiss, J., & Sprenger, J. (2020). Scientific objectivity. In Zalta, E. N. (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter ed.). https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2020/entries/scientific-objectivityGoogle Scholar
Rendell, P. G., Phillips, L. H., Henry, J. D., Brumby-Rendell, T., de la Piedad Garcia, X., Altgassen, M., & Kliegel, M. (2011). Prospective memory, emotional valence and ageing. Cognition & Emotion, 25(5), 916–925.Google Scholar
Roberts, C. (2012). Information structure: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. Semantics and Pragmatics, 5, article 6. https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.5.6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rogoff, B., Callanan, M., Gutierrez, K. D., & Erickson, F. (2016). The organization of informal learning. Review of Research in Education, 40(1), 356–401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schaefer, A., & Philippot, P. (2005). Selective effects of emotion on the phenomenal characteristics of autobiographical memories. Memory, 13(2), 148–160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schatz, P. (2011). Finger tapping test. In Kreutzer, J. S., DeLuca, J., & Caplan, B. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of clinical neuropsychology. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-79948-3_178Google Scholar
Sedivy, J., & Carlson, G. (2011). Sold on language: How advertisers talk to you and what this says about you. John Wiley & Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seymour, P. H. K., Aro, M., & Erskine, J. M. (2003). Foundation literacy acquisition in European orthographies. British Journal of Psychology, 94, 143–174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shohamy, E., & Gorter, D. (Eds.). (2009). Linguistic landscapes: Expanding the scenery. Taylor & Francis.Google Scholar
Singham, M. (2020, September 7). The idea that a scientific theory can be falsified is a myth. Scientific American. www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-idea-that-a-scientific-theory-can-be-falsified-is-a-myth/Google Scholar
Sobel, D. M., & Jipson, J. L. (eds.). (2015). Cognitive development in museum settings: Relating research and practice. Routledge.Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition (vol. 142). Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Stevens, S., Andrade, R., & Page, M. (2016). Motivating young Native American students to pursue STEM learning through a culturally relevant science program. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25, 947–960.Google Scholar
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18(6), 643–662.Google Scholar
Tan, S.- L. (2015, October 7). Six reasons pop singers pronounce some lyrics in odd ways. Psychology Today. www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/what-shapes-film/201510/six-reasons-pop-singers-pronounce-some-lyrics-in-odd-waysGoogle Scholar
Tannen, D. (1984). The pragmatics of cross-cultural communication. Applied Linguistics, 5(3), 189–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannen, D. (1986). That’s not what I meant! How conversational style makes or breaks your relations with others. Morrow.Google Scholar
Tatman, R. (2017). Gender and dialect bias in YouTube’s automatic captions. In Proceedings of the First ACL Workshop on Ethics in Natural Language Processing. Association for Computational Linguistics. https://github.com/rctatman/personal-website/blob/master/files/Tatman_2017_GenderAndDialectBias.pdfGoogle Scholar
Tiippana, K. (2014). What is the McGurk effect? Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 725. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00725Google Scholar
Ugwu, R. (2015, October 6). Selena Gomez’s “Good for You” and the rise of “Indie pop voice.” BuzzFeed. www.buzzfeednews.com/article/reggieugwu/what-is-indie-pop-voice#.biXnELLoXGoogle Scholar
Vélez-Ibáñez, C. G., & Greenberg, J. B. (1992). Formation and transformation of funds of knowledge among U.S. Mexican households. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 23(4), 313–335.Google Scholar
Wagner, L., Moore, L. C., & Campbell-Kibler, K. (2021). Training students to conduct outreach in an informal science learning environment. In Farland-Smith, D. (Ed.), Enhancing learning opportunities through student, scientist, and teacher partnerships. IGI Global.Google Scholar
Wagner, L., Speer, S. R., Moore, L. C., McCullough, E. A., Ito, K., Clopper, C. G., & Campbell-Kibler, K. (2015). Linguistics in a science museum: Integrating research, teaching, and outreach in a language sciences research lab. Language and Linguistics Compass, 9, 420–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walkden, G. (2012, November 8). English VP fronting and the syntax of Yoda [LinguistMix presentation]. University of Manchester. http://46.32.240.35/walkden.space/Walkden_2012_Yoda.pdfGoogle Scholar
Warneken, F., & Tomasello, M. (2006). Altruistic helping in human infants and young chimpanzees. Science, 311(5765), 1301–1303.Google Scholar
Wright, S. (1954, November). The death of Lady Mondegreen. Harper’s Magazine, 209, 48–51.Google Scholar
Yegiyan, N. S., & Yonelinas, A. P. (2011). Encoding details: Positive emotion leads to memory broadening. Cognition & Emotion, 25(7), 1255–1262.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zimmer, B. (2010, June 25). On language: Ghoti. New York Times. www.nytimes.com/2010/06/27/magazine/27FOB-onlanguage-t.htmlGoogle Scholar
Zimmer, E. (2016). Children’s awareness of syntactic ambiguity [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Arizona.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. (2008). Time in language, situation models, and mental simulations. Language Learning, 58, 13−26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar