Waxman Sandra R, Gelman Susan A
Department of Psychology, Northwestern University, 2029 Sheridan Rd, Evanston, IL 60208-2710, USA.
Trends Cogn Sci. 2009 Jun;13(6):258-63. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2009.03.006. Epub 2009 May 15.
Recent years have witnessed a resurgence of classic tensions concerning the fundamental nature of human knowledge and the processes underlying its acquisition. This tension, especially evident in research on the acquisition of words and concepts, arises when researchers pit one type of content against another (perceptual versus conceptual) and one type of process against another (associative versus theory-based). But these dichotomies are false; they rest upon insufficient consideration of the structure and diversity of the words and concepts that we naturally acquire. As infants and young children establish categories and acquire words to describe them, they take advantage of both perceptual and conceptual information, and relate this to both the (rudimentary) theories they hold and the statistics that they witness.
近年来,关于人类知识的基本性质及其获取过程的经典矛盾再次出现。这种矛盾在词汇和概念获取的研究中尤为明显,当研究人员将一种内容类型与另一种内容类型(感知与概念)以及一种过程类型与另一种过程类型(联想与基于理论)进行对比时就会产生。但这些二分法是错误的;它们基于对我们自然获取的词汇和概念的结构与多样性的考虑不足。婴幼儿在建立类别并获取描述这些类别的词汇时,会利用感知和概念信息,并将其与他们所拥有的(初步)理论以及他们所观察到的统计数据联系起来。