=Paper=
{{Paper
|id=Vol-1347/talk01
|storemode=property
|title=None
|pdfUrl=https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1347/talk01.pdf
|volume=Vol-1347
}}
==None==
<pdf width="1500px">https://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1347/talk01.pdf</pdf>
<pre>
            Psycholinguistic illusions in and on morphology
                                    Wolfgang U. Dressler
                                     University of Vienna
                               wolfgang.dressler@univie.ac.at

Fruitful interdisciplinary contact between specialists in theoretical morphology and in various
branches of psycholinguistics (my examples will come from acquisition, processing, aphasia)
is hampered by reciprocal illusions, some of them rarely criticised explicitly. Often ecological
validity is dubious.




The bridge of iconicity: from a world of experience to experience
                            of language
                                    Gabriella Vigliocco
                                  University College London
                                   g.vigliocco@ucl.ac.uk

Arbitrariness between linguistic form and meaning is taken as foundational in language stud-
ies and the question of how linguistic form links to meaning is central to language development,
processing and evolution. But, languages also display iconicity in addition to arbitrariness.
This is especially evident in sign languages. This, what if the study of language started from
signed rather than spoken languages? In the talk I will explore this question.




         Needles in a haystack and how to find them. Can
 neuroscientists, psychologists and computational linguist help
 us (to build a tool) to overcome the “tip of the tongue” problem?
                                       Michael Zock
                              LIF-CNRS, University of Marseille
                                michael.zock@lif.univ-mrs.fr

Whenever we speak, read or write we always use words, the exchange money of concepts they
are standing for. No doubt, words ARE important. Yet having stored “words” does not guarantee
that we can access them under all circumstances. Some forms may refuse to come to our mind
when we need them most, the moment of speaking or writing. This is when we tend to reach
for a dictionary, hoping to find the token we are looking for.
The problem is that most dictionaries, be they in paper or electronic form, are not well suited
to support the language producer. Hence the questions, why is this so and what does it take
to enhance existing resources? Can we draw on what is known about the human brain or its
externalized form (texts)? Put differently, what kind of help can we expect by looking at the
work done by neuroscientists, psycholinguists or computational linguistics? These are some of
the questions I will briefly touch upon, by ending with a concrete proposal (roadmap), outlining
the majors steps to be performed in order to enhance an existing electronic resource.




                                               2

</pre>