Naming, meaning, and verbal operants

Article Abstract:

Horne and Lowe's paper actually contradicts many of Skinner's theories despite claiming to embrace his precepts. For instance, Skinner rejects descriptions or explanations based on meaning, and does not consider verbal behavior as different from nonverbal behavior in principle. Skinner also views listening as having a central role and recognizes different processes producing unique forms or sequences of verbal behavior. Finally, he believes that the functional unit of verbal operant takes the place of structural units of language. All these are challenged by Horne and Lowe.

Criticism and interpretation, Skinner, B.F.

---

Names as constituents of sentences: an omission

Article Abstract:

Horne and Lowe's account of naming is a highly commendable paper that widens understanding of the first few stages of the process of language development and the phenomena of stimulus equivalence observed in the matching-to-sample experiment. However, it has two major flaws. One is its failure to acknowledge that sentences are the functional units of languages. The other is its failure to recognize the three senses of the word 'tact' as used by Skinner in 'Verbal Behavior.'

---

Similar abstracts:

• Abstracts: Naming, stimulus equivalence, and conditioned hearing. Naming and equivalence relations
• Abstracts: Naming is not (necessary for) stimulus equivalence. Experimental analysis of naming behavior cannot explain naming capacity
• Abstracts: On naming and symbolic behavior: in the beginning was the name?

This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.