
Steve and I come from very different schools of thought when it comes to language generally: I was trained at MIT he was trained at CMU; he has been sympathetic to mirror neuron related approaches, me not so much. But, for those you expecting a bloody, glove-off battle, sorry... it turns out we agree on more things than either of us thought we would -- once you actually sit down and start talking that is. I am looking forward to working with him. For sure, the addition of Steve Small to our UC Irvine language science community will add a new dimension. I'm sure Steve and I will find a few things to debate, so it could be an interesting place to do doctoral or post-doc work. Stay tuned for future advertisements.
So what convinced Steve to come to Irvine? (Beside it being Talking Brains West, of course!)
Chicago winter:

Irvine winter:

What would you choose?
4 comments:
Honestly, Chicago. I like snow. Boston doesn't have nearly enough. I like summer, too. It's good to live some place that has both.
Just a point Greg,
You said that: "Steve and I come from very different schools of thought when it comes to language generally: I was trained at MIT he was trained at CMU; he has been sympathetic to mirror neuron related approaches, me not so much. But, for those you expecting a bloody, glove-off battle, sorry..."
just to mention that, apart from MIT and CMU, researchers are doing their best. From my part, i began working ten years ago in an abattoir... My point is mostly that of my students: Do you think that apart from MIT or CNU, they should quit about their researches? Of course not! So please the next time be more cool with your affiliation (MIT/Harvard/and so on...)!
We are all proud about our researches. And a university for rich people is not obligatory a university for bright people, fortunately.
Marc
Ok, so apparently the CMU vs. MIT comment doesn't translate well for those who are unfamiliar with language-related academic culture in the U.S. This was not intended as a statement about elitist academic pedigree, but rather the different philosophical approaches to language science that are characteristic of the culture at MIT vs. CMU. MIT tends toward nativist, Chomsky-style linguistics whereas CMU adopts a more empiricist data-driven approach. Think Nature vs. Nurture. It is this sense that Steve and I come from different traditions in Language Science. It has nothing to do with rich people wherever THEY are -- not in academia for sure.
Hi Greg,
Oups, sorry. I completely misunderstood your point about MIT and CMU. My apologies...
Marc
Post a Comment