Time served sentence meaning and speaker
US President Donald Trump has granted a pardon to his disgraced former aide Steve Bannon as part of a wave of clemency and commutations during his final hours in office. President Donald J. Trump granted pardons to 73 individuals and commuted the sentences of an additional 70 individuals. In , Mr. Boulanger pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit honest services fraud. He has taken full responsibility for his conduct.
We are searching data for your request:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.
Content:
- Direct Object
- Jared Fogle Sentenced To 15 Years In Prison For Sex With Minors, Child Pornography
- 5 simple ways to become a better speaker
- Personalized Hey Siri
- Saudi appeals court reduces sentence of U.S.-Saudi physician - documents
- Disagreements in Everyday Conversation, Part Two
- computer speaker sentence
- How To Identify Subject And Predicate In A Sentence
- Chapter 2. Working with Words: Which Word Is Right?
Direct Object
Thank you for visiting nature. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer. In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.
The relationship between language and thought is controversial. One hypothesis is that language fosters habits of processing information that are retained even in non-linguistic domains. In left-branching LB languages, modifiers usually precede the head, and real-time sentence comprehension may more heavily rely on retaining initial information in working memory.
Here we presented a battery of working memory and short-term memory tasks to adult native speakers of four LB and four right-branching RB languages from Africa, Asia and Europe. In working memory tasks, LB speakers were better than RB speakers at recalling initial stimuli, but worse at recalling final stimuli.
Our results show that the practice of parsing sentences in specific directions due to the syntax and word order of our native language not only predicts the way we remember words, but also other non-linguistic stimuli. Memory plays a central role in our lives and hundreds of studies have investigated how we store and retrieve information under different conditions 1 , 2 , 3. A classic approach to the study of memory consists in presenting subjects with a list of stimuli and immediately afterwards asking them to recall as many as possible in the order they were presented.
Typically, stimuli presented at the beginning primacy items and at the end of a list recency items are recalled better than stimuli from the middle 4 , 5 , 6 , 7. But are these findings universal and generalizable across cultures? Most studies on memory have tested individuals that come from western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic societies — all characteristics which are rather atypical when compared to those of other humans 8.
Moreover, the languages they speak hardly represent the linguistic diversity found across the world 9. To date, most scholars would disagree with the most radical interpretations of both approaches i. Indeed, recent evidence suggests, on one hand, that the language one speaks has some effect on categorization processes see for a review and, on the other hand, that learnability, and therefore the limits of our cognition, clearly affects the range of syntactic structures and semantic distinctions present among world languages 21 , 22 , Even among supporters of linguistic relativity or Whorfian hypothesis , an important distinction between a strong and a weak interpretation has been put forward 24 ; see While a strong interpretation suggests that language affects cognitive capabilities , a weak one suggests that language is rather linked to preferred cognitive tendencies , in particular with respect to developing and retrieving categorical representations.
Similarly, less radical interpretations of linguistic relativity suggest that language may bias attention towards certain aspects of the world This could provide interference between linguistic and non-linguistic concepts i.
The interface between language and cognition can be detected at different levels Language, for instance, may have a clear semantic effect on thought, in that specific characteristics of languages may affect the way we conceptualize the world.
Specific representations of concepts get consolidated because the language we use carves the continuum of what we perceive into specific chunks, with specific boundaries, and those constrained chunks become easier to retrieve and harder to modify. A growing body of empirical work supports this view, by showing cross-linguistic differences across domains, including color 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , numbers 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , space 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , time 25 , 42 , 43 , 44 , odor 45 and mental states 46 , Besides semantic biases, however, it is clear that repeated use of specific syntactic structures may impose specific cognitive challenges to speakers, or foster specific processing habits, which in the long term might enhance specific ways of processing information beyond the linguistic domain.
Recent research on the effect of syntax on the processing of events, for instance, has shown 1 an effect of canonical noun-adjective word order on the speed at which noun categories are retrieved 48 , 2 and on recognition memory and similarity judgments while classifying items 49 , as well as 3 an effect of transitive vs.
Here we test the linguistic relativity hypothesis, along with the previously established perspective that the main effect of language on thought is likely due to habituation in terms of strategies deployed to perceive, interpret and remember the world that surrounds us We believe to be the first ones to focus not on the semantic or syntactic effect of language on cognitive representations, but rather on the effect of syntax on the cognitive processes through which people recall information.
Specifically, we investigate whether memory retrieval in both linguistic and non-linguistic tasks is predicted by the way languages normatively order words within sentences. In typical right-branching RB languages, like Italian, the head of the sentence usually comes first, followed by a sequence of modifiers that provide additional information about the head, creating parse trees that grow down and to the right: the head noun typically precedes genitive noun phrases e.
In contrast, in left-branching LB languages, like Japanese, modifiers generally precede heads e. In addition to specific ordering within phrases, languages differ also in terms of the positions of subject, verb and object within a clause.
It has long been noted that languages with SVO e. Italian tend to use prepositions and therefore put modifiers after the head i. Japanese tend to prefer postposition and place modifiers before the head i. One of the hypotheses behind this correlation is that languages tend to be consistently LB or consistently RB to facilitate language processing e. To date, there is no consensus on how LB and RB structures are parsed. In RB languages, speakers could process information incrementally with a low risk of re-analysis, given that heads are presented first and modifiers rarely affect previous parsing decisions.
Although final modifiers surely refer to initial heads in RB languages, initial heads are clear from the very beginning and independently of the final modifiers, which only add information to the heads. In contrast, LB structures can be highly ambiguous until the end, because modifiers, that usually come first, often acquire a clear meaning only after the head has been parsed see 58 , Therefore, LB speakers may need to consistently delay parsing decisions to avoid extensive backtracking, retaining initial modifiers in working memory until the head is encountered or the verb is produced, and the sentence can be given a meaning.
In contrast, RB speakers may make parsing decisions immediately, and thus they would require no especially enhanced memory for the initial information while parsing.
In line with this, some studies suggest that LB speakers may more easily parse double-embedded relative clauses, as compared to RB speakers, also because of a higher WM capacity e. In natural conversation, all natural languages are processed fast and efficiently, and successfully deployed in fast and timely turn-taking during social interaction 63 , probably because language comprehension is facilitated by other contextual factors, such as current topic of conversation, recent referential mentioning, salience and priming effects Therefore, LB speakers might rely more on strategies other than word order to resolve ambiguity during sentence processing For instance, they may also rely on statistical information about the relative frequencies with which different syntactic structures and other linguistic material occur in the language 73 , 74 , 75 ; see 76 , 77 for a discussion of processing in LB languages.
Thus, processing difficulty would simply increase when the input does not match expectations 77 , 78 , but would remain as low as expected otherwise. Accordingly, languages tend to be consistently RB or LB 55 , because consistently sticking to just one parsing strategy may reduce the processing difficulties associated with a mixture of RB and LB structures 9 , 55 , More specifically, we expected LB speakers to better recall initial stimuli as compared to RB speakers, as real-time sentence comprehension relies more heavily on retaining initial information in LB languages.
To determine the degree of branching in each language, we used the following word order criteria: order of object-verb, genitive-noun, relative clause-noun, and clause-subordinate. In comparison, English is consistently RB for three out of four of these criteria. For each language, we tested 24—30 adult native speakers of both sexes, in three widely used working memory WM and three widely used short-term memory STM tasks, containing sets of 2—9 numerical, spatial or word stimuli see Methods.
Ambiguity exists on the relationship between these two distinct but highly correlated constructs, but most cognitive psychologists would agree that while STM is a storage component of no longer externally available information, WM also contains an attention component aimed at maintaining memory representations in the face of concurrent processing, distraction and attention shifts e. Indeed, several studies have demonstrated the influence of WM on sentence processing 88 , 89 ; see 90 , with WM tasks correlating much better with sentence comprehension as compared to STM tasks e.
In our study, subjects had to sequentially recall the stimuli right after each presentation. The stimuli position initial, final was then included as test predictor - together with stimuli kind spatial, numerical, word and branching direction left, right - in two different models, one for STM tasks and the other for WM tasks, while controlling for repeated observations, multiple components of socio-economic status and individual demographic variables see Method for a detailed description.
This ensured that differences in performance across linguistic groups depended on the position of the recalled stimuli, while controlling for several other factors. For each linguistic group, we recruited 30 native speakers with the exception of South Korea, where only 25 participants were tested due to logistic problems.
Participants were of both sexes, aged between 14 and Participants differed in their education level, had different occupations and monthly income. Participants further varied in the second languages they spoke and in their level of proficiency.
English was the most common second language spoken in all linguistic groups, with the exception of Khoekhoe who mostly spoke Afrikaans as a second language and Sidaama who mostly spoke Amharic as a second language. For more details, see Table 1 and Supplementary Information. All experimental procedures had been approved by the ethical committee at the University of Bern, Switzerland , all experiments were performed in accordance with European guidelines and regulations, and informed consent was obtained from all participants.
Testing took place in surroundings that were familiar to the participants, such as schools, community centers and private homes. Individuals were generally tested alone, unless they felt uncomfortable and asked for other people being present, in which case these were sat at a certain distance behind the computer screen and instructed not to interfere in any way with the testing procedure.
For each population, one research assistant collected the data together with a local research assistant translating the procedure, when needed i. In Italy and Thailand no local research assistant was needed, as the research assistant collecting the data was a native speaker of the language tested.
Overall, a native speaker of the local language conducted recruiting, consenting and testing for all populations tested. Each participant was tested in 6 different memory tasks, administered one after the other on a laptop, with approximately one-minute breaks in-between.
All tasks have been validated across a variety of studies and basically test STM and WM by requiring individuals to observe a series of stimuli and recall them immediately afterwards, in the same order they were presented. Before each task started, participants were instructed about the procedure and provided with two examples containing two stimuli. Moreover, they were also reminded that stimuli had to be sequentially recalled, in the same order as they were presented.
In case the procedure was not clear, it was explained again until the participant understood it. Throughout the tasks, the experimenter made no suggestions, but could motivate participants regardless of their performance by reassuring them that they were doing fine. The order of tasks was pseudo-randomized and counterbalanced across subjects, but the order of stimuli and trials within each task was the same for all participants see Supplementary Information for more details.
In the STM-WS task, participants were presented with 18 test trials, each one containing 2—7 stimuli. Before the task started, individuals were instructed to observe the series of pictures on the screen, name each of them aloud as soon as it appeared, and recall them aloud in the same order they had appeared, as soon as question marks appeared on the screen.
The experimenter audio-recorded all trials. Before the task started, individuals were instructed to observe the series of numbers on the screen and then recall them in the same order they had appeared, as in the previous task. Participants provided their response on coding sheets with series of 9 squares, so that each square could contain one number.
Each stimulus was visible for ms in the middle of the screen. Before the task started, individuals were instructed to observe the series of matrixes on the screen and then recall the position of each red square in the same order they had appeared, by writing them down in a coding sheet as soon as questions marks appeared on the screen. In the WM-OS task, participants were presented with 12 test trials containing 2—5 stimuli.
Before the task started, individuals were instructed to observe the series of pictures on the screen, name each of them aloud as soon as it appeared, solve the distracting task by subtracting the red dots in a box from the red dots in the other one, and telling aloud whether the result corresponded to the number of red dots in the third box; i. In this task, each stimulus remained in the middle of the screen until it was named and the mathematical operation was solved.
In the WM-CS task, participants were presented with 15 test trials containing 2—6 stimuli. Before the task started, individuals were instructed to observe the series of images on the screen, count aloud the number of blue circles among other figures in each image i.
Each stimulus remained in the middle of the screen until the blue circles had been counted. In the WM-SS task, participants were presented with 12 test trials containing 2—5 stimuli. We then compared the recalled stimuli to the stimuli as named during the stimuli presentation. For each trial, we divided the list of stimuli presented in two halves and separately coded the number of correct responses for the first half i.
For the first half, we coded whether the first stimulus recalled corresponded to the first stimulus having been presented, whether the second stimulus recalled corresponded to the second stimulus having been presented, and so on. For the second half, we coded whether the last stimulus recalled corresponded to the last stimulus having been presented, the second to last stimulus recalled corresponded to the second to last stimulus having been presented, and so on.
Crucially, coding the final stimuli starting from the end ensured that mistakes in recalling initial stimuli did not affect the response for the final stimuli, as a correct response required that both identity and order of stimuli were recalled correctly. A second observer recoded Before conducting the analyses, we excluded some participants from the sample.
Jared Fogle Sentenced To 15 Years In Prison For Sex With Minors, Child Pornography
This article has been approved by an Indeed Career Coach. Communication skills are beneficial in and out of the workplace. Having the ability to clearly communicate instructions, ideas and concepts can help you find success in any career. With practice, anyone can develop their communication skills. One of the most critical skills in effective communication is active listening. Developing this soft skill will help you build and maintain relationships, solve problems , improve processes and retain information such as instructions, procedures and expectations.
5 simple ways to become a better speaker
Just as a mason uses bricks to build sturdy homes, writers use words to build successful documents. Consider the construction of a building. Builders need to use tough, reliable materials to build a solid and structurally sound skyscraper. From the foundation to the roof and every floor in between, every part is necessary. Writers need to use strong, meaningful words from the first sentence to the last and in every sentence in between. You already know many words that you use every day as part of your writing and speaking vocabulary. You probably also know that certain words fit better in certain situations.
Personalized Hey Siri
Language matters, and the words you use have an impact on your effectiveness as a speaker and as a leader. There are three strategic reasons for when to use them. First, to be diplomatic. A second reason is to hold the floor.
Saudi appeals court reduces sentence of U.S.-Saudi physician - documents
Discourse analysis is sometimes defined as the analysis of language 'beyond the sentence'. This contrasts with types of analysis more typical of modern linguistics, which are chiefly concerned with the study of grammar: the study of smaller bits of language, such as sounds phonetics and phonology , parts of words morphology , meaning semantics , and the order of words in sentences syntax. Discourse analysts study larger chunks of language as they flow together. Some discourse analysts consider the larger discourse context in order to understand how it affects the meaning of the sentence. For example, Charles Fillmore points out that two sentences taken together as a single discourse can have meanings different from each one taken separately.
Disagreements in Everyday Conversation, Part Two
SlideShare uses cookies to improve functionality and performance, and to provide you with relevant advertising. If you continue browsing the site, you agree to the use of cookies on this website. See our User Agreement and Privacy Policy. See our Privacy Policy and User Agreement for details. Create your free account to read unlimited documents. The SlideShare family just got bigger.
computer speaker sentence
A pronoun stands in the place of a noun. Like nouns, pronouns can serve as the subject or object of a sentence: they are the things sentences are about. Pronouns include words like he , she , and I , but they also include words like this , that , which , who , anybody , and everyone. Because a pronoun is replacing a noun, its meaning is dependent on the noun that it is replacing.
How To Identify Subject And Predicate In A Sentence
Bill Chappell. Former Subway pitchman Jared Fogle arrives at a federal courthouse in Indianapolis on Thursday to be sentenced on charges of trading child pornography and paying to have sex with minors. District Judge Tanya Walton Pratt sentenced former Subway pitchman Jared Fogle to a prison term of more than 15 years Thursday, accepting a plea deal that sees him admit to charges of receiving child pornography and repeatedly having sex with minors. The case involved interstate travel to pay minors for sex, as well as at least child pornography videos — many of which Fogle received from the head of his charity, prosecutors said at today's hearing. Fogle was sentenced to months on each count, to be served concurrently.
Chapter 2. Working with Words: Which Word Is Right?
Curator: Mark Aronoff. Eugene M. Language sets people apart from all other creatures. Every known human society has had a language and though some nonhumans may be able to communicate with one another in fairly complex ways, none of their communication systems begins to approach language in its ability to convey information. Nor is the transmission of complex and varied information such an integral part of the everyday lives of other creatures. Nor do other communication systems share many of the design features of human language, such as the ability to communicate about events other than in the here and now.
During the sentence, an offender has access to various programs and services designed to complement their correctional plans. The main goal is to ensure that eligible offenders safely return to the community. When an inmate first arrives in CSC custody, a full intake assessment is completed.
you have made a mistake, it is obvious.
Do not take in a head!