For anyone interested in conversation analysis in speech language pathology, follow conversation_analysis on insta!

An informed mom digs into the Gestalt Language Processing and Natural Language Acquisition controversy: check it out lindakimpton.substack.com/p/the-gestal...

communicationdevelopmentcenter.com/wp-content/u... If you haven’t had a chance to read Blanc’s rebuttal to Hutchins et al. (2024), the link is here. It is extremely revealing. The irony is also deep with red herrings heaped upon red herrings. Enjoy…

If you’re keeping up with the NLA/GLP controversy, this may be worth a listen: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/l...

“GLP” is used by social media influencers to describe someone with *stereotypically* autistic features (ex., delayed echoes, unintelligibility, lang delay). This makes the argument that ‘most autistic people are GLPs’, seem unquestionably true when it is, in fact, empty/circular. We can do better….

Jim is an autistic child: Jim: I’m a duck. Quack! Dad: You’re a duck! Jim: I’m a chick.Cheep! Dad: You’re a chick! Jim: Rooster! (crowing sound) Dad: You’re a rooster! NLA/GLP: Jim is breaking down chunks! Conversation analysis: No, Jim uses ellipses & recipient design:MAJOR pragmatic achievements!

My colleagues and I are on record as having argued that equating Peters’ ‘gestalt’ with delayed echoes (which has a troubled definitional history; Hutchins et al., 2024) is VERY problematic. We feel strongly about this as false analogies risk obscuring interesting differences and UNIQUE strengths!

We should understand differences between things b/c all analogies are imperfect (including this one) and we want to respect echoes on their own terms. Both bats and birds can fly but they are also different. If I want to truly understand either one, i should probably not lump them as ‘same’

Good reminder: “language science is a team sport” (credit: Sedivny). Yes, collaboration is hard work and, yup, the work is ongoing, but the state of the science and our related professions would not be where they are today without many productive collaborations across disciplines. Magic happens here

And in the end, it is the burden of NLA/GLP advocates to define their terms adequately in defense of their strong claims so as to make them measurable and testable.

Do we mean it as a clinical entity or identity?… This is not a trivial matter. Like my colleagues who have written on the difficulties surrounding this topic and the challenges to the claims of GLP advocates, it would seem prudent to clarify this term to advance the conversation…

Or do we just mean ‘Gestalt’ as synonym for ‘delayed echoes’ or does it refer to any/all kinds of formulaic speech? Do we mean ‘gestalt’ as linguistic form/gestalt as linguistic style/or cognitive style..

Blanc (2012 and since) never defined gestalt but rather variably described it and then conflated it with Gestalt Psychology/perception Various social media for-profit influencers define ‘gestalt’ circularly to mean stereotypical autistic traits

Peters (1977, 1983, 1986) described but did not define ‘gestalt’…. Prizant defined ‘gestalt’ in different - but kind of similar- ways - across works in the 80s and 90s (but most of those definitions appear to be tautological)

I am sometimes asked if GLP is “a thing”. Before pondering that (which may or may not ultimately prove fruitful), my question is what do you mean by ‘gestalt’. How are you understanding that term? consider how others have treated the subject matter: