Ideas; ' and the English treatment of language belongs rather to logic and epistemology than to psychology.I n the by the pathological method.Among the genetic studies of expression, the work of Baldwin,' Preyer,Verez,' S c h ~l t z e , ~ Noble,' Kirkpatrick,' Tracy ,' and Lukens furnishes valuable data regarding the ontogenesis of speech.These data must, of course, be verified and supplemented by further observations, and finally interpreted in the light of some comprehensive theory of mental development.I n connection with the pathology of expression, the work of Wernicke, Grashey, Lichtheim.Freud, Hughlings-Jackson, Kussmaul, Exner, Charcot, D&j&rine, Bastian, Starr, and Elder is too well known to require especial mention.Many of the monographs are already classics in the literature of psychiatry.A general summary of their results, however, interpreted from a psychological rather than from a clinical standpoint, has long been wanting.Perhaps the most satisfactory attempt to fill this want is represented by Joseph Collins's recent work.gBawden's monograph,1 dealing as it does with the border-line between normal and abnormal expression, will also find its place in this subsection.T h e latter subsection-the psychology of symbolic interpretation-deals with the conscious processes that are correlated with the perception of symbols and the apperception of their meaning.I t is to this chapter of the psychology of language that the present study belongs.I t represents an attempt to determine the nature and relations of the factors which are involved in the perception of spoken symbols and in the apperception of their meaning.Inasmuch, however, as the study was suggested by recent investigations upon the psychophysics of visual perception, a general discussion of the factors involved in any form of symbolic perception, as well as a brief review of these other investigations, will not be out of place.If we consider symbols apart from their ' meaning ' and look Baldwin, J. %.I. :
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
William C. Bagley (1900) studied this question.