Branch and Vollmer (2004) argue that use of the word behavior as a count noun is ungrammatical and, worse, mischaracterizes and ultimately degrades the concept of the operant. In this paper I argue that use of behavior as a count noun is a reflection of its grammatical status as a hybrid of count and mass noun. I show that such usage is widespread across colloquial, referential, and scientific documents including the writings of major figures in behavior analysis (most notably B. F. Skinner), books describing its applications, and its major journals. Finally, I argue against the assertion that such usage degrades the concept of the operant, at least in any meaningful way, and argue instead that employing eccentric definitions for ordinary words and using arcane terms to describe everyday human behavior risks diminishing the influence of behavior analysis on human affairs.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2755365 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF03392095 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!