Lingustics Olympiad

I'll be taking a shot over the next few days (I won't be trying to do it in the three hours!)

Reposted from Languagelog.

I'm going to try it as well.

Wow! I took a swift glance at it. It looks difficult!

I'll have a go at it later, too.

It's surely very tricky - and a test of intelligence more than linguistic ability it seems to me (although I only looked at the first four exercises).

And no, I won't be bothering to try it!

Richard,

Congratulations on your intelligent decision. I think that's the wise way to go, and I am following your example.

~~~~ jerry

quote:

Originally posted by Richard English:
It's surely very tricky - and a test of intelligence more than linguistic ability it seems to me (although I only looked at the first four exercises).

It's not a test of language-learning ability, that's what you mean. But it is a test of linguistic skill, in that if you have some knowledge of linguistics you might find it easier.

Having glanced at it briefly and assessing my skills, I will have to finish our Linguistics 101 course before attempting it.

quote:

But it is a test of linguistic skill, in that if you have some knowledge of linguistics you might find it easier.

Possibly - in that a knowledge of how words and sentences tend to be constructed could help. But the symbols chosen could just as well have been from a totally fictitious language - or could even have been figures - since what is being tested is an ability to recognise patterns and similarities.

quote:

Originally posted by Richard English:
an ability to recognise patterns and similarities.

That is what a lot of linguistics is about.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: goofy, August 06, 2008 08:35

That's interesting. Richard is correct that many IQ tests are designed with pattern recognization. I've always wondered why pattern recognization was associated with IQ. Perhaps it's because the verbal sections are designed by linguists? Probably not, but I thought I'd throw it out there.

One of the criticisms of IQ tests is that they can be biased to those whose upbringing and culture is typical of that enjoyed by most who post here. That is, reasonably well-off people living in one of the more favoured countries of the world, whose native tongue is English.

For that reason, those who set such tests have, over the years, tried to use testing devices that reduce such bias, and pattern recognition is one device that might have less bias than does, say, deduction that relies on good comprehension and understanding of language.

Because most IQ tests are timed (on the basis that a feature of higher intelligence is the higher speed at which a brain processes information), difficulty in comprehension caused by difficulty in understanding, will disadvantage those whose language is not that of the test's creator, regardless of their real intelligence. Deciding which of a choice of patterns is next in a series relies less on linguistic ability and more on speed of comprehension.

I suspect we've talked about this before, but I do know (from personal experience) that high stakes exams in the U.S. are required to be psychometrically sound and have all sorts of cultural and gender sensitivity reviews. I know that people think the exams only work for certain cultural groups, but it just isn't the case.