Skip to main content
×
×
Home

Converging on a theory of language through multiple methods

  • Mónica González-Márquez (a1), Michele I. Feist (a2) and Liane Ströbel (a1)
Abstract
Abstract

Assuming that linguistic representation has been studied only by linguists using grammaticality judgments, Branigan & Pickering (B&P) present structural priming as a novel alternative. We show that their assumptions are incorrect for cognitive-functional linguistics, exposing converging perspectives on form/meaning pairings between generativists and cognitive-functional linguists that we hope will spark the cross-disciplinary discussion necessary to produce a cognitively plausible model of linguistic representation.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Bergen B. & Coulson S. (2006) Frame-shifting humor in simulation-based language understanding. IEEE Intelligent Systems 21(2):5962.
Bybee J. L. (1994) A view of phonology from a cognitive and functional perspective. Cognitive Linguistics 5(4):285305.
Bybee J. L. & Moder C. L. (1983) Morphological classes as natural categories. Language 59:251–89.
Coulson S. & Van Petten C. (2002) Conceptual integration and metaphor: An event-related potential study. Memory & Cognition 30:958–68.
Croft W. & Poole K. T. (2008) Inferring universals from grammatical variation: Multidimensional scaling for typological analysis. Theoretical Linguistics 34:137.
Dąbrowska E. (2014) Words that go together: Measuring individual differences in native speakers' knowledge of collocations. The Mental Lexicon 9(3):401–18.
Divjak D. S. & Arppe A. (2013) Extracting prototypes from exemplars What can corpus data tell us about concept representation? Cognitive Linguistics 24(2):221–74.
Feist M. I. (2008) Space between languages. Cognitive Science 32(7):1177–99.
Feist M. I. (2010) Inside in and on: Typological and psycholinguistic perspectives. In: Language, Cognition, and Space, ed. Evans V. & Chilton P., pp. 95114. Equinox.
Feist M. I. (2013) Codability and cost in the naming of motion events. Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio 7(3):4561.
Feist M. I. & Duffy S. E. (2015) Moving beyond “Next Wednesday”: The interplay of lexical semantics and constructional meaning in an ambiguous metaphoric statement. Cognitive Linguistics 26(4):633–56.
Fillmore C. J. (1976) Frame semantics and the nature of language. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 280:2032.
Fillmore C. J., Kay P. & O'Connor M. C. (1988) Regularity and idiomaticity in grammatical constructions: The case of let alone . Language 64(3):501–38.
Goldberg A. E. (2003) Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7(5):219–24. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9
Haspelmath M. (2008) Frequency vs. iconicity in explaining grammatical asymmetries. Cognitive Linguistics 19:133.
Heim I. & Kratzer A. (1998) Semantics in generative grammar. Blackwell.
Huette S., Winter B., Matlock T., Ardell D. & Spivey M. J. (2014) Eye movements during listening reveal spontaneous grammatical processing. Frontiers in Psychology 5:410. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00410.
Jackendoff R. (2002) Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford University Press.
Lakoff G. (1987) Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff G. (1990) The invariance hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image-schemas? Cognitive Linguistics 1(1):3974.
Levinson S. C. & Meira S. (2003) “Natural concepts” in the spatial topological domain – Adpositional meanings in crosslinguistic perspective: An exercise in semantic typology. Language 79:485516.
Liu N. & Bergen B. (2016) When do language comprehenders mentally simulate locations? Cognitive Linguistics 27(2):181203.
Lupyan G. (2012) Linguistically modulated perception and cognition: The label feedback hypothesis. Frontiers in Cognition 3(54):113. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00054.
Lupyan G. & Casasanto D. (2015) Meaningless words promote meaningful categorization. Language and Cognition 7(2):167–93.
Núñez R. & Sweetser E. (2006) With the future behind them: Convergent evidence from Aymara language and gesture in the crosslinguistic comparison of spatial construals of time. Cognitive Science 30(3):401–50.
Perry L. & Lupyan G. (2014) The role of language in multi-dimensional categorization: Evidence from transcranial direct current stimulation and exposure to verbal labels. Brain and Language 135:6672.
Saj A., Fuhrman O., Vuilleumier P. & Boroditsky L. (2014) Patients with left spatial neglect also neglect the “left side” of time. Psychological Science 25(1):207–14.
Schiffer S. (2015) Meaning and formal semantics in generative grammar. Erkenntnis 80(1):6187.
Spivey M. & González-Márquez M. (2003) Rescuing generative linguistics: Too little, too late? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26(06):690–1.
Spivey M., Richardson D. & Gonzalez-Marquez M. (2004) On the perceptual-motor and image-schematic underpinnings of real-time language processing. In: The grounding of cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking, ed. Zwaan R. & Pecher D., pp. 246–81. Cambridge University Press.
Ströbel L., ed. (2016) Sensory-motor concepts in language & cognition. Duesseldorf University Press.
Tomasello M. (1998) The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, vol. 1. Erlbaum.
Tomasello M. (2003b) The new psychology of language: Cognitive and functional approaches to language structure, vol. 2. Erlbaum.
Van Petten C., Coulson S., Plante E., Rubin S. & Parks M. (1999) Timecourse of word identification and semantic integration in spoken language. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 25(2):394417.
Walker E., Bergen B. & Núñez R. (2013) Investigating spatial axis recruitment in temporal reckoning through acoustic stimuli and non-spatial responses. Center for Research in Language Technical Report, University of California, San Diego 25:110.
Winawer J., Huk A. & Boroditsky L. (2008) A motion aftereffect from still photographs depicting motion. Psychological Science 19(3):276–83.
Winter B. & Matlock T. (2013) Making judgments based on similarity and proximity. Metaphor & Symbol 28:114.
Yoon J. & Gries S. Th., eds. (2016) Corpus-based approaches to construction grammar. John Benjamins.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Behavioral and Brain Sciences
  • ISSN: 0140-525X
  • EISSN: 1469-1825
  • URL: /core/journals/behavioral-and-brain-sciences
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 1
Total number of PDF views: 16 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 235 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 10th November 2017 - 25th February 2018. This data will be updated every 24 hours.