Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-6c7dr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-03-29T07:55:32.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Communicative intentions can modulate the linguistic perception-action link

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 June 2013

Yoshihisa Kashima ,
Harold Bekkering  and
Emiko S. Kashima
Yoshihisa Kashima
Affiliation:
Melbourne School of Psychological Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria 3010, Australia. ykashima@unimelb.edu.au http://www.psych.unimelb.edu.au/people/staff/KashimaY.html
Harold Bekkering
Affiliation:
Donders Institute for Brain, Cognition, and Behaviour, Radboud University Nijmegen, 6500 HE Nijmegen, The Netherlands. h.bekkering@donders.ru.nl http://www.nici.ru.nl/anc/index.php?staff=bekkering
Emiko S. Kashima
Affiliation:
School of Psychological Science, La Trobe University, Bundoora, Victoria 3086, Australia. e.kashima@latrobe.edu.au http://www.latrobe.edu.au/scitecheng/about/staff/profile?uname=ekashima
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although applauding Pickering & Garrod's (P&G's) attempt to ground language use in the ideomotor perception-action link, which provides an “infrastructure” of embodied social interaction, we suggest that it needs to be complemented by an additional control mechanism that modulates its operation in the service of the language users' communicative intentions. Implications for intergroup relationships and intercultural communication are discussed.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 36 , Issue 4 , August 2013 , pp. 361 - 362
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Babel, M. (2010) Dialect divergence and convergence in New Zealand English. Language in Society 39:437–56.Google Scholar
Bourhis, R. Y. & Giles, H. (1977) The language of intergroup distinctiveness. In: Language, ethnicity, and intergroup relations, ed. Giles, H., pp. 119–36. Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bratman, M. E. (1992) Shared cooperative activity. The Philosophical Review 101:327–41.Google Scholar
Bratman, M. E. (1999) Faces of intention: Selected essays on intention and agency. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Carpenter, W. B. (1852) On the influence of suggestion in modifying and directing muscular movement independently of volition. Proceedings of the Royal Institution 147–54.Google Scholar
Castelli, L., Pavan, G., Ferrari, E. & Kashima, Y. (2009) The stereotyper and the chameleon: The effects of stereotype use on perceiver's mimicry. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 4:835–39.Google Scholar
Clark, H. H. (1996) Using language. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Giles, H., Coupland, N. & Coupland, J. (1991) Accommodation theory: Communication, context, and consequence. In Contexts of accommodation, ed. Giles, H., Coupland, J. & Coupland, N., pp. 1–68. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Holtgraves, T. & Kashima, Y. (2008) Language, meaning and social cognition. Personality and Social Psychology Review 12:73–94.Google Scholar
Hurley, S. (2008a) The shared circuits model (SCM): How control, mirroring, and simulation can enable imitation, deliberation, and mindreading. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 31(01):1–22.Google Scholar
Kashima, Y. & Lan, Y. (in press) Communication and language use in social cognition. In: The Oxford handbook of social cognition, ed. Carlson, D.. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ondobaka, S. & Bekkering, H. (2012) Hierarchy of idea-guided action and perception-guided movement. Frontiers in Psychology. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00579.Google Scholar
Ondobaka, S., de Lange, F. P., Newman-Norlund, R. D., Wiemers, M. & Bekkering, H. (2011) Interplay between action and movement intentions during social interaction. Psychological Science 23: 30–35.Google Scholar
Pacherie, E. (2012) The phenomenology of joint action: Self-agency vs. joint-agency. In: Joint attention: New developments, ed. Seemann, A., pp. 343–89. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tuomela, R. (2007) The philosophy of sociality. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar