Multiple representational and dynamic conceptual analysis in the wild
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/1984-8412.2021.e74461Abstract
Cognitive semantics has different research methods, such as introspection, corpora analysis, interaction analysis, and experiments. The analysis of “data in the wild” (corpora and interaction) is generally informed by theories, but rarely by the current landscape of experiments’ findings on language and cognition. The goal of this paper is twofold: first, we want to highlight the possibility and importance of shortening the gap between theory, empirical evidence, and analysis of data in the wild in the study of cognition. Second, we suggest that resorting to the state of the art of empirical research about language and cognition allows for more flexible analyses, which may surpass the limits of current theories. In order to do that, we (i) provide a current overview of neuro and psycholinguistic findings about the grounding of concrete and abstract concepts, (ii) discuss how these findings can support linguistic data analysis, and (iii) emphasize trends toward multiple representation theories and dynamic systems.
References
AMSEL, B. D.; URBACH, T. P.; KUTAS, M. Empirically grounding grounded cognition: The case of color. Neuroimage, v. 99, p. 149-157, 2014.
ANTONUCCI, S. M.; ALT, M. A lifespan perspective on semantic processing of concrete concepts: does a sensory/motor model have the potential to bridge the gap? Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, v. 11, n. 4, p. 551-572, 2011.
BARROS-LOSCERTALES, A. et al. Reading salt activates gustatory brain regions: fMRI evidence for semantic grounding in a novel sensory modality. Cerebral Cortex, v. 22, n. 11, p. 2554-2563, 2012.
BARSALOU, L. W. Challenges, and Opportunities for Grounding Cognition. Journal of Cognition (in press), 2020.
BARSALOU, L. W.; DUTRIAUX, L.; SCHEEPERS, C. Moving beyond the distinction between concrete and abstract concepts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, v. 373, n. 1752, p. 20170144, 2018.
BARSALOU, L. W. On staying grounded and avoiding quixotic dead ends. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, v. 23, n. 4, p. 1122-1142, 2016.
BARSALOU, L. W. Grounding knowledge in the brain’s modal systems. In: UK COGNITIVE LINGUISTICS CONFERENCE. 4., 2012. p. 3.
BARSALOU, L. W. The human conceptual system. In: SPIVEY, M.; MCRAY, K. The Cambridge Handbook of Psycholinguistics. Cambridge University Press, 2012. p 239-258.
BARSALOU, L. W. Grounded cognition: Past, present, and future. Topics in cognitive science, v. 2, n. 4, p. 716-724, 2010.
BARSALOU, L. W. Grounded cognition. Annu. Rev. Psychol., v. 59, p. 617-645, 2008.
BARSALOU, L. W.; WIEMER-HASTINGS, K. Situating abstract concepts. Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thought, p. 129-163, 2005.
BARSALOU, L. W. Perceptions of perceptual symbols. Behavioral and brain sciences, v. 22, n. 4, p. 637-660, 1999. Available in: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X99002149. Access in: sept. 2020.
BEHUNIAK, S. M. The living dead? The construction of people with Alzheimer's disease as zombies. Ageing & Society, v. 31, n. 1, p. 70-92, 2011.
BERGEN, B. K. Louder than words: The new science of how the mind makes meaning.New York: Basic Books (AZ), 2012.
BOLOGNESI, M.; BURGERS, C.; CASELLI, T. On abstraction: decoupling conceptual concreteness and categorical specificity. Cognitive Processing, p. 1-17, 2020.
BOLOGNESI, M.; STEEN, G. Abstract Concepts: Structure, Processing, and Modeling. In: Perspectives on abstract concepts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company, p. 1-13, 2019.
BORGHI, A. M. et al. Varieties of abstract concepts: development, use and representation in the brain. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. 2018. Available in: http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0121. Access in: sept. 2020.
BORTFELD, H.; MCGLONE, M. S. The continuum of metaphor processing. Metaphor and Symbol, v. 16, n. 1-2, p. 75-86, 2001.
BUNDGAARD, P. F. The structure of our concepts: A critical assessment of Conceptual Metaphor Theory as a theory of concepts. Cognitive Semiotics, v. 12, n. 1, p. 1-11, 2019.
BUNDGAARD, P. F. Are cross-domain mappings psychologically deep, but conceptually shallow? What is still left to test for conceptual metaphor theory. Cognitive Semiotics, v. 5, n. 1-2, p. 400-407, 2013.
CIPORA, K. et al. A Minority pulls the sample mean: on the individual prevalence of robust group-level cognitive phenomena – the instance of the SNARC effect. PsyArXiv, 2019. Available in: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/bwyr3. Access in: sept. 2020.
CHOMSKY, N. Syntactic structures, The Hague: Mouton, 1957.
CROFT, W.; CRUISE, D. A. Cognitive linguistics. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
CRUTCH, S. J.; WARRINGTON, E. K. Abstract and concrete concepts have structurally different representational frameworks. Brain, v. 128, n. 3, p. 615-627, 2005.
CUCCIO, V.; GALLESE, V. A Peircean account of concepts: grounding abstraction in phylogeny through a comparative neuroscientific perspective. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, v. 373, n. 1752, p. 20170128, 2018.
DAVIS, C. P.; ALTMANN, G. T. M; YEE, E. Situational systematicity: A role for schema in understanding the differences between abstract and concrete concepts. Cognitive Neuropsychology, p. 1-12, 2020.
DEL PRADO MARTÍN, F. M; HAUK, O.; PULVERMÜLLER, F. Category specificity in the processing of color-related and form-related words: An ERP study. Neuroimage, v. 29, n. 1, p. 29-37, 2006.
DESAI, R. H.; REILLY, M.; VAN DAM, W. The multifaceted abstract brain. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, v. 373, n. 1752, p. 20170122, 2018.
DI PAOLO, E. A.; CUFFARI, E. C.; DE JAEGHER, H. Linguistic bodies: The continuity between life and language. Massachusetts: Mit Press, 2018.
FELDMAN, J. From molecule to metaphor: A neural theory of language. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2006.
FIGUEIREDO, N. M.; SIMAN, J H. Questões atuais sobre corpo e linguagem: cognição corporificada, agenda empírica e enativismo linguístico. Conjectura: filosofia e educação, v. 25, 2020 (forthcoming).
FLUSBERG, S. J.; MATLOCK, T.; THIBODEAU, P. H. War metaphors in public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, v. 33, n. 1, p. 1-18, 2018.
FODOR, J. A. The language of thought. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1975.
FRAME INDEX. 2020. Disponível em: https://framenet2.icsi.berkeley.edu/fnReports/data/frameIndex.xml?frame=Sharing. Access in: sept. 2020.
GALETZKA, C. The story so far: how embodied cognition advances our understanding of meaning-making. Frontiers in Psychology, v. 8, p. 1315, 2017.
GALLESE, V.; LAKOFF, G. The brain's concepts: The role of the sensory-motor system in conceptual knowledge. Cognitive neuropsychology 22, n. 3-4, p. 455-479, 2005.
GARCÍA, A. M. et al. How meaning unfolds in neural time: Embodied reactivations can precede multimodal semantic effects during language processing. NeuroImage, v. 197, p. 439-449, 2019.
GARCÍA, A. M.; IBÁÑEZ, A. A touch with words: dynamic synergies between manual actions and language. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, v. 68, p. 59-95, 2016.
GEORGE, D. R.; WHITEHOUSE, P. J. The war (on terror) on Alzheimer’s. Dementia, v. 13, n. 1, p. 120-130, 2014.
GIBBS JR, R.. Making good psychology out of blending theory. Cognitive linguistics, v. 11, p. 347-358, 2001.
GIBBS JR, R. W. The real complexities of psycholinguistic research on metaphor. Language Sciences, v. 40, p. 45-52, 2013.
GIBBS JR, R. W. Metaphor wars. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2017.
GIBBS JR, R.. W. Metaphor as dynamical–ecological performance. Metaphor and Symbol, v. 34, n. 1, p. 33-44, 2019.
GLENBERG, A. M. et al. Processing abstract language modulates motor system activity. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, v. 61, n. 6, p. 905-919, 2008.
GOLDINGER, S. D. et al. The poverty of embodied cognition. Psychonomic bulletin & review, v. 23, n. 4, p. 959-978, 2016.
GONZÁLEZ, J. et al. Reading cinnamon activates olfactory brain regions. Neuroimage, v. 32, n. 2, p. 906-912, 2006.
GRADY, J. Foundations of Meaning: primary metaphors and primary scenes. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística), University of California, Berkeley, 1997.
HOLYOAK, K. J.; STAMENKOVIĆ, D. Metaphor comprehension: A critical review of theories and evidence. Psychological bulletin, v. 144, n. 6, p. 641, 2018
IJZERMAN, H. et al. The Human Penguin Project: Climate, Social Integration, and Core Body Temperature. Collabra: Psychology, v.4, n.1, p. 37. 2018. Available in: http://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.165. Access in: sept. 2020.
KIEFER, M. et al. The sound of concepts: Four markers for a link between auditory and conceptual brain systems. Journal of Neuroscience, v. 28, n. 47, p. 12224-12230, 2008.
KÖVECSES, Z. Metaphor and emotion. New York: Oxford University Press. 2000.
KÖVECSES, Z.; PALMER, G. B.; DIRVEN, R. Language and emotion: The interplay of conceptualisation with physiology and culture. In: Metaphor and metonymy in comparison and contrast, Berlim: De Gruyter Mouton, 2003, p. 133-159.
KÖVECSES, Z. Some consequences of a multi-level view of metaphor. Current approaches to metaphor analysis in discourse, v., p. 19-33, 2019.
LAKOFF, G.; JOHNSON, M. Metaphors we live by. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, 1980.
LAKOFF, G. How metaphor structures dreams: The theory of conceptual metaphor applied to dream analysis. Dreaming, v. 3, n. 2, p.77, 1992.
LAKOFF, G; JOHNSON, M. Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to western thought. New York: Basic books, 1999.
LAKOFF, G. The neural theory of metaphor. In: GIBBS, R. W. (ed). The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge University Press, 2008. p. 17-38.
LANE, H. P.; MCLACHLAN, S.; PHILIP, J. The war against dementia: are we battle weary yet?. Age and ageing, v. 42, n. 3, p. 281-283, 2013.
LESHINSKAYA, A.; CARAMAZZA, A. For a cognitive neuroscience of concepts: Moving beyond the grounding issue. Psychonomic bulletin & review, v. 23, n. 4, p. 991-1001, 2016.
MAHON, B. Z. The burden of embodied cognition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, v. 69, n. 2, p. 172, 2015.
MARTIN, A.; CHAO, L. L. Semantic memory and the brain: structure and processes. Current opinion in neurobiology, v. 11, n. 2, p. 194-201, 2001.
MARTIN, A. The representation of object concepts in the brain. Annu. Rev. Psychol., v. 58, p. 25-45, 2007.
MARTINS, S. A Doença de Alzheimer e suas manifestações na linguagem: um estudo sobre a divulgação científica brasileira e norte-americana à luz da Linguística Cognitiva. 2019. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística) – Faculdade de Letras, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 2019.
MCGLONE, M. S. What is the explanatory value of a conceptual metaphor?. Language & Communication, v. 27, n. 2, p. 109-126, 2007.
MITCHELL, M. Complexity: A guided tour. Oxford University Press, 2009.
NGATCHA-RIBERT, L. Alzheimer disease and society: an analysis of its social representation. Psychologie & neuropsychiatrie du vieillissement, v.2, n.1, p. 49-66, 2004.
ONNIS, L.; SPIVEY, M. J. Toward a new scientific visualization for the language sciences. Information, v. 3, n. 1, p. 124-150, 2012.
PAIVIO, A. Mental representations: A dual coding approach. Oxford University Press, 1986.
PECHER, D.; ZEELENBERG, R.; BARSALOU, L. W. Sensorimotor simulations underlie conceptual representations: Modality-specific effects of prior activation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, v. 11, n. 1, p. 164-167, 2004.
PULVERMÜLLER, F. Neural reuse of action perception circuits for language, concepts and communication. Progress in neurobiology, v. 160, p. 1-44, 2018.
PULVERMÜLLER, F. How neurons make meaning: brain mechanisms for embodied and abstract-symbolic semantics. Trends in cognitive sciences, v. 17, n. 9, p. 458-470, 2013.
PULVERMÜLLER, F; FADIGA, L. Active perception: sensorimotor circuits as a cortical basis for language. Nature reviews neuroscience, v. 11, n. 5, p. 351-360, 2010.
PULVERMÜLLER, F. Brain mechanisms linking language and action. Nature reviews neuroscience, v. 6, n. 7, p. 576-582, 2005.
ROTH, M. A. Representation, philosophical issues about. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, v. 1, n. 1, p. 32-39, 2010.
SAUCIUC, G-A.. The role of metaphor in the structuring of emotion concepts. Cognitive Semiotics, v. 5, n. 1-2, p. 244-267, 2009.
SEMINO, E.; DEMJÉN, Z.; DEMMEN, J. An integrated approach to metaphor and framing in cognition, discourse, and practice, with an application to metaphors for cancer. Applied Linguistics, v. 39, n. 5, p. 625-645, 2016.
SIMAN, J. H. Os frames de Doença de Alzheimer. 2015. Dissertação (mestrado em Linguística) – Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, 2015.
SIMAN, J. H. Metáforas sobre doença de alzheimer: no pensamento e no mundo social. Revista do SETA, v. 9, p.1-19, 2019.
SPIVEY, M. The continuity of mind.Oxford Local: Oxford University Press, 2006.
STEEN, G. Deliberate Metaphor Theory: Basic assumptions, main tenets, urgent issues. Intercultural Pragmatics, v. 14, n. 1, p. 1-24, 2017.
THIBODEAU, P. H.; BORODITSKY, L. Metaphors we think with: The role of metaphor in reasoning. PloS one, v. 6, n. 2, p.1-11, 2011.
TOMASELLO, R. et al. Brain connections of words, perceptions and actions: A neurobiological model of spatio-temporal semantic activation in the human cortex. Neuropsychologia, v. 98, p. 111-129, 2017.
VARELA, F. J.; THOMPSON, E.; ROSCH, E. The embodied mind: Cognitive science and human experience. Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2016.
VAN GORP, B.; VERCRUYSSE, T. Frames and counter-frames giving meaning to dementia: a framing analysis of media content. Social Science & Medicine, v.8, n. 74, p. 1274-1281, 2012.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Fórum Linguístico
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Rights including those in copyright in the content of the published works are owned by Revista Forum Linguistico. Complete or parcial reprint should be authorized by the Editorial Board of the Journal. In case of authorization, the source of the original publication must be stated.
