Construal and similarity in conceptual combination

Journal of Memory and Language

Volumn 35, Issue 3, 1996, Pages 434-453

  Wisniewski, Edward J ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030167529     PISSN: 0749596X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jmla.1996.0024     Document Type: Article

References (50)

1. ALLOY, L. B., & TABACHNIK, N. (1984) Assessment of co-variation by humans and animals. Psychological Review, 91, 112-149.
2. BARSALOU, L. W. (1993). Flexibility, structure, and linguistic vagary in concepts: Manifestations of a compositional system of perceptual symbols. In A. C. Collins, S. E. Gathercole, M. A. Conway, & P. E. M. Morris (Eds.), Theory of memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. BARSALOU, L. W., & HALE, C. R. (1992). Components of conceptual representation: From feature lists to recursive frames. In I. Van Mechelen, J. Hampton, R. Michalski, & P. Theuns (Eds.), Categories and concepts: Theoretical views and inductive data analysis. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
4. BATTIG, W. F., & MONTAGUE, W. E. (1969). Category norms for verbal items in 58 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph, 80, (3, Part 2).
5. BRACHMAN, R. J. (1978). A structural paradigm for representing knowledge. BBN Report No. 3605, Cambridge, MA.
6. CAREY, S. (1985). Conceptual change in childhood. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. COHEN, B., & MURPHY, G. L. (1984). Models of concepts. Cognitive Science, 8, 27-58.
8. COOLEN, R., VAN JAARSVELD, H. J., & SCHREUDER, R. (1991). The interpretation of isolated novel nominal compounds. Memory and Cognition, 19, 341-352.
9. DOWNING, P. (1977). On the creation and use of English compound nouns. Language, 53, 810-842.
10. FALKENHAINER, B., FORBUS, K. D., & GENTNER, D. (1989). The structure mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1-63.
11. FININ, T. (1980). The semantic interpretation of nominal compounds. Proceedings of the First Annual National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Stanford, CA.
12. GAGNE, C., & SHOBEN, E. (1993). The influence of relational information on interpreting nonpredicating combinations. Paper presented at the 65th Annual Meeting of MPA, Chicago, IL, April, 1993.
13. GENTNER, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
14. GENTNER, D. (1989). The mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.), Similarity, analogy, and thought (pp. 199-241). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
15. GENTNER, D., & MARKMAN, A. B. (1994). Structural alignment in comparison: No difference without similarity. Psychological Science, 5, 152-158.
16. GERRIG, R. J. (1989). The time course of sense creation. Memory and Cognition, 17, 194-207.
17. GERRIG, R. J., & MURPHY, G. L. (1992). Contextual influences on the comprehension of complex concepts. Language and Cognitive Processes, 7, 205-230.
18. GLEITMAN, L. R., & GLEITMAN, H. (1970). Paraphrase and paraphrase: Some innovative uses of language. New York: Norton.
19. GOLDSTONE, R. L. (1994). Similarity, interactive-activation and mapping. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 20, 3-28.
20. GOLDSTONE, R. L., MEDIN, D. L., & GENTNER, D. (1991). Relational similarity and the non-independence of features in similarity judgment. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 222-264.
21. IMAI, M., GENTNER, D., & UCHIDA, N. (in press). Children's theories of word meaning: The role of shape similarity in early acquisition. Cognitive Development.
22. KAY, P., & ZIMMER, K. (1976). On the semantics of compounds and genitives in English. Sixth California Linguistics Association Proceedings. San Diego: Campile Press.
23. KEIL, F. C. (1979). Semantic and conceptual development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
24. KEIL, F. C. (1989). Concepts, kinds, and the acquisition of word meaning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25. LAKOFF, G. (1987). Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
26. LANDAU, B., JONES, S. S., & SMITH, L. B. (1992). Perception, ontology and naming in young children: Commentary on Soja, Carey and Spelke. Cognition, 43, 85-91.
27. LEVI, J. N. (1978). The syntax and semantics of complex nominals. New York: Academic Press.
28. MARKMAN, A. B., & GENTNER, D. (1993a). Structural alignment during similarity comparisons. Cognitive Psychology, 23, 431-467.
29. MARKMAN, A. B., & GENTNER, D. (1993b). Splitting the differences: A structural alignment view of similarity. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 517-535.
30. MARKMAN, A. B., & WISNIEWSKI, E. J. (1995). Comparability in taxonomic categories. Manuscript submitted for publication.
31. MARTIN, J. D., & BILLMAN, D. O. (in press). Acquiring and combining overlapping concepts. Machine Learning.
32. MEDIN, D. L. (1989). Concepts and conceptual structure. American Psychologist, 44, 1469-1481.
33. MEDIN, D. L., GOLDSTONE, R. L., & GENTNER, D. (1993). Respects of similarity. Psychological Review, 100, 254-278.
34. MEDIN, D. L., & SHOBEN, E. J. (1988). Context and structure in conceptual combination. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 158-190.
35. MINSKY, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge. In P. H. Winston (Ed.), The psychology of computer vision. New York: McGraw-Hill.
36. MURPHY, G. L. (1988). Comprehending complex concepts. Cognitive Science, 12, 529-562.
37. MURPHY, G. L. (1990). Noun phrase interpretation and conceptual combination. Journal of Memory and Language, 29, 259-288.
38. MURPHY, G. L., & MEDIN, D. L. (1985). The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review, 92, 289-316.
39. NUNBERG, G. (1979). The non-uniqueness of semantic solutions. Polysemy. Linguistics & Philosophy, 3, 143-184.
40. PALMER, S. E. (1978). Fundamental aspects of cognitive representation. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
41. ROSCH, E., MERVIS, C. B., GRAY, W. D., JOHNSON, D. M., & BOYES-BRAEM, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 382-439.
42. RUMELHART, D. E. (1980). Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. SHOBEN, E. J. (1993). Comprehending nonpredicating conceptual combinations. In G. Nakamura, R. Taraban, & D. Medin (Eds.). The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 20). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
44. SMITH, E. E., OSHERSON, D. N., RIPS, L. J., & KEANE, M. (1988). Combining prototypes: A modification model. Cognitive Science, 12, 485-527.
45. THAGARD, P. (1984). Conceptual combination and scientific discovery. In P. Asquith and P. Kitcher (Eds.), PSA (Vol. 1). East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.
46. WISNIEWSKI, E. J. (1992). When concepts combine: the interaction of multiple constraints. Paper presented at 18th Annual Meeting of the Society for Philosophy and Psychology, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, June, 1992.
47. WISNIEWSKI, E. J. (1994). Interpretations of novel noun-noun combinations. Unpublished manuscript.
48. WISNIEWSKI, E. J., & GENTNER, D. (1991). On the combinatorial semantics of noun pairs: Minor and major adjustments to meaning. In G. B. Simpson (Ed.), Understanding word and sentence. Amsterdam: North Holland.
49. WISNIEWSKI, E. J., & MARKMAN, A. B. (1993). The role of structural alignment in conceptual combination. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 1083-1086, Boulder, CO.
50. WISNIEWSKI, E. J., & MEDIN, D. L. (1994). On the interaction of theory and data in concept learning. Cognitive Science, 18, 221-282.