Language-relative construal of individuation constrained by universal ontology: Revisiting language universals and linguistic relativity

Cognitive Science

Volumn 31, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 385-413

  Imai, Mutsumi ^a   Mazuka, Reiko ^b  

^a KEIO UNIVERSITY   (Japan)

^b DUKE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Individuation; Language acquisition; Language and thought; Linguistic relativity; Ontological concepts; Role of language in conceptual development

Indexed keywords

EID: 34447534499     PISSN: 03640213     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/15326900701326436     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Aikhenvald, A. Y. (2000). Classifiers: A typology of noun categorization devices. New York: Oxford University Press.
2. Armstrong, S. L., Gleitman, L., & Gleitman, H. (1983). What some concepts might not be. Cognition, 13, 263-308.
3. Berlin, B. (1992). Ethnobiological classification: Principles of categorization of plants and animals in traditional societies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
4. Bloom, P. (1994). Possible names: The role of syntax-semantics mappings in the acquisition of nominals. Lingua, 92, 297-329.
5. Boroditsky, L., Schimidt, L. A., & Phillips, W. (2003). Sex, Syntax, & Language. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 61-80). Cambridge, MA: MIT Pess.
6. Carmichael, L., Hogan, H. P., & Walter, A. A. (1932). An experimental study of the effect of language on the reproduction of visually perceived form. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 15, 73-86.
7. Clark, E. (2001). Emergent categories in first language acquisition. In M. Bowerman, & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 379-405). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8. Choi, S., & Bowerman, M. (1991). Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns. Cognition, 42, 83-121.
9. Diesendruck, G., & Bloom, P. (2003). How specific is the shape bias? Child Development, 74, 168-178.
10. Gentner, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2001). Individuation, relativity and early word learning. In M. Bowerman, & S. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 215-256). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
11. Gentner, D., & Namy, L. (1999). Comparison in the development of categories. Cognitive Development, 14, 487-513.
12. Gordon, P. (1985). Evaluating the semantic categories hypothesis: The case of the count/mass distinction. Cognition, 20, 209-242.
13. Haryu, E., & Imai, M. (2002). Reorganizing the lexicon by learning a new word: Japanese children's inference of the meaning of a new word for a familiar artifact. Child Development, 73, 1378-1391.
14. Hunt, E., & Agnoli, F. (1991). The Whorfian hypothesis: a cognitive psychology perspective. Psychological Review, 98, 377-389.
15. Huntley-Fenner, G., Carey, S., & Solimando, A. (2002). Objects are individuals but stuff doesn't count: Perceived rigidity and cohesiveness influence infants' representations of small groups of discrete entities. Cognition, 85, 203-221.
16. Imai, M., & Gentner, D. (1997). A cross-linguistic study of early word meaning: Universal ontology and linguistic influence. Cognition, 62, 169-200.
17. Imai, M., & Haryu, E. (2001). How do Japanese children learn proper nouns and common nouns without clues from syntax? Child Development, 72, 787-802.
18. Imai, M., Gentner, D., & Uchida, N. (1994). Children's theories of word meaning: The role of shape similarity in early acquisition. Cognitive Development, 9, 45-75.
19. Keil, F. C. (1989). Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Landau, B., Smith, L. B., & Jones, S. S. (1988). The importance of shape in early lexical learning. Cognitive Development, 3, 299-321.
21. Lucy, J. A. (1992). Grammatical categories and cognition: A case study of the linguistic relativity hypothesis. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
22. Lucy, J. A., & Gaskins, S. (2001). Grammatical categories and the development of classification preferences: A comparative approach. In S. Levinson, & M. Bowerman (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 257-283). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
23. Malt, B. C. (1995). Category coherence in cross-cultural perspective. Cognitive Psychology, 29, 85-148.
24. Malt, B. C., Sloman, S., Gennari, S., Shi, M., & Wang, Y. (1999). Knowing versus naming: Similarity and the linguistic categorization of artifacts. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 230-262.
25. Markman, E. M. (1989). Categorization in children: Problems of induction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, Bradford Books.
26. Markman, E. M., & Hutchinson, J. E. (1984). Children's sensitivity to constraints on word meaning: Taxonomic versus thematic relations. Cognitive Psychology, 16, 1-27.
27. Medin, D. L., Lynch, E. B., Coley, J., & Atran, S. (1997). Categorization and reasoning among tree experts: Do all roads lead to Rome? Cognitive Psychology, 32, 49-96.
28. Prasada, S., Ferenz, K., & Haskell, T. (2002). Conceiving of entities as objects and as stuff. Cognition, 83, 141-165.
29. Quine, W. V. (1969). Ontological relativity and other essays. New York: Columbia University Press.
30. Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch, & B.B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 28-46). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
31. Rosch, E., & Mervis, C. B. (1975). Family resemblances: Studies in the internal structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 7, 573-605.
32. Saalbach, H. & Imai, M. (in press). The scope of linguistic influence: Does a classifier system alter object concepts? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General.
33. Samuelson, L. K., & Smith, L. B. (1999). Early noun vocabularies: Do ontology, category organization, and syntax correspond? Cognition, 73, 1-33.
34. Senft, G. (2000). What do we really know about nominal classification systems? In G. Senft (Ed.), Systems of nominal classification (pp. 11-50). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
35. Shipley, E. E., & Shepperson, B. (1990). Countable entities: Developmental changes. Cognition, 34, 109-136.
36. Slobin, D. (1987). Thinking for speaking. Berkeley Linguistic Society, 13
37. Soja, N. N. (1992). Inferences about the meanings of nouns: The relationship between perception and syntax. Cognitive Development, 7, 29-45.
38. Soja, N. N., Carey, S., & Spelke, E. S. (1991). Ontological categories guide young children's inductions of word meaning: Object terms and substance terms. Cognition, 38, 179-211.
39. Subrahmanyam, K., Gelman, R., & Landau, B. (1999). Shape, material and syntax: Interacting forces in the acquisition of count and mass nouns. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 249-281.
40. Waxman, S. R., & Gelman, R. (1986). Preschoolers' use of superordinate relations in classification and language. Cognitive Development, 1, 139-156.
41. Wisniewski, E., Imai, M., & Casey, L. (1996). On the equivalence of superordinate concepts. Cognition, 60, 269-298.