Category essence or essentially pragmatic? Creator's intention in naming and what's really what

Cognition

Volumn 105, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 615-648

  Malt, Barbara C ^a   Sloman, Steven A ^b  

^a LEHIGH UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b BROWN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Artifact categorization; Artifact concepts; Essentialism; Intentional historical theory; Naming; Pragmatics

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; BEHAVIOR; COGNITION; COMMUNICATION SKILL; CONCEPT ANALYSIS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISCOURSE ANALYSIS; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; PERCEPTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOLOGY; STIMULUS RESPONSE; THEORY;

HUMANS; INTENTION; LANGUAGE; SEMANTICS; VOCABULARY;

EID: 34848920327     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (47)

1. Ameel E., Storms G., Malt B.C., and Sloman S.A. How bilinguals solve the naming problem. Journal of Memory and Language 52 (2005) 309-329
2. Barr D.J. Establishing conventional communication systems: Is common knowledge necessary?. Cognitive Science 28 (2004) 937-962
3. Barr, D. J. (2004b). The emergence of conventions in language communities. In J. C. Trueswell & M. K. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Approaches to studying world-situated language use: Bridging the language-as-product and language-as-action traditions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Bloom P. Intention, history, and artifact concepts. Cognition 60 (1996) 1-29
5. Bloom P. Theories of artifact categorization. Cognition 66 (1998) 87-93
6. Bloom P., and Markson L. Intentionality and analogy in children's naming of pictorial representations. Psychological Science 9 (1998) 200-204
7. Bloom P. How children learn the meanings of words (2000), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
8. Boroditsky L. Does language shape thought? English and Mandarin speakers' conceptions of time. Cognitive Psychology 43 (2001) 1-22
9. Brennan S.E., and Clark H.H. Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition 22 (1996) 1482-1493
10. Carey S. Conceptual change in childhood (1985), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
11. Carey S. Cognitive domains as modes of thought. In: Olson D.R., and Torrance N. (Eds). Modes of thought: Explorations in cognition and culture (1996), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK 187-215
12. Chaigneau S.E., Barsalou L.W., and Sloman S.A. Assessing affordance and intention in the HIPE theory of function. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 133 (2004) 601-625
13. Clark E.V. Conceptual perspective and lexical choice in acquisition. Cognition 64 (1997) 1-37
14. Clark H.H., and Marshall C.R. Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In: Joshi A.K., Sag I.S., and Webber B. (Eds). Elements of discourse understanding (1981), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 10-46
15. Clark H.H., and Wilkes-Gibbs D. Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition 22 (1986) 1-39
16. Diesendruck G., Markson L., and Bloom P. Children's reliance on creator's intent in extending names for artifacts. Psychological Science 14 (2003) 164-168
17. Defeyter M.A., and German T. Acquiring an understanding of design: Evidence from children's insight problem solving. Cognition 89 (2003) 133-155
18. Fodor J.A. The Language of thought (1975), Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts
19. Garrod S., and Anderson A. Saying what you mean in dialog: a study in conceptual and semantic coordination. Cognition 27 (1987) 181-218
20. Garrod S., and Doherty G. Conversation, co-ordination and convention: An empirical investigation of how groups establish linguistic conventions. Cognition 53 (1994) 181-215
21. Gelman S.A., and Bloom P. Children are sensitive to how an object was created when deciding what to name it. Cognition 76 (2000) 91-103
22. Gelman S.A., and Hirschfeld L. How biological is essentialism?. In: Medin D.L., and Atran S. (Eds). Folkbiology (1999), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA 403-446
23. Gelman S.A., and Wellman H.M. Insides and essences: Early understandings of the non-obvious. Cognition 38 (1991) 213-244
24. Gutheil G., Bloom P., Valderrama N., and Freedman R. The role of historical intuitions in children's and adult's naming of artifacts. Cognition 91 (2004) 23-42
25. Graham R., and Belnap K. The acquisition of lexical boundaries in English by native speakers of Spanish. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 24 (1986) 275-286
26. Hirschfeld L.A., and Gelman S.A. Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (1994), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
27. Keil F.C. Concepts, kinds, and cognitive development (1989), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
28. Kemler-Nelson D.G., Herron L., and Morris C. How children and adults name broken objects: Inferences and reasoning about design intentions in the categorization of artifacts. Journal of Cognition and Development 3 (2002) 301-332
29. Krauss R.M., and Glucksberg S. The development of communication: Competence as a function of age. Child Development 40 (1969) 255-256
30. Kronenfeld D.B., Armstrong J.D., and Wilmoth S. Exploring the internal structure of linguistic categories: An extensionist semantic view. In: Dougherty J.W.D. (Ed). Directions in cognitive anthropology (1985), University of Illinois Press, Urbana 91-113
31. Levinson J. Refining art historically. Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 47 (1989) 21-33
32. Levinson S. Space in language and cognition: Explorations in cognitive diversity (2003), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
33. Locke J. An essay concerning human understanding (1690/1964), Meridian Books, Cleveland
34. Malt B.C. Features and beliefs in the mental representation of categories. Journal of Memory and Language 29 (1990) 289-315
35. Malt B.C., and Sloman S.A. Conversation and convention: Enduring influences on name choice for common objects. Memory & Cognition 32 (2004) 1346-1354
36. Malt, B. C. & Sloman, S. A. (2007). Artifact categorization: The good, the bad, and the ugly. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Creations of the mind: Theories of artifacts and their representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
37. Malt B.C., Sloman S.A., Gennari S., Shi M., and Wang Y. Knowing versus naming: Similarity and the linguistic categorization of artifacts. Journal of Memory and Language 40 (1999) 230-262
38. Matan A., and Carey S. Developmental changes within the core of artifact concepts. Cognition 78 (2001) 1-26
39. Murphy G.L. The big book of concepts (2002), MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
40. Paradis M. Language and thought in bilinguals. In: McCormack W., and Izzo H. (Eds). The Sixth LACUS Forum (1979), Hornbeam Press Inc., Columbia, SC 420-431
41. Pickering M.J., and Garrod S. Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral & Brain Sciences 27 (2004) 169-226
42. Reips U.-D., and Neuhaus C. WEXTOR: A Web-based tool for generating and visualizing experimental designs and procedures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 34 (2002) 234-240
43. Rips L.J. Similarity, typicality, and categorization. In: Vosniadou S., and Ortony A. (Eds). Similarity and Analogical Reasoning (1989), Cambridge University Press, New York 21-59
44. Sloman S.A., Harrison M., and Malt B.C. Recent exposure affects artifact naming. Memory & Cognition 30 (2002) 687-695
45. Sloman, S.A. & Malt, B.C. (2003). Artifacts are not ascribed essences, nor are they treated as belonging to kinds. Language and Cognitive Processes [Special Issue: Conceptual Representation], 18, 563-582.
46. Smith L.B., Jones S.S., and Landau B. Naming in young children: A dumb attentional mechanism?. Cognition 60 (1996) 143-171
47. Sperber, D. (2007). Seedless grapes: Nature and culture. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Ed.), Creations of the mind: Theories of artifacts and their representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.