Embodied language, best-fit analysis, and formal compositionality

Physics of Life Reviews

Volumn 7, Issue 4, 2010, Pages 385-410

  Feldman, Jerome ^a  

^a INTERNATIONAL COMPUTER SCIENCE INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

Best fit analysis; Compositionality; Construction grammar; Embodiment; Language community; Mental simulation

Indexed keywords

BEST-FIT ANALYSIS; COMPOSITIONALITY; CONSTRUCTION GRAMMAR; EMBODIMENT; LANGUAGE COMMUNITY; MENTAL SIMULATION;

ANIMALS;

MODELS;

ANIMALIA;

ANIMAL; CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMAN; KNOWLEDGE; LANGUAGE; LEARNING; LITERATURE; REVIEW;

ANIMALS; CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMANS; KNOWLEDGE; LANGUAGE; LEARNING; METAPHOR;

EID: 78649650467     PISSN: 15710645     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.plrev.2010.06.006     Document Type: Review

References (98)

1. Semin G., Smith E.R. Embodied grounding 2008, Cambridge U Press, Cambridge.
2. Jackendoff R. Foundations of language: brain, meaning, grammar, evolution 2002, Oxford U Press, Oxford.
3. Turing A. Intelligent machinery. Machine intelligence, vol. 5 1948, 3-23. Edinburgh U Press, Edinburgh, reprinted. B. Meltzer, D. Michie (Eds.).
4. Szabó Z.G. Compositionality In: Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Last accessed: 5 May 2010. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/compositionality/.
5. Krifka M. Compositionality. MIT encyclopedia of cognitive science 1999, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. R.A. Wilson, F.C. Keil (Eds.).
6. Feldman J. From molecule to metaphor: a neural theory of language 2006, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
7. Feldman J. Ecological expected utility and the mythical neural code. Cogn Neurodyn 2009, 4:25-35. 10.1007/s11571-009-9090-4.
8. Partee B.H. Compositionality in formal semantics 2004, Blackwell, Oxford.
9. Dowty D. Compositionality as an empirical problem. Direct compositionality 2007, 23-102. Oxford U Press, New York. C. Barker, P. Jacobson (Eds.).
10. Barker C., Jacobson P. Direct compositionality 2007, Oxford U Press, New York.
11. Hamm F., Kamp H., van Lambalgen M. There is no opposition between Formal and Cognitive Semantics. Theor Linguist 2006, 32:1-40.
12. Fauconnier G., Turner M. The way we think: conceptual blending and the mind's hidden complexities 2002, Basic Books, New York.
13. Sweetser E. Compositionality and blending. Cognitive linguistics: foundations, scope, and methodology 1999, 129-162. Mouton de Gruyter, New York. T. Janssen, G. Redeker (Eds.).
14. Hagoort P., Baggio G., Willems R.M. Semantic unification. The new cognitive neurosciences 2009, 819-836. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. Fourth ed. M. Gazzaniga (Ed.).
15. Mok E., Bryant J. A best-fit approach to productive omission of arguments. Proceedings of the 32nd annual meeting of the Berkeley linguistics society: theoretical approaches to argument structure 2006, 35-55. Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley.
16. Mok E. An embodied construction grammar approach to understanding and learning Mandarin Chinese. Computational approaches to embodied construction grammar 2010, John Benjamins, Amsterdam. H.C. Boas (Ed.).
17. Tardif T. Adult-to-child speech and language acquisition in Mandarin Chinese. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, New Haven, CT; 1993.
18. Tardif T. Nouns are not always learned before verbs: evidence from Mandarin speakers' early vocabularies. Dev Psychol 1996, 32:492-504.
19. MacWhinney B. The CHILDES project: tools for analyzing talk 2000, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
20. Barsalou L.W. Grounded cognition. Annu Rev Psych 2008, 59:617-645.
21. Glenberg A. Embodiment as a unifying perspective for psychology. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci 2010, 1:586-596. 10.1002/wcs.55.
22. Bergen B., Feldman J. Embodied concept learning. Handbook of cognitive science: an embodied approach 2008, 313-332. Elsevier, San Diego. P. Calvo, T. Gomila (Eds.).
23. Dodge E., Lakoff G. Image schemas: from linguistic analysis to neural grounding. From perception to meaning: image schemas in cognitive linguistics 2005, 57-91. Mouton de Gruyter, Berlin, New York. B. Hampe (Ed.).
24. Gallese V., Lakoff G. The brain's concepts: the role of the sensory-motor system in reason and language. Cogn Neuropsychol 2005, 22:455-479.
25. Pulvermüller F., Haerle M., Hummel F. Walking or talking?: Behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of action verb processing. Brain Lang 2001, 78:143-168.
26. Hauk O., Johnsrude I., Pulvermüller F. Somatotopic representation of action words in human motor and premotor cortex. Neuron 2004, 41:301-307.
27. Buccino G., Riggio L., Melli G., Binkofski F., Gallese V., Rizzolatti G. Listening to action-related sentences modulates the activity of the motor system: a combined TMS and behavioral study. Cogn Brain Res 2005, 24:355-363.
28. Tettamanti M., Buccino G., Saccuman M.C., Gallese V., Danna M., Scifo P., et al. Listening to action-related sentences activates fronto-parietal motor circuits. J Cogn Neurosci 2005, 17:273-281.
29. Richardson D., Spivey M., McRae K., Barsalou L. Spatial representations activated during real-time comprehension of verbs. Cogn Sci 2003, 27:767-780.
30. Bergen B., Lindsay S., Matlock T., Narayanan S. Spatial and linguistic aspects of visual imagery in sentence comprehension. Cogn Sci 2007, 31:733-764.
31. Glenberg A., Kaschak M. Grounding language in action. Psychon Bull Rev 2002, 9:558-565.
32. Stanfield R., Zwaan R. The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychol Sci 2001, 12:153-156.
33. Zwaan R., Stanfield R., Yaxley R. Do language comprehenders routinely represent the shapes of objects?. Psychol Sci 2002, 13:168-171.
34. Narayanan S. KARMA: Knowledge-based action representations for metaphor and aspect. Ph.D. dissertation, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA; 1997.
35. Matlock T. Fictive motion as cognitive simulation. Mem Cognit 2004, 32:1389-1400.
36. Feldman J., Dodge E., Bryant J. Embodied construction grammar. The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis 2009, 111-138. Oxford U Press, Oxford. B. Heine, H. Narrog (Eds.).
37. Fillmore C.J., Baker C. A frames approach to semantic analysis. The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis 2009, 313-340. Oxford U Press, Oxford. B. Heine, H. Narrog (Eds.).
38. Feldman J., Narayanan S. Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language. Brain and Lang 2004, 89:385-392.
39. Langacker R.W. Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 1 1987, Stanford U Press, Stanford, CA.
40. Fillmore C.J. The mechanisms of "construction grammar". Proceedings of the 14th annual meeting of the Berkeley linguistics society: grammaticalization 1988, 35-55. Berkeley Linguistics Society, Berkeley.
41. Goldberg A.E. Constructions: a construction grammar approach to argument structure 1995, U of Chicago Press, Chicago, London.
42. Kay P., Fillmore C.J. Grammatical constructions and linguistic generalizations: the what's X doing Y? construction. Language 1999, 75:1-33.
43. Croft W. Radical construction grammar: syntactic theory in typological perspective 2001, Oxford U Press, Oxford.
44. Langacker R.W. Cognitive grammar: a basic introduction 2008, Oxford U Press, New York.
45. Michaelis L.A. Sign-based construction grammar. The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis 2009, 155-176. Oxford U Press, Oxford. B. Heine, H. Narrog (Eds.).
46. Langacker R.W. Foundations of cognitive grammar, vol. 2 1991, Stanford U Press, Stanford, CA.
47. Goldberg A.E. Constructions at work: the nature of generalizations in language 2006, Oxford U Press, Oxford.
48. Chang N. Learning embodied constructions. Computational approaches to embodied construction grammar 2010, John Benjamins, San Diego. H. Boas (Ed.).
49. Bryant J. Constructional analysis. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA; 2008.
50. Bryant J., Gilardi L. A cognitive model of sentence interpretation. Computational approaches to embodied construction grammar 2010, John Benjamins, San Diego. H.C. Boas (Ed.).
51. Edelman G. Neural darwinism. The theory of neuronal group selection 1987, Basic Books, New York.
52. Pinker S., Jackendoff R. What's special about the human language faculty?. Cognition 2005, 95:201-236.
53. Mandler J.M. How to build a baby: II. Conceptual primitives. Psychol Rev 1992, 99:587-604.
54. Mandler J.M. The foundations of mind: origins of conceptual thought 2004, Oxford U Press, Oxford.
55. Saxe R. Uniquely human social cognition. Curr Opin Neurobiol 2006, 16:235-239.
56. Spelke E., Kinzler K. Core knowledge. Dev Sci 2007, 10:89-96.
57. Barrett L.F., Lindquist K.A. The embodiment of emotion. Embodied grounding 2008, 237-262. Cambridge U Press, New York. G. Semin, E.R. Smith (Eds.).
58. Jackendoff R. Consciousness and the computational mind 1987, Bradford/MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
59. Slobin D.I. The origins of grammaticizable notions: beyond the individual mind. The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, vol. 5: expanding the contexts 1997, 265-323. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ. D.I. Slobin (Ed.).
60. Wierzbicka A. Universal semantic primitives as a basis for lexical semantics. Folia Linguistica 1995, 29:149-169.
61. Talmy L. Toward a cognitive semantics I: concept structuring systems 2000, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA/London.
62. Talmy L. The fundamental system of spatial schemas in language. From perception to meaning: image schemas in cognitive linguistics 2006, 199-234. Mouton de Gruyter, Amsterdam. B. Hamp (Ed.).
63. Bergen B., Wheeler K. Grammatical aspect and mental simulation. Brain Lang 2009, 112:150-158.
64. Narayanan S. Moving right along: a computational model of metaphoric reasoning about events. In: Proceedings of the national conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI-99), Orlando, Florida; 1999. p. 121-8.
65. Bailey D, Chang N, Feldman J, Narayanan S. Extending embodied lexical development. In: Proceedings of the twentieth annual meeting of the cognitive science society (COGSCI-98), Madison, Wisconsin; 1998.
66. Lakoff G., Johnson M. Metaphors we live by 1980, U of Chicago Press, Chicago.
67. Jones R. Physics as metaphor 1982, U Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
68. Brown T.L. Making truth: METAPHOR IN SCIENCE 2003, U of Illinois Press, Champaign.
69. Lakoff G. The contemporary theory of metaphor. Metaphor and thought 1993, Cambridge U Press, Cambridge, MA. Second ed. A. Ortony (Ed.).
70. Gibbs R.W., Bogdanovich J.M., Sykes J.R., Barr D.J. Metaphor in idiom comprehension. J Mem Lang 1997, 37:141-154.
71. Boroditsky L. Metaphoric structuring: understanding time through spatial metaphors. Cognition 2000, 75:1-28.
72. Boroditsky L. Does language shape thought? English and Mandarin speakers' conceptions of time. Cogn Psychol 2001, 43:1-22.
73. Tseng M.-Y. Exploring image schemas as a critical concept: toward a critical-cognitive linguistic account of image-schematic interactions. J Literary Semantics 2007, 36:135-157.
74. Grady J.E. THEORIES ARE BUILDINGS revisited. Cognitive Linguistics 1997, 8:267-290.
75. Feldman J., Gilardi L. Extending ECG to communities, mental spaces and maps. Computational approaches to embodied construction grammar 2010, John Benjamins, Amsterdam. H.C. Boas (Ed.).
76. Dodge E. Conceptual and constructional composition. Ph.D. dissertation, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA; 2010.
77. Dodge E., Bryant J. Computational cognitive linguistics: an embodied construction grammar analysis of transitive constructions. Computational approaches to embodied construction grammar 2010, John Benjamins, Amsterdam. H.C. Boas (Ed.).
78. Guerts B., Beaver D.I. Discourse representation theory In: Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy, Last accessed: 5 May 2010. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/discourse-representation-theory/.
79. Fauconnier G. Mental spaces: aspects of meaning construction in natural language 1985, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
80. Clark H.H. Using language 1996, Cambridge U Press, Cambridge.
81. Nichol J.L., Swinney D.A. The psycholinguistics of anaphor. Anaphora: a reference guide 2003, 72-104. Blackwell, Oxford. A. Barr (Ed.).
82. Kehler A. Coherence, reference, and the theory of grammar 2002, CSLI Publications, Stanford, CA.
83. Anaphora: a reference guide 2003, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. A. Barrs (Ed.).
84. Poon H, Domingos P. Joint unsupervised coreference resolution with Markov logic. In: Proceedings of the 2008 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing (EMNLP), Honolulu, Hawaii; 2008. p. 650-9.
85. Poesio N.M., Sturt P., Artstein R., Filik R. Underspecification and anaphora: theoretical issues and preliminary evidence. Discourse Process 2006, 42:157-175.
86. Markert K., Hahn U. Understanding metonymies in discourse. Artif Intell 2002, 135:145-198.
87. Bloom P. How children learn the meanings of words 2000, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
88. Tomasello M. First steps in a usage based theory of first language acquisition. Cognitive Linguistics 2000, 11:116-135.
89. Johnson CR. Constructional grounding: the role of interpretational overlap in lexical and constructional acquisition. Ph.D. dissertation, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA; 1999.
90. Tomasello M. Constructing a language: a usage-based theory of language acquisition 2003, Harvard U Press, Cambridge, MA/London.
91. Chang N, Mok E. Putting context in constructions. In: Proceedings of the fourth international conference on construction grammar (ICCG4), Tokyo, Japan; 2006.
92. Chang N. Constructing grammar: a computational model of the emergence of early constructions. Ph.D. dissertation, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA; 2009.
93. Mok E. Contextual bootstrapping for grammar learning. Ph.D. dissertation, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA; 2009.
94. Steels L. Grounding symbols through evolutionary language games. Simulating the evolution of language 2001, 221-226. Springer, New York. A. Cangelosi, D. Parisi (Eds.).
95. Perlovsky L.I. Integrating language and cognition. IEEE Connections 2004, 2(2):8-12.
96. Brighton H., Smith K., Kirby S. Language as an evolutionary system. Phys Life Rev 2005, 2:177-226.
97. Fontanari J.F., Perlovsky L.I. Evolving compositionality in evolutionary language games. IEEE Trans Evolutionary Computations 2007, 11:758-769.
98. Slobin D.I. Universal and particular in the acquisition of language. Language acquisition: the state of the art 1982, 129-170. Cambridge U Press, Cambridge. E. Wanner, L.R. Gleitman (Eds.).