Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Get access
    Check if you have access via personal or institutional login
  • Cited by 10
  • Print publication year: 2008
  • Online publication date: June 2012

Chapter 19 - Language in the Brain, Body, and World

from Part III - Empirical Developments

Summary

Among the most common informal fallacies in reasoning are fallacies of ambiguity. These are mistakes that hinge on a word or phrase that has one meaning in some or all of the premises of the argument but another meaning in other premises or in the conclusion. Many modern theories describe concepts of individuals or kinds as though these thoughts were reducible to thoughts or judgments about complexes of properties and then ignore the question of what it is to think of a property. Abilities to identify and reidentify appearances of the same objective thing as appearances of the same constitute a substantial part of the possession of any empirical concept. One's rationality depends at every point on the complex causal and informational structure of the empirical world. Rationality is firmly embedded in the world outside the mind.

References

Anderson, A., Garrod, S. C., & Sanford, A. J. (1983). The accessibility of pronominal antecedents as a function of episode shifts in narrative text. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 35A, 427–440.
Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–660.
Barsalou, L. W. (2005). Situated conceptualization. In H. Cohen & C. Lefebvre (Eds.), Handbook of categorization in cognitive science (pp. 619–650). St. Louis: Elsevier.
Borreggine, K. L., & Kaschak, M. P. (2006). The action-sentence compatibility effect: It's all in the timing. Cognitive Science, 30(6), 1097–1112.
Bower, G. H., Black, J. B., & Turner, T. J. (1979). Scripts in memory for text. Cognitive Psychology, 11, 177–220.
Bryant, D. J., Tversky, B., & Franklin, N. (1992). Internal and external spatial frameworks for representing described scenes. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 74–98.
Buccino, G., Riggio, L., Mellia, G., Binkofski, F., Gallese, V., & Rizzolatti, G. (2005). Listening to action-related sentences modulates the activity of the motor system: A combined TMS and behavioral study. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 355–363.
Carreiras, M., Carriedo, N., Alonso, M. A., & Fernandez, A. (1997). The role of verbal tense and verbal aspect in the foregrounding of information in reading. Memory and Cognition, 23, 438–446.
Chambers, C. G., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Magnuson, J. S. (2004). Actions and affordances in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 687–696.
Damasio, H., Tranel, D., Grabowskia, T., Adolphs, R., & Damasio, A. (2004). Neural systems behind word and concept retrieval. Cognition, 92, 179–229.
Flanagan, J. R., & Johansson, R. S. (2003). Action plans used in action observation. Nature, 424, 769–771.
Fowler, C. A. (1996). Listeners do hear sounds, not tongues. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 99, 1730–1741.
Franklin, N., & Tversky, B. (1990). Searching imagined environments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 119, 63–76.
Glenberg, A. M. (1997). What memory is for. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 1–19.
Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9, 558–565.
Glenberg, A. M., Havas, D., Becker, R., & Rinck, M. (2005). Grounding language in bodily states: The case for emotion. In R. A. Zwaan & D. Pecher (Eds.), The grounding of cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking (pp. 115–128). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Glenberg, A. M., Meyer, M., & Lindem, K. (1987). Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 69–83.
Goldberg, A. E. (1995). Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42, 335–346.
Hauk, O., Johnsrude, I., & Pulvermüller, F. (2004). Somatotopic representation of action words in the motor and premotor cortex. Neuron, 41, 301–307.
Hess, D. J., Foss, D. J., & Carroll, P. (1995). Effects of global and local context on lexical processing during language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 62–82.
Hintzman, D. L. (1986). “Schema-abstraction” in a multiple trace model. Psychological Review, 93, 411–428.
Horton, W. S., & Rapp, D. N. (2002). Occlusion and accessibility of information in narrative comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 104–109.
Isenberg, N., Silbersweig, D., Engelien, A., Emmerich, K., Malavade, K., Benti, B., et al. (1999). Linguistic threat activates the human amygdala. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 96, 10456–10459.
Jurafsky, D. (1996). A probabilistic model of lexical and syntactic access and disambiguation. Cognitive Science, 20, 137–194.
Kaschak, M. P., Madden, C. J., Therriault, D. J., Yaxley, R. H., Aveyard, M., Blanchard, A. A., et al. (2005). Perception of motion affects language processing. Cognition, 94, B79–B89.
Kaschak, M. P., Zwaan, R. A., Aveyard, M., & Yaxley, R. H. (2006). Perception of auditory motion affects language processing. Cognitive Science, 30(4), 733–734.
Kaup, B., & Zwaan, R. A. (2003). Effects of negation and situational presence on the accessibility of text information. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 23, 439–446.
Klatzky, R. L., Pellegrino, J. W., McCloskey, B. P., & Doherty, S. (1989). Can you squeeze a tomato? The role of motor representations in semantic sensibility judgements. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 56–77.
Lavie, N. (2005). Distracted and confused? Selective attention under load. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9, 75–82.
LeDoux, J. E. (1995). Emotion: Clues from the brain. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 209–235.
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676–703.
MacWhinney, B. (2005). The emergence of grammar from perspective taking. In D. Pecher & R. A. Zwaan (Eds.), Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking (pp. 198–223). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mandler, J. M. (1986). On the comprehension of temporal order. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1, 309–320.
Martin, A., & Chao, L. L. (2001). Semantic memory and the brain: Structure and process. Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 11, 194–201.
Masur, E. F. (1997). Maternal labeling of novel and familiar objects: Implications for children's development of lexical constraints. Journal of Child Language, 24, 427–439.
McNeill, D. (1998). Speech and gesture integration. In J. M. Iverson & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), The nature and functions of gesture in children's communication: New directions for child development (No. 9, pp. 11–27). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
McRae, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 283–312.
Morrow, D. G., Bower, G. H., & Greenspan, S. L. (1989). Updating situation models during narrative comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 292–312.
Morrow, D. G., & Clark, H. H. (1988). Interpreting words in spatial descriptions. Language and Cognitive Processes, 3, 275–291.
Morrow, D. G., Greenspan, S. E., & Bower, G. H. (1987). Accessibility and situation models in narrative comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 165–187.
Pecher, D., Zeelenberg, R., & Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Verifying the properties of object concepts across different modalities produces switching costs. Psychological Science, 14, 119–129.
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2004). Toward a mechanistic psychology of dialogue. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 27, 169–226.
Porter, R., & Lubker, J. (1980). Rapid reproduction of vowel-vowel sequences: Evidence for a fast and direct acoustic-motoric linkage in speech. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research, 23, 593–602.
Pulvermüller, F. (1999). Words in the brain's language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 253–336.
Rall, J., & Harris, P. L. (2000). In Cinderella's slippers? Story comprehension from the protagonist's point of view. Developmental Psychology, 36, 202–208.
Richardson, D. C., Spivey, M. J., Barsalou, L. W., & McRae, K. (2003). Spatial representations activated during real-time comprehension of verbs. Cognitive Science, 27, 767–780.
Rinck, M., & Bower, G. H. (2000). Temporal and spatial distance in situation models. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1310–1320.
Searle, J. R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 417–457.
Spivey, M. J., & Geng, J. J. (2001). Oculomotor mechanisms activated by imagery and memory: Eye movements to absent objects. Psychological Research, 65, 235–241.
Spivey, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 1521–1543.
Stanfield, R. A., & Zwaan, R. A. (2001). The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science, 12(2), 153–156.
Strack, F., Martin, L., & Stepper, S. (1988). Inhibiting and facilitating conditions of the human smile: A nonobtrusive test of the facial feedback hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 768–777.
Tabossi, P., Colombo, L., & Job, R. (1987). Accessing lexical ambiguity: Effects of context and dominance. Psychological Research, 49, 161–167.
Tomasello, M. (2003). Constructing a language: A usage-based theory of language acquisition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (2001). Sentence comprehension: The integration of habits and rules. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Trabasso, T., & Suh, S. (1993). Understanding text: Achieving explanatory coherence through on-line inferences and mental operations in working memory. Discourse Processes, 16, 3–34.
Tucker, M., & Ellis, R. (2004). Action priming by briefly presented objects. Acta Psychologica, 116, 185–203.
van Berkum, J. J. A., Brown, C. M., Zwitserlood, P., Kooijman, V., & Hagoort, P. (2005). Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: Evidence from ERPs and reading times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 443–467.
van Dijk, T. A., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. New York: Academic Press.
Vu, H., Kellas, G., & Paul, S. T. (1998). Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution. Memory and Cognition, 26, 979–1001.
Wolpert, D. M., Doya, K., & Kawato, M. (2003). A unifying computational framework for motor control and social interaction. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 358, 593–602.
Zwaan, R. A. (1994). Effect of genre expectations on text comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 920–933.
Zwaan, R. A. (1996). Processing narrative time shifts. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 1196–1207.
Zwaan, R. A. (2004). The immersed experiencer: Toward an embodied theory of language comprehension. In B. H. Ross (Ed.),The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 44, pp. 35–62). New York: Academic Press.
Zwaan, R. A., & Madden, C. J. (2004). Updating situation models. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 283–288.
Zwaan, R. A., Madden, C. J., & Whitten, S. N. (2000). The presence of an event in the narrated situation affects its activation. Memory and Cognition, 28, 1022–1028.
Zwaan, R. A., Madden, C. J., Yaxley, R. H., & Aveyard, M. E. (2004). Moving words: Dynamic mental representations in language comprehension. Cognitive Science, 28, 611–619.
Zwaan, R. A., & Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162–185.
Zwaan, R. A., & Rapp, D. N. (2006). Discourse comprehension. In M. A. Gernsbacher & M. J. Traxler (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (2nd ed., pp. 725–764). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.
Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychological Science, 13(2), 168–171.
Zwaan, R. A., & Taylor, L. (2006). Seeing, acting, understanding: Motor resonance in language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 1–11.
Zwaan R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2004). Lateralization of object-shape information in semantic processing. Cognition, 94, B35–B43.