Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T18:42:47.864Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Individuation, relativity, and early word learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 January 2010

Dedre Gentner
Affiliation:
Northwestern University and Stanford University
Lera Boroditsky
Affiliation:
Northwestern University and Stanford University
Melissa Bowerman
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Psycholinguistik, The Netherlands
Stephen Levinson
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Psycholinguistik, The Netherlands
Get access

Summary

Which words do children learn earliest, and why? These questions bear on how humans organize the world into semantic concepts, and how children acquire this parsing. A useful perspective is to think of how bits of experience are conflated into the same concept. One possibility is that children are born with the set of conceptual conflations that figures in human language. But assuming (as we will) that most semantic concepts are learned, not innate, there remain two possibilities. First, aspects of perceptual experience could form inevitable conflations that are conceptualized and lexicalized as unified concepts.

In this case, we would have cognitive dominance: concepts arise from the cognitive-perceptual sphere and are simply named by language. A second possibility is guistic dominancee world presents perceptual bits whose clumping is not pre-ordained, and language has a say in how the bits get conflated into concepts. We propose that both cognitive and linguistic dominance apply, but to different degrees for different kinds of words (Gentner 1981, 1982). Some bits of experience naturally form themselves into inevitable (preindividuated) concepts, while other bits are able to enter into several different possible combinations.

Relational relativity and the division of dominance

Embracing both cognitive and linguistic dominance may seem to be a vague middle-of-the-road position. But we can make the distinction sharper by asking which applies when. We suggest a larger pattern, a division of dominance (Gentner 1988). The Division of Dominance continuum is shown in figure 8.1. At one extreme, concrete nouns - terms for objects and animate beings - follow cognitive- perceptual dominance.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×