David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Cognitive Science 36 (3):517-544 (2012)
When people describe motion events, their path expressions are biased toward inclusion of goal paths (e.g., into the house) and omission of source paths (e.g., out of the house). In this paper, we explored whether this asymmetry has its origins in people’s non-linguistic representations of events. In three experiments, 4-year-old children and adults described or remembered manner of motion events that represented animate/intentional and physical events. The results suggest that the linguistic asymmetry between goals and sources is not fully rooted in non-linguistic event representations: linguistic descriptions showed the goal bias for both kinds of events, whereas non-linguistic memory for events showed the goal bias only for events involving animate, goal-directed motion. The findings are discussed in terms of the mapping between non-linguistic representations of goals and sources in language, focusing on the role that linguistic principles play in producing a more absolute goal bias from more gradient non-linguistic representations of paths
|Keywords||Prominence hierarchies Conceptual representations Syntax Motion events Goal Semantics Space‐language interface Source|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
Lila R. Gleitman, Henry Gleitman, Carol Miller & Ruth Ostrin (1996). Similar, and Similar Concepts. Cognition 58 (3):321-376.
William G. Hayward & Michael J. Tarr (1995). Spatial Language and Spatial Representation. Cognition 55 (1):39-84.
Ray S. Jackendoff (1983). Semantics And Cognition. Cambridge: Mit Press.
Ray S. Jackendoff (1990). Semantic Structures. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Laura Lakusta & Barbara Landau (2005). Starting at the End: The Importance of Goals in Spatial Language. Cognition 96 (1):1-33.
Citations of this work BETA
Mahesh Srinivasan & David Barner (2013). The Amelia Bedelia Effect: World Knowledge and the Goal Bias in Language Acquisition. Cognition 128 (3):431-450.
Similar books and articles
Anna Papafragou (2010). Source-Goal Asymmetries in Motion Representation: Implications for Language Production and Comprehension. Cognitive Science 34 (6):1064-1092.
Anna Papafragou (2006). When English Proposes What Greek Presupposes: The Cross-Linguistic Encoding of Motion Events. Cognition 98 (3):75-87.
Lila Gleitmanb (2006). When English Proposes What Greek Presupposes: The Cross-Linguistic Encoding of Motion Events. Cognition 98 (3):75-87.
Anna Papafragou (2002). Shake, Rattle, 'N' Roll: The Representation of Motion in Language and Cognition. Cognition 84 (2):189-219.
Panos Athanasopoulos & Emanuel Bylund (2013). Does Grammatical Aspect Affect Motion Event Cognition? A Cross-Linguistic Comparison of English and Swedish Speakers. Cognitive Science 37 (2):286-309.
Jeff Loucks & Eric Pederson (2010). Linguistic and Non-Linguistic Categorization of Complex Motion Events. In Jürgen Bohnemeyer & Eric Pederson (eds.), Event Representation in Language and Cognition. Cambridge University Press.
John C. Trueswell & Anna Papafragou, Perceiving and Remembering Events Cross-Linguistically: Evidence From Dual-Task Paradigms.
Jeffrey M. Zacks (2001). Scaling Up From Atomic to Complex Events. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (5):909-910.
Shulan Lu & Donald R. Franceschetti (2003). Perceiving and Describing Motion Events. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (3):295-296.
James Higginbotham (2000). On Events in Linguistic Semantics. In James Higginbotham, Fabio Pianesi & Achille Varzi (eds.), Speaking of Events. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2012-01-19
Total downloads4 ( #198,664 of 1,089,057 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,801 of 1,089,057 )
How can I increase my downloads?