Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (3):294-304 (2010)
AbstractTraditionally, the language faculty was supposed to be a device that maps linguistic inputs to semantic or conceptual representations. These representations themselves were supposed to be distinct from the representations manipulated by the hearer’s perceptual and motor systems. Recently this view of language has been challenged by advocates of embodied cognition. Drawing on empirical studies of linguistic comprehension, they have proposed that the language faculty reuses the very representations and processes deployed in perceiving and acting. I review some of the evidence and arguments in favor of the embodied view of language comprehension, and argue that none of it is conclusive. Moreover, the embodied view itself blurs two important distinctions: first, the distinction between linguistic comprehension and its typical consequences; and second, the distinction between representational content and vehicles. Given that these distinctions are well-motivated, we have good reason to reject the embodied view of linguistic understanding.Keywords: Language; Comprehension; Perception; Action; Embodied cognition; Representation.
Similar books and articles
Understanding is not simulating: a reply to Gibbs and Perlman.Daniel A. Weiskopf - 2010 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (3):309-312.
Intermediate representations exclude embodiment.Guy Dove - 2013 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (4):353 - 354.
Language understanding is grounded in experiential simulations: a response to Weiskopf.Raymond W. Gibbs & Marcus Perlman - 2010 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (3):305-308.
In defence of embodied cognition: a reply to Fred Adams.Christopher Letheby - 2012 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 11 (3):403-414.
Symbol Interdependency in Symbolic and Embodied Cognition.Max M. Louwerse - 2011 - Topics in Cognitive Science 3 (2):273-302.
Embodied Cognition: Lessons from Linguistic Determinism.Lawrence A. Shapiro - 2011 - Philosophical Topics 39 (1):121-140.
Principles of Representation: Why You Can't Represent the Same Concept Twice.Louise Connell & Dermot Lynott - 2014 - Topics in Cognitive Science 6 (3):390-406.
Nativism: In Defense of the Representational Interpretation.Glen Hoffmann - 2009 - Croatian Journal of Philosophy 9 (3):303-315.
Like the breathability of air: Embodied embedded communication.Pim Haselager - 2012 - Pragmatics and Cognition 20 (2):263-274.
Moving words: dynamic representations in language comprehension.Rolf A. Zwaan, Carol J. Madden, Richard H. Yaxley & Mark E. Aveyard - 2004 - Cognitive Science 28 (4):611-619.
Reenactment: An embodied cognition approach to meaning and linguistic content. [REVIEW]Sergeiy Sandler - 2012 - Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 11 (4):583-598.
Language and embodiment.Claudia Scorolli & Anna Borghi - 2008 - Anthropology and Philosophy 9 (1-2):7-23.
The Linguistic Subversion of Mental Representation.Whit Schonbein - 2012 - Minds and Machines 22 (3):235-262.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Language as a disruptive technology: Abstract concepts, embodiment and the flexible mind.Guy Dove - 2018 - Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 1752 (373):1-9.
Structure-Mapping in Metaphor Comprehension.Phillip Wolff & Dedre Gentner - 2011 - Cognitive Science 35 (8):1456-1488.
Thinking in Words: Language as an Embodied Medium of Thought.Guy Dove - 2014 - Topics in Cognitive Science 6 (3):371-389.
Bridging the Gap between Similarity and Causality: An Integrated Approach to Concepts.Corinne L. Bloch-Mullins - 2018 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 69 (3):605-632.
References found in this work
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception: Classic Edition.James J. Gibson - 1979 - Houghton Mifflin.
The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception.Marc H. Bornstein - 1980 - Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism 39 (2):203-206.