Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-cnmwb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T08:27:21.889Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

18 - Space, motion and thinking for language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2016

By
Anna Ewert
Edited by
Vivian Cook  and
Li Wei
Vivian Cook
Affiliation:
University of Newcastle upon Tyne
Li Wei
Affiliation:
Institute of Education, University College London
Get access

Summary

A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Chapter
Information
The Cambridge Handbook of Linguistic Multi-Competence , pp. 376 - 402
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2016

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.)

References

Athanasopoulos, P. 2006. ‘Effects of the grammatical representation of number on cognition in bilinguals’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9, 89–96.Google Scholar
Athanasopoulos, P. and Bylund, E. 2013. ‘Does grammatical aspect affect motion event cognition? A cross-linguistic comparison of English and Swedish speakers’, Cognitive Science 37, 286–309.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. 1999. ‘Perceptual symbol systems’, Behavioural and Brain Sciences 22, 577–660.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. 2008. ‘Grounded cognition’, Annual Review of Psychology 59, 617–645.Google Scholar
Bergen, B., Lau, T.-T. C., Narayan, S., Stojanovic, D. and Wheeler, K. 2010. ‘Body part representations in verbal semantics’, Memory and Cognition 38, 969–981.Google Scholar
Bergen, B. and Wheeler, K. 2010. ‘Grammatical aspect and mental simulation’, Brain and Language 112, 150–158.Google Scholar
Berlin, B. and Kay, P. 1969. Basic Color Terms. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Bloomfield, L. 1933. Language. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Boroditsky, L., Ham, W. and Ramscar, M. 2002. ‘What is universal in event perception? Comparing English & Indonesian speakers’, in Gray, W. D. and Schunn, C. D. (eds), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 136–141. Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Brown, A. 2008. ‘Gesture viewpoint in Japanese and English: cross-linguistic interactions between two languages in one speaker’, Gesture 8, 256–276.Google Scholar
Brown, A. 2015. ‘Universal development and L1–L2 convergence in bilingual construal of manner in speech and gesture in Mandarin, Japanese, and English’, Modern Language Journal 99 (S1), 66–82.Google Scholar
Brown, A. and Gullberg, M. 2008. ‘Bidirectional crosslinguistic influence in L1–L2 encoding of manner in speech and gesture: a study of Japanese speakers of English’, Studies in Second Language Acquisition 30, 225–251.Google Scholar
Brown, A. and Gullberg, M. 2010. ‘Changes in encoding of PATH of motion in a first language during acquisition of a second language’, Cognitive Linguistics 21, 263–286.Google Scholar
Brown, A. and Gullberg, M. 2011. ‘Bidirectional cross-linguistic influence in event conceptualization? Expressions of Path among Japanese learners of English’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 14, 79–94.Google Scholar
Brown, A. and Gullberg, M. 2013. ‘L1–L2 convergence in clausal packaging in Japanese and English’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 16, 477–494.Google Scholar
Brown, R. W. and Lenneberg, E. H. 1954. ‘A study in language and cognition’, Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 49, 454–462.Google Scholar
Bylund, E. 2009. ‘Effects of age of L2 acquisition on L1 event conceptualization patterns’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 12, 305–322.Google Scholar
Bylund, E. 2011. ‘Language-specific patterns in event conceptualization: insights from bilingualism’, in Pavlenko, A. (ed.), Thinking and Speaking in Two Languages, pp. 108–142. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Bylund, E. and Jarvis, S. 2011. ‘L2 effects on L1 event conceptualization’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 14, 47–59.Google Scholar
Carroll, J. B. (ed.) 1956. Language, Thought, and Reality: Selected Writings of Benjamin Lee Whorf. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Casasanto, D. 2008. ‘Who’s afraid of the Big Bad Whorf? Crosslinguistic differences in temporal language and thought’, Language Learning 58 (S1), 63–79.Google Scholar
Choi, S. and Bowerman, M. 1991. ‘Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: the influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns’, Cognition 41, 83–121.Google Scholar
Cook, R. S., Kay, P. and Regier, T. 2005. ‘The World Color Survey database: history and use’, in Cohen, H. and Lefebvre, C. (eds), Handbook of Categorization in the Cognitive Sciences, pp. 223–242. Elsevier.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J. 1991. ‘The poverty-of-the-stimulus argument and multi-competence’, Second Language Research 7, 103–117.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J. 1992. ‘Evidence for multi-competence’, Language Learning 42, 557–591.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J. 2003. ‘The changing L1 in the L2 user’s mind’, in Cook, V. J. (ed.), Effects of the Second Language on the First, pp. 1–18. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J., Bassetti, B., Kasai, C., Sasaki, M. and Takahashi, J. A. 2006. ‘Do bilinguals have different concepts? The case of shape and material in Japanese L2 users of English’, International Journal of Bilingualism 10, 137–152.Google Scholar
Costa, A., Strijkers, K., Martin, C. and Thierry, G. 2009. ‘The time course of word retrieval revealed by event-related brain potentials during overt speech’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 50, 21442–21446.Google Scholar
Czechowska, N. and Ewert, A. 2011. ‘Perception of motion by Polish–English bilinguals’, in Cook, V. J. and Bassetti, B. (eds), Language and Bilingual Cognition, pp. 287–314. New York and Hove: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Daller, M. H., Treffers-Daller, J. and Furman, R. 2011. ‘Transfer of conceptualization patterns in bilinguals: the construal of motion events in Turkish and German’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 14, 95–119.Google Scholar
De Grauwe, S., Willems, R. M., Rueschemeyer, S.-A., Lemhöfer, K. and Schriefers, H. 2014. ‘Embodied language in first- and second-language speakers: neural correlates of processing motor verbs’, Neuropsychologia 56, 334–349.Google Scholar
Desai, R. H., Conant, L. L., Binder, J. R., Park, H. and Seidenberg, M. S. 2013. ‘A piece of the action: modulation of sensory-motor regions by action idioms and metaphors’, Neuroimage 83, 862–869.Google Scholar
Ewert, A. and Krzebietke, W. 2015. ‘Manner and path of motion in descriptions of motion trajectories by Polish L2 users of English’, in Roberts, L., McManus, K., Vanek, N. and Trenkic, D. (eds), EUROSLA Yearbook, vol. 15, pp. 95–113. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Flecken, M., Carroll, M., Weimar, K. and von Stutterheim, C. 2015. ‘Driving along the road or heading for the village? Conceptual differences underlying motion event encoding in French, German, and French–German L2 users’, Modern Language Journal 99 (S1), 100–122.Google Scholar
Flecken, M., von Stutterheim, C. and Carroll, M. 2014. ‘Grammatical aspect influences motion event perception: findings from a cross-linguistic nonverbal recognition task’, Language and Cognition 6, 45–78.Google Scholar
Gennari, S. P., Sloman, S. A., Malt, B. C. and Fitch, W. T. 2002. ‘Motion events in language and cognition’, Cognition 83, 49–79.Google Scholar
Gilbert, A. L., Regier, T., Kay, P. and Ivry, R. B. 2008. ‘Support for lateralization of the Whorf effect beyond the realm of color discrimination’, Brain and Language 105, 91–98.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M. and Kaschak, M. P. 2002. ‘Grounding language in action’, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 9, 558–565.Google Scholar
Hedden, T., Ketay, S., Aron, A., Markus, H. R. and Gabrieli, J. D. E. 2008. ‘Cultural influences on neural substrates of attentional control’, Psychological Science 19, 1–17.Google Scholar
Hickmann, M. and Hendricks, H. 2010. ‘Typological constraints on the acquisition of spatial language in French and English’, Cognitive Linguistics 21, 189–215.Google Scholar
Hohenstein, J., Eisenberg, A. and Naigles, L. 2006. ‘Is he floating across or crossing afloat? Cross-influence of L1 and L2 in Spanish–English bilingual adults’, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 9, 249–261.Google Scholar
Holmes, K. J. 2012. Language as a Window into the Mind: The Case of Space. Doctoral dissertation, Emory University.Google Scholar
Holmes, K. J. and Wolff, P. 2013. ‘When is language a window into the mind? Looking beyond words to infer conceptual categories’, in Knauff, M., Pauen, M., Sebanz, N. and Wachsmuth, I. (eds), Proceedings of the 35th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 597–602. Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Jarvis, S. and Pavlenko, A. 2008. Crosslinguistic Influence in Language and Cognition. New York: Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar
Kay, P., to appear. ‘Universality of color categorization’, in Elliot, A. J., Fairchild, M. D. and Franklin, A. (eds), Handbook of Color Psychology. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kay, P. and Kempton, W. 1984. ‘What is the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis?’, American Anthropologist 86, 65–79.Google Scholar
Kersten, A. W., Meissner, C. A., Lechuga, J., Schwartz, B. L., Albrechtsen, J. S. and Iglesias, A. 2010. ‘English speakers attend more strongly than Spanish speakers to manner of motion when classifying novel objects and events’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 139, 638–653.Google Scholar
Kiefer, M. and Pulvermüller, F. 2012. ‘Conceptual representations in mind and brain: theoretical developments, current evidence and future directions’, Cortex 48, 805–825.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. 1989. Speaking: From Intention to Articulation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. 1996. ‘Perspective taking and ellipsis in spatial descriptions’, in Bloom, P., Peterson, M., Nadel, L. and Garrett, M. (eds), Language and Space, pp. 77–107. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M. 1999. ‘Producing spoken language: a blueprint for the speaker’, in Brown, C. and Hagoort, P. (eds), The Neurocognition of Language, pp. 83–120. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. 1996. ‘Frames of reference and Molyneux’s question: cross-linguistic evidence’, in Bloom, P., Peterson, M., Nadel, L. and Garrett, M. (eds), Language and Space, pp. 109–169. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. C. 2003. Space in Language and Cognition: Explorations in Linguistic Diversity. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lucy, J. A. 1997. ‘Linguistic relativity’, Annual Review of Anthropology 26, 291–312.Google Scholar
Maier, M., Glage, P., Hohlfeld, A. and Abdel Rahman, R. 2014. ‘Does the semantic content of verbal categories influence categorical perception? An ERP study’, Brain and Cognition 91, 1–10.Google Scholar
Malt, B. C., Gennari, S., Imai, M., Ameel, E., Tsuda, N. and Majid, A. 2008. ‘Talking about walking: biomechanics and the language of locomotion’, Psychological Science 19, 232–240.Google Scholar
Meteyard, L., Rodriguez Cuadrado, S., Bahrami, B. and Vigliocco, G. 2012. ‘Coming of age: a review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics’, Cortex 48, 788–804.Google Scholar
Mo, L., Xu, G., Kay, P. and Tan, L.-H. 2011. ‘Electrophysiological evidence for the left-lateralized effect of language on preattentive categorical perception of color’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108 (34), 14026–14030.Google Scholar
Papafragou, A., Hulbert, J. and Trueswell, J. 2008. ‘Does language guide event perception? Evidence from eye movements’, Cognition 108, 155–184.Google Scholar
Papafragou, A., Massey, C. and Gleitman, L. 2002. ‘Shake, rattle, ’n’ roll: the representation of motion in language and cognition’, Cognition 84, 189–219.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A. 2005. ‘Bilingualism and thought’, in Kroll, J. F. and de Groot, A. M. B. (eds), Handbook of Bilingualism: Psycholinguistic Approaches, pp. 433–453. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A. 2011. ‘Introduction: bilingualism and thought in the 20th century’, in Pavlenko, A. (ed.), Thinking and Speaking in Two Languages, pp. 1–28. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Pavlenko, A. and Volynsky, M. 2015. ‘Motion encoding in Russian and English: moving beyond Talmy’s typology’, Modern Language Journal 99 (S1), 32–48.Google Scholar
Phelps, K. S. and Duman, S. 2012. ‘Manipulating manner: semantic representations of human locomotion verbs in English and German’, in Miyake, N., Peebles, D. and Cooper, R. P. (eds), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, pp. 857–863. Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F., Härle, M. and Hummel, F. 2001. ‘Walking or talking? Behavioral and neurophysiological correlates of action verb processing’, Brain and Language 78, 143–168.Google Scholar
Roberson, D. and Davidoff, J. 2000. ‘The categorical perception of colors and facial expressions: the effect of verbal interference’, Memory and Cognition 28, 977–986.Google Scholar
Segall, M. H., Campbell, D. T. and Herskovits, M. J. 1966. The Influence of Culture on Visual Perception. Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
Simmons, W. K., Hamann, S. B., Harenski, C. N., Hu, X. P. and Barsalou, L. W. 2008. ‘fMRI evidence for word association and situated simulation in conceptual processing’, Journal of Physiology: Paris 102, 106–119.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. 1996a. ‘From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”’, in Gumperz, J. J. and Levinson, S. C. (eds), Rethinking Linguistic Relativity, pp. 70–96. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. 1996b. ‘Two ways to travel: verbs of motion in English and Spanish’, in Shibatani, M. and Thompson, S. A. (eds), Grammatical Constructions: Their Form and Meaning, pp. 195–219. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. 2003. ‘Language and thought online: cognitive consequences of linguistic relativity’, in Gentner, D. and Goldin-Meadow, S. (eds), Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, pp. 157–191. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I. 2006. ‘What makes manner of motion salient? Explorations in linguistic typology, discourse, and cognition’, in Hickmann, M. and Robert, S. (eds), Space in Languages: Linguistic Systems and Cognitive Categories, pp. 59–81. Amsterdam and Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Slobin, D. I., Ibarretxe-Antuñano, I., Kopecka, A. and Majid, A. 2014. ‘Manners of human gait: a crosslinguistic event-naming study’, Cognitive Linguistics 25, 701–741.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. 1985. ‘Lexicalization patterns: semantic structure in lexical forms’, in Shopen, T. (ed.), Language Typology and Syntactic Description, vol. 3, pp. 57–149. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. 2000. Toward a Cognitive Semantics, vol. 2: Typology and Process in Concept Structuring. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Tettamanti, M., Buccino, G., Saccuman, M. C., Gallese, V., Danna, M., Scifo, P., Fazio, F., Rizzolatti, G., Cappa, S. F. and Perani, D. 2005. ‘Listening to action-related sentences activates fronto-parietal motor circuits’, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 17, 273–281.Google Scholar
Thierry, G., Athanasopoulos, P., Wiggett, A., Dering, B. and Kuipers, J.-R. 2009. ‘Unconscious effects of language-specific terminology on preattentive color perception’, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 106, 4567–4570.Google Scholar
Tomczak, E. and Ewert, A. 2015. ‘Real and fictive motion processing in Polish L2 users of English and monolinguals: evidence for different conceptual representations’, Modern Language Journal 99 (S1), 49–65.Google Scholar
Trueswell, J. C. and Papafragou, A. 2010. ‘Perceiving and remembering events cross-linguistically: evidence from dual-task paradigms’, Journal of Memory and Language 63, 64–82.Google Scholar
Von Stutterheim, C., Andermann, M., Carroll, M., Flecken, M. and Schmiedtovà, B. 2012. ‘How grammaticized concepts shape event conceptualization in language production: insights from linguistic analysis, eye tracking data, and memory performance’, Linguistics 50, 833–867.Google Scholar
Von Stutterheim, C. and Nüse, R. 2003. ‘Processes of conceptualization in language production: language-specific perspectives and event construal’, Linguistics 41, 851–881.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U. 1953. Languages in Contact: Findings and Problems. The Hague: Mouton.Google Scholar
Whorf, B. L. 1940a/1956. ‘Linguistics as an exact science’, reprinted in Carroll, J. B. (ed.) 1956, pp. 220–232.Google Scholar
Whorf, B. L. 1940b/1956. ‘Science and linguistics’, reprinted in Carroll, J. B. (ed.) 1956, pp. 207–219.Google Scholar
Whorf, B. L. 1941/1956. ‘The relation of habitual thought and behavior to language’, reprinted in Carroll, J. B. (ed.) 1956, pp. 134–159.Google Scholar
Wilson, M. 2002. ‘Six views of embodied cognition’, Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 9, 625–636.Google Scholar
Wu, D. H., Morganti, A. and Chatterjee, A. 2008. ‘Neural substrates of processing path and manner information of a moving event’, Neuropsychologia 46, 704–713.Google Scholar
Yee, N. 1999. What Whorf really said. Manuscript. www.nickyee.com/ponder/whorf.htmlGoogle Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., Taylor, L. J. and de Boer, M. 2010. ‘Motor resonance as a function of narrative time: further tests of the linguistic focus hypothesis’, Brain and Language 112, 143–149.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] 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
×