Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-20T05:41:46.006Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What do we know when we claim to know nothing? Partial knowledge of word meanings may be ontological, but not hierarchical

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2014

Jeannette M. Stein  and
Wendelyn J. Shore
Jeannette M. Stein*
Affiliation:
University of Michigan-Flint
Wendelyn J. Shore
Affiliation:
Pacific Lutheran University
*
Correspondence addresses: Jeannette M. Stein, Department of Psychology, University of Michigan-Flint, Flint, MI 48502. E-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Two studies investigated whether knowledge about ontological category membership exists early in the word learning process—specifically, when words are partially known—and if so, how such knowledge is represented. Participants made decisions about the ontological category membership of words at three levels of knowledge: words they correctly defined (known), words recognized as familiar (frontier), and words mistakenly identified as nonwords (unknown). Accuracy on this task improved as a function of word level. Participants were able to identify the broad ontological categories to which words at all three levels of knowledge belonged, as well as the more specific ontological categories to which the words belonged. Overall, results indicated that knowledge about ontological category membership is available for words at very low levels of knowledge, and that this knowledge does not necessarily follow the strict hierarchical organization some ontological systems are thought to embody (e.g. Keil 1979). Implications for the acquisition and representation of word meanings are discussed.

Keywords

partial knowledgeword learninglanguage representation
Type
Research Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 4 , Issue 3 , September 2012 , pp. 141 - 166
Copyright
Copyright © UK Cognitive Linguistics Association 2012

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

Carey, S. 1983. Constraints on the meanings of natural kind terms. In Seiler, B. & Wannenmacher, W. (eds.), Concept development and the development of word meaning, 126–143. Berlin: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaffin, R. 1997. Associations to unfamiliar words: Learning the meanings of new words. Memory and Cognition 25. 203–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chaigneau, S. E., Barsalou, L. W. & Zamani, M.. 2009. Situational information contributes to object categorization and inference. Acta Psychologica 130. 81–94.Google Scholar
Chandler, K., Rosser, R. A. & Nicholson, G. C.. 1992. The relationship between ontological knowledge structure and intelligence in children. Cognitive Development 7. 63–80.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. 1973. What's in a word? On the child's acquisition of semantics in his first language. In Moore, T. E. (ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Curtis, M. E. 1987. Vocabulary testing and vocabulary instruction. In McKeown, M. G. & Curtis, M. E. (eds.), The nature of vocabulary acquisition, 37–51. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Dale, E. 1965. Vocabulary measurement: Techniques and major findings. Elementary English 42. 395–401.Google Scholar
De Deyne, S. & Storms, G.. 2008. Word associations: Network and semantic properties. Behavior Research Methods 40. 213–231.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dolling, J. 1995. Ontological domains, semantic sorts and systematic ambiguity. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 43. 785–807.Google Scholar
Durso, F. T. & Shore, W. J.. 1991. Partial knowledge of word meanings. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 120. 190–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eysenck, M. W. 1979. The feeling of knowing a word's meaning. British Journal of Psychology 70. 243–251.Google Scholar
Fazly, A., Alishahi, A. & Stevenson, S.. 2010. A probabilistic computational model of cross-situational word learning. Cognitive Science 34. 1017–1063.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frishkoff, G. A., Collins-Thompson, K., Perfetti, C. A. & Callan, J.. 2008. Measuring incremental changes in word knowledge: Experimental validation and implications for learning and assessment. Behavior Research Methods 40. 907–925.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frishkoff, G. A., Perfetti, C. A. & Collins-Thompson, K.. 2010. Lexical quality in the brain: ERP evidence for robust word learning from context. Developmental Neuropsychology 35(4). 376–403.Google Scholar
Frishkoff, G. A., Perfetti, C. A. & Collins-Thompson, K.. 2011. Predicting robust vocabulary growth from measures of incremental learning. Scientific studies of reading: The official journal of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading 15(1). 71–91.Google Scholar
Gangemi, A., Guarino, N., Masolo, C., Oltramari, A. & Schneider, L.. 2002. Sweetening ontologies with DOLCE. Knowledge engineering and knowledge management: Ontologies and the semantic web: Vol. 2473/2002. 223–233.Google Scholar
Gerard, A. B. & Mandler, J. M.. 1983. Ontological knowledge and sentence anomaly. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22. 105–120.Google Scholar
Grandy, R. E. 1987. In defense of semantic fields. In Lepore, E. (ed.), New directions in semantics, 259–280. Orlando: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Grandy, R. E. 1992. Semantic fields, prototypes, and the lexicon. In Lehrer, A. and Kittay, E. F. (eds.), Frames, fields, and contrasts: New essays in semantic and lexical organization, 103–122. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Ince, E. & Christman, S. D.. 2002. Semantic representations of word meanings by the cerebral hemispheres. Brain and Language 80. 393–420.Google Scholar
Keil, F. C. 1979. Semantic and conceptual development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Keil, F. C. 1981. Constraints on knowledge and cognitive development. Psychological Review 88. 197–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keil, F. C. 1983. Semantic inferences and the acquisition of word meaning. In Seiler, T. & Wannenmacher, W. (eds.), Conceptual development and the development of word meaning, 103–124. Berlin: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
Keil, F. C. 1995. The growth of causal understandings of natural kinds. In Sperber, D., Premack, D. & Premack, A. J. (eds.), Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate, 235–267. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kittay, E. F. 1992. Semantic fields and the individuation of content. In Lehrer, A. and Kittay, E. F. (eds.), Frames, fields, and contrasts: New essays in semantic and lexical organization, 229–252. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Landauer, T. K. & Dumais, S. T.. 1997. A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review 104. 211–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, B. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
Lockett, J. N. & Shore, W. J.. 2003. A narwhal is an animal: Partial word knowledge biases adults' decisions. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32. 477–496.Google Scholar
Loewenthal, K. 1971. A study of imperfectly acquired vocabulary. British Journal of Psychology 62. 225–233.Google Scholar
Luka, B. J. & Barsalou, L. W.. 2005. Structural facilitation: Mere exposure effects for grammatical acceptability as evidence for syntactic priming in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 52. 436–459.Google Scholar
Lund, K. & Burgess, C.. 1996. Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers 28. 203–208.Google Scholar
Mandler, J. M. 1992. How to build a baby II: Conceptual primitives. Psychological Review 99. 587–604.Google Scholar
Mandler, J. M. 2000. Perceptual and conceptual processes in infancy. Journal of Cognition and Development 1. 3–36.Google Scholar
Mandler, J. M. & McDonough, L.. 1993. Concept formation in infancy. Cognitive Development 8. 291–318.Google Scholar
O'Brien, R. G. & Kaiser, M. K.. 1985. MANOVA method for analyzing repeated measures designs: An extensive primer. Psychological Bulletin 97. 316–333.Google Scholar
O'Connor, J. 1940. Unsolved business problems. Boston, MA: Johnson O'Connor Research Foundation.Google Scholar
Shore, W. J. & Durso, F. T.. 1990. Partial knowledge in vocabulary acquisition: General constraints and specific detail. Journal of Educational Psychology 82. 315–318.Google Scholar
Shore, W. J. & Kempe, V.. 1999. The role of sentence context in accessing partial knowledge of word meanings. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 28. 145–163.Google Scholar
Sines, L. K. 1958. Intelligence test correlates of Shipley-Hartford performance. Journal of Clinical Psychology 14. 399–404.Google Scholar
Sloman, S. A. 1998. Categorical inference is not a tree: the myth of inheritance hierarchies. Cognitive Psychology, 35(1), 1–33.Google Scholar
Smith, B. 1995. Formal ontology, common sense and cognitive science. Journal of Human-Computer Interactions 43. 641–667.Google Scholar
Smith, P. H., Whitmore, J. M.Shore, W. J.Robinson, C. & Dixon, W. E. Jr. 1999. Infants' responses to objects representing levels of word knowledge and categorical information. Infant Behavior and Development 22. 511–526.Google Scholar
Soja, N. N., Carey, S. & Spelke, E. S.. 1991. Ontological categories guide young children's inductions of word meaning: Object terms and substance terms. Cognition 38. 179–211.Google Scholar
Sommers, F. 1959. The ordinary language tree. Mind 68. 160–185.Google Scholar
Sommers, F. 1965. Predicability. In Black, M. (ed.), Philosophy in America. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Swanborn, M. S. L. & de Glopper, K.. 1999. Incidental word learning while reading: A meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research 69(3). 261–285.Google Scholar
Taylor, J. R. 1989. Linguistic categorization: Prototypes in linguistic theory. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Trembly, D. 1966. Laws of learning general and specialized vocabulary. Proceedings of the 74th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association 1. 229–230.Google Scholar
Van Daalen-Kapteijns, M., Elshout-Mohr, M. & de Glopper, K.. 2001. Deriving the meaning of unknown words from multiple contexts. Language Learning 51. 145–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitmore, J. M., Shore, W. J. & Smith, P. H.. 2004. Partial knowledge of word meanings: Thematic and taxonomic representations. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 33. 137–164.Google Scholar