日本語
 
Help Privacy Policy ポリシー/免責事項
  詳細検索ブラウズ

アイテム詳細

  The human body in cognition, brain, and typology

Majid, A., Van Staden, M., & Enfield, N. J. (2004). The human body in cognition, brain, and typology. In K., Hovie (Ed.), Forum Handbook, 4th International Forum on Language, Brain, and Cognition - Cognition, Brain, and Typology: Toward a Synthesis (pp. 31-35). Sendai: Tohoku University.

Item is

基本情報

表示: 非表示:
資料種別: 会議論文

ファイル

表示: ファイル

関連URL

表示:

作成者

表示:
非表示:
 作成者:
Majid, Asifa1, 2, 著者           
Van Staden, Miriam2, 3, 著者
Enfield, N. J.1, 2, 著者           
所属:
1Language and Cognition Group, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, ou_55204              
2Space, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, ou_55229              
3Language Acquisition Group, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, ou_55202              

内容説明

表示:
非表示:
キーワード: -
 要旨: The human body is unique: it is both an object of perception and the source of human experience. Its universality makes it a perfect resource for asking questions about how cognition, brain and typology relate to one another. For example, we can ask how speakers of different languages segment and categorize the human body. A dominant view is that body parts are “given” by visual perceptual discontinuities, and that words are merely labels for these visually determined parts (e.g., Andersen, 1978; Brown, 1976; Lakoff, 1987). However, there are problems with this view. First it ignores other perceptual information, such as somatosensory and motoric representations. By looking at the neural representations of sesnsory representations, we can test how much of the categorization of the human body can be done through perception alone. Second, we can look at language typology to see how much universality and variation there is in body-part categories. A comparison of a range of typologically, genetically and areally diverse languages shows that the perceptual view has only limited applicability (Majid, Enfield & van Staden, in press). For example, using a “coloring-in” task, where speakers of seven different languages were given a line drawing of a human body and asked to color in various body parts, Majid & van Staden (in prep) show that languages vary substantially in body part segmentation. For example, Jahai (Mon-Khmer) makes a lexical distinction between upper arm, lower arm, and hand, but Lavukaleve (Papuan Isolate) has just one word to refer to arm, hand, and leg. This shows that body part categorization is not a straightforward mapping of words to visually determined perceptual parts.

資料詳細

表示:
非表示:
言語: -
 日付: 2004
 出版の状態: 出版
 ページ: -
 出版情報: -
 目次: -
 査読: -
 識別子(DOI, ISBNなど): eDoc: 226413
 学位: -

関連イベント

表示:
非表示:
イベント名: 4th International Forum on Language, Brain, and Cognition - Cognition, Brain, and Typology: Toward a Synthesis
開催地: Sendai< Japan
開始日・終了日: 2004-09-12 - 2004-09-13

訴訟

表示:

Project information

表示:

出版物 1

表示:
非表示:
出版物名: Forum Handbook, 4th International Forum on Language, Brain, and Cognition - Cognition, Brain, and Typology: Toward a Synthesis
種別: 会議論文集
 著者・編者:
Hovie, K., 編集者
所属:
-
出版社, 出版地: Sendai : Tohoku University
ページ: - 巻号: - 通巻号: - 開始・終了ページ: 31 - 35 識別子(ISBN, ISSN, DOIなど): -