Towards a Domain-Independent Computational Framework for Theory Blending

The literature on conceptual blending and metaphor-making has illustrations galore of how these mechanisms may support the creation and grounding of new concepts (or whole domains) in terms of a complex, integrated network of older ones. In spite of this, as of yet there is no general computational account of blending and metaphor-making that has proven powerful enough as to cover all the examples from the literature. This paper proposes a logic-based framework for blending and metaphor making and explores its applicability in settings as diverse as mathematical domain formation, classical rationality puzzles, and noun-noun combinations.

[1]  J. Goguen.  Mathematical Models of Cognitive Space and Time , 2006 .

[2]  Gordon Plotkin,et al.  A Note on Inductive Generalization , 2008 .

[3]  Kai-Uwe Kühnberger,et al.  A computational account of conceptual blending in basic mathematics , 2011, Cognitive Systems Research.

[4]  J. Firth.  Papers in linguistics , 1958 .

[5]  Gregory B. Simpson,et al.  Understanding word and sentence , 1991 .

[6]  G. Fauconnier,et al.  The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought: Rethinking metaphor , 2008 .

[7]  R. Gibbs.  The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought , 2008 .

[8]  Kai-Uwe Kühnberger,et al.  An Argument for an Analogical Perspective on Rationality & Decision-Making , 2011 .

[9]  J. Alexander,et al.  Mathematical Blending , 2008 .

[10]  Jonathan Evans,et al.  Logic and human reasoning: an assessment of the deduction paradigm. , 2002, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  Ariel Rubinstein,et al.  A Course in Game Theory , 1995 .

[12]  T. Veale,et al.  Computation and Blending , 2001 .

[13]  A. Tversky,et al.  Extensional versus intuitive reasoning: the conjunction fallacy in probability judgment , 1983 .

[14]  J. Goguen.  An introduction to algebraic semiotics, with application to user interface design , 1999 .

[15]  Zachary Estes,et al.  A tale of two similarities: comparison and integration in conceptual combination , 2003, Cogn. Sci..

[16]  E. Wisniewski.  When concepts combine , 1997, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[17]  H. Gust,et al.  Mathematical reasoning with higher-order anti-unifcation , 2010 .

[18]  Mark T. Keane,et al.  Setting limits on analogy: Why conceptual combination is not structural alignment. , 2001 .

[19]  G. Lakoff,et al.  Where mathematics comes from : how the embodied mind brings mathematics into being , 2002 .

[20]  Victor J. Katz.  Mathematics Emerging: A Sourcebook 1540–1900 , 2009 .

[21]  G. Fauconnier,et al.  The Way We Think: Conceptual Blending and the Mind''s Hidden Complexities. Basic Books , 2002 .

[22]  D. Gentner,et al.  The analogical mind : perspectives from cognitive science , 2001 .

[23]  Angela Schwering,et al.  Syntactic principles of heuristic-driven theory projection , 2009, Cognitive Systems Research.

[24]  D. Gentner,et al.  Chapter 10 On the Combinatorial Semantics of Noun Pairs: Minor and Major Adjustments to Meaning , 1991 .

[25]  Angela Schwering,et al.  Remarks on the Meaning of Analogical Relations , 2010, AGI 2010.

[26]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  On the combinatorial semantics of noun pairs: Minor and major adjustments , 1991 .

[27]  Charles Kemp,et al.  Bayesian models of cognition , 2008 .