Symbol systems and perceptual representations

The relationship between verbal mental representations and action, perception and emotion is discussed. It is argued that symbols are not directly grounded in the real world but are made meaningful because of their relationship with other symbols. Symbols are not defined by the real world, but symbols mirror the real world. An isomorphism exists between symbolic representations and the world of action and perception, but the meaning of symbols cannot be reduced to perception and action. This argument is illustrated with some examples from LSA and related models of verbal meaning. The ability to represent the world symbolically, and hence abstract thought, evolved from other, more concrete forms of representation. The ways in which people model the world in their mind follows an orderly sequence, both phylogenetically and ontogenetically. Donald (1991), for instance, distinguishes a sequence of cultures, each characterized by a particular form of mental representation. All animals learn and have procedural memories. At some level (certainly at the level of primates) animals are able to represent the world in terms of generalized records of past experience that allow them

[1]  J. Feldman,et al.  Embodied meaning in a neural theory of language , 2004, Brain and Language.

[2]  M. Louwerse.  A Case for Symbol Interdependency 1 Symbolic or Embodied representations : A Case for Symbol Interdependency , 2008 .

[3]  M. Donald.  Origins of the modern mind , 1991 .

[4]  Joakim Nivre,et al.  MaltParser: A Data-Driven Parser-Generator for Dependency Parsing , 2006, LREC.

[5]  T. Landauer,et al.  A Solution to Plato's Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction, and Representation of Knowledge. , 1997 .

[6]  Thomas L. Griffiths,et al.  Probabilistic Topic Models , 2007 .

[7]  John D. Bransford,et al.  The abstraction of linguistic ideas , 1971 .

[8]  Michael N Jones,et al.  Representing word meaning and order information in a composite holographic lexicon. , 2007, Psychological review.

[9]  A. Glenberg,et al.  Symbol Grounding and Meaning: A Comparison of High-Dimensional and Embodied Theories of Meaning , 2000 .

[10]  Danielle S. McNamara,et al.  Handbook of latent semantic analysis , 2007 .

[11]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition , 1998 .

[12]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Grounding Cognition: Connecting Concepts to Each Other and the World , 2005 .

[13]  Scott Dooley,et al.  Summary Street®: Computer Support for Comprehension and Writing , 2005 .

[14]  A. Paivio.  Mental imagery in associative learning and memory , 1969 .

[15]  W. Kintsch,et al.  The representation of meaning in memory , 1974 .

[16]  J. Bruner.  Actual minds, possible worlds , 1985 .

[17]  L. Barsalou,et al.  Whither structured representation? , 1999, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[18]  R. Shepard,et al.  Toward a universal law of generalization for psychological science. , 1987, Science.

[19]  Stevan Harnad.  The Symbol Grounding Problem , 1999, ArXiv.

[20]  W. Kintsch,et al.  High-Dimensional Semantic Space Accounts of Priming. , 2006 .

[21]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Meaning in Context , 2007 .

[22]  Lawrence W. Barsalou,et al.  Representing Properties Locally , 2001, Cognitive Psychology.

[23]  W. Kintsch,et al.  Metaphor Comprehension: What Makes a Metaphor Difficult to Understand? , 2002 .

[24]  J. Sullivan.  ON CARTESIAN LINGUISTICS , 1977 .

[25]  J. Deloache.  Becoming symbol-minded , 2004, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[26]  Yuji Matsumoto,et al.  Statistical Dependency Analysis with Support Vector Machines , 2003, IWPT.

[27]  Steve R. Howell,et al.  A Model of Grounded Language Acquisition: Sensorimotor Features Improve Lexical and Grammatical Learning. , 2005 .

[28]  Katherine Nelson,et al.  Language in Cognitive Development: The Emergence of the Mediated Mind , 1996 .

[29]  Curt Burgess,et al.  Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence , 1996 .

[30]  Eileen Kintsch,et al.  Summary Street: Interactive Computer Support for Writing , 2004 .

[31]  M. Bruck,et al.  Jeopardy in the Courtroom: A Scientific Analysis of Children's Testimony , 1995 .

[32]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Predication , 2001, Cogn. Sci..