UnivTrevesV1, PascalFrancis, Corpus, bibRecord, 000D43

Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning

Identifieur interne : 000D43 ( PascalFrancis/Corpus ); précédent : 000D42; suivant : 000D44

Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning

Auteurs : Stephen C. Levinson ; Sotaro Kita ; Daniel B. M. Haun ; Björn H. Rasch

Source :

Cognition [ 0010-0277 ] ; 2002.

RBID : Pascal:02-0344443

Descripteurs français

Pascal (Inist)
- Langage, Espace, Etude expérimentale, Cognition, Homme.

English descriptors

KwdEn :
- Cognition, Experimental study, Human, Language, Space.

Abstract

Li and Gleitman (Turning the tables: language and spatial reasoning. Cognition, in press) seek to undermine a large-scale cross-cultural comparison of spatial language and cognition which claims to have demonstrated that language and conceptual coding in the spatial domain covary (see, for example, Space in language and cognition: explorations in linguistic diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, in press; Language 74 (1998) 557): the most plausible interpretation is that different languages induce distinct conceptual codings. Arguing against this, Li and Gleitman attempt to show that in an American student population they can obtain any of the relevant conceptual codings just by varying spatial cues, holding language constant. They then argue that our findings are better interpreted in terms of ecologically-induced distinct cognitive styles reflected in language. Linguistic coding, they argue, has no causal effects on non-linguistic thinking - it simply reflects antecedently existing conceptual distinctions. We here show that Li and Gleitman did not make a crucial distinction between frames of spatial reference relevant to our line of research. We report a series of experiments designed to show that they have, as a consequence, misinterpreted the results of their own experiments, which are in fact in line with our hypothesis. Their attempts to reinterpret the large cross-cultural study, and to enlist support from animal and infant studies, fail for the same reasons. We further try to discern exactly what theory drives their presumption that language can have no cognitive efficacy, and conclude that their position is undermined by a wide range of considerations.

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Pour connaître la documentation sur le format Inist Standard.

A01	`01`	`1`		`@0 0010-0277`
A02	`01`			`@0 CGTNAU`
A03		`1`		`@0 Cognition`
A05				`@2 84`
A06				`@2 2`
A08	`01`	`1`	`ENG`	`@1 Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning`
A11	`01`	`1`		`@1 LEVINSON (Stephen C.)`
A11	`02`	`1`		`@1 KITA (Sotaro)`
A11	`03`	`1`		`@1 HAUN (Daniel B. M.)`
A11	`04`	`1`		`@1 RASCH (Björn H.)`
A14	`01`			`@1 Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics @2 Nijmegen @3 NLD @Z 1 aut. @Z 2 aut. @Z 3 aut.`
A14	`02`			`@1 Department of Psychology, University of Trier @2 Trier @3 DEU @Z 4 aut.`
A20				`@1 155-188`
A21				`@1 2002`
A23	`01`			`@0 ENG`
A43	`01`			`@1 INIST @2 15966 @5 354000101402350020`
A44				`@0 0000 @1 © 2002 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.`
A45				`@0 1 p.3/4`
A47	`01`	`1`		`@0 02-0344443`
A60				`@1 P`
A61				`@0 A`
A64	`01`	`1`		`@0 Cognition`
A66	`01`			`@0 NLD`
C01	`01`		`ENG`	@0 Li and Gleitman (Turning the tables: language and spatial reasoning. Cognition, in press) seek to undermine a large-scale cross-cultural comparison of spatial language and cognition which claims to have demonstrated that language and conceptual coding in the spatial domain covary (see, for example, Space in language and cognition: explorations in linguistic diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, in press; Language 74 (1998) 557): the most plausible interpretation is that different languages induce distinct conceptual codings. Arguing against this, Li and Gleitman attempt to show that in an American student population they can obtain any of the relevant conceptual codings just by varying spatial cues, holding language constant. They then argue that our findings are better interpreted in terms of ecologically-induced distinct cognitive styles reflected in language. Linguistic coding, they argue, has no causal effects on non-linguistic thinking - it simply reflects antecedently existing conceptual distinctions. We here show that Li and Gleitman did not make a crucial distinction between frames of spatial reference relevant to our line of research. We report a series of experiments designed to show that they have, as a consequence, misinterpreted the results of their own experiments, which are in fact in line with our hypothesis. Their attempts to reinterpret the large cross-cultural study, and to enlist support from animal and infant studies, fail for the same reasons. We further try to discern exactly what theory drives their presumption that language can have no cognitive efficacy, and conclude that their position is undermined by a wide range of considerations.
C02	`01`	`X`		`@0 002A26I06`
C03	`01`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Langage @5 01`
C03	`01`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Language @5 01`
C03	`01`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Lenguaje @5 01`
C03	`02`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Espace @5 02`
C03	`02`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Space @5 02`
C03	`02`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Espacio @5 02`
C03	`03`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Etude expérimentale @5 06`
C03	`03`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Experimental study @5 06`
C03	`03`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Estudio experimental @5 06`
C03	`04`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Cognition @5 17`
C03	`04`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Cognition @5 17`
C03	`04`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Cognición @5 17`
C03	`05`	`X`	`FRE`	`@0 Homme @5 19`
C03	`05`	`X`	`ENG`	`@0 Human @5 19`
C03	`05`	`X`	`SPA`	`@0 Hombre @5 19`
N21				`@1 189`
N82				`@1 PSI`

Format Inist (serveur)

NO :	PASCAL 02-0344443 INIST
ET :	Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning
AU :	LEVINSON (Stephen C.); KITA (Sotaro); HAUN (Daniel B. M.); RASCH (Björn H.)
AF :	Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics/Nijmegen/Pays-Bas (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut.); Department of Psychology, University of Trier/Trier/Allemagne (4 aut.)
DT :	Publication en série; Niveau analytique
SO :	Cognition; ISSN 0010-0277; Coden CGTNAU; Pays-Bas; Da. 2002; Vol. 84; No. 2; Pp. 155-188; Bibl. 1 p.3/4
LA :	Anglais
EA :	Li and Gleitman (Turning the tables: language and spatial reasoning. Cognition, in press) seek to undermine a large-scale cross-cultural comparison of spatial language and cognition which claims to have demonstrated that language and conceptual coding in the spatial domain covary (see, for example, Space in language and cognition: explorations in linguistic diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, in press; Language 74 (1998) 557): the most plausible interpretation is that different languages induce distinct conceptual codings. Arguing against this, Li and Gleitman attempt to show that in an American student population they can obtain any of the relevant conceptual codings just by varying spatial cues, holding language constant. They then argue that our findings are better interpreted in terms of ecologically-induced distinct cognitive styles reflected in language. Linguistic coding, they argue, has no causal effects on non-linguistic thinking - it simply reflects antecedently existing conceptual distinctions. We here show that Li and Gleitman did not make a crucial distinction between frames of spatial reference relevant to our line of research. We report a series of experiments designed to show that they have, as a consequence, misinterpreted the results of their own experiments, which are in fact in line with our hypothesis. Their attempts to reinterpret the large cross-cultural study, and to enlist support from animal and infant studies, fail for the same reasons. We further try to discern exactly what theory drives their presumption that language can have no cognitive efficacy, and conclude that their position is undermined by a wide range of considerations.
CC :	002A26I06
FD :	Langage; Espace; Etude expérimentale; Cognition; Homme
ED :	Language; Space; Experimental study; Cognition; Human
SD :	Lenguaje; Espacio; Estudio experimental; Cognición; Hombre
LO :	INIST-15966.354000101402350020
ID :	02-0344443

Links to Exploration step

Pascal:02-0344443

Le document en format XML

<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning</title>
<author><name sortKey="Levinson, Stephen C" sort="Levinson, Stephen C" uniqKey="Levinson S" first="Stephen C." last="Levinson">Stephen C. Levinson</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics</s1>
<s2>Nijmegen</s2>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Kita, Sotaro" sort="Kita, Sotaro" uniqKey="Kita S" first="Sotaro" last="Kita">Sotaro Kita</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics</s1>
<s2>Nijmegen</s2>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Haun, Daniel B M" sort="Haun, Daniel B M" uniqKey="Haun D" first="Daniel B. M." last="Haun">Daniel B. M. Haun</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics</s1>
<s2>Nijmegen</s2>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Rasch, Bjorn H" sort="Rasch, Bjorn H" uniqKey="Rasch B" first="Björn H." last="Rasch">Björn H. Rasch</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Psychology, University of Trier</s1>
<s2>Trier</s2>
<s3>DEU</s3>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</titleStmt>
<publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">INIST</idno>
<idno type="inist">02-0344443</idno>
<date when="2002">2002</date>
<idno type="stanalyst">PASCAL 02-0344443 INIST</idno>
<idno type="RBID">Pascal:02-0344443</idno>
<idno type="wicri:Area/PascalFrancis/Corpus">000D43</idno>
</publicationStmt>
<sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en" level="a">Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning</title>
<author><name sortKey="Levinson, Stephen C" sort="Levinson, Stephen C" uniqKey="Levinson S" first="Stephen C." last="Levinson">Stephen C. Levinson</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics</s1>
<s2>Nijmegen</s2>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Kita, Sotaro" sort="Kita, Sotaro" uniqKey="Kita S" first="Sotaro" last="Kita">Sotaro Kita</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics</s1>
<s2>Nijmegen</s2>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Haun, Daniel B M" sort="Haun, Daniel B M" uniqKey="Haun D" first="Daniel B. M." last="Haun">Daniel B. M. Haun</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="01"><s1>Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics</s1>
<s2>Nijmegen</s2>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
<author><name sortKey="Rasch, Bjorn H" sort="Rasch, Bjorn H" uniqKey="Rasch B" first="Björn H." last="Rasch">Björn H. Rasch</name>
<affiliation><inist:fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Psychology, University of Trier</s1>
<s2>Trier</s2>
<s3>DEU</s3>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</inist:fA14>
</affiliation>
</author>
</analytic>
<series><title level="j" type="main">Cognition</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">Cognition</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0010-0277</idno>
<imprint><date when="2002">2002</date>
</imprint>
</series>
</biblStruct>
</sourceDesc>
<seriesStmt><title level="j" type="main">Cognition</title>
<title level="j" type="abbreviated">Cognition</title>
<idno type="ISSN">0010-0277</idno>
</seriesStmt>
</fileDesc>
<profileDesc><textClass><keywords scheme="KwdEn" xml:lang="en"><term>Cognition</term>
<term>Experimental study</term>
<term>Human</term>
<term>Language</term>
<term>Space</term>
</keywords>
<keywords scheme="Pascal" xml:lang="fr"><term>Langage</term>
<term>Espace</term>
<term>Etude expérimentale</term>
<term>Cognition</term>
<term>Homme</term>
</keywords>
</textClass>
</profileDesc>
</teiHeader>
<front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Li and Gleitman (Turning the tables: language and spatial reasoning. Cognition, in press) seek to undermine a large-scale cross-cultural comparison of spatial language and cognition which claims to have demonstrated that language and conceptual coding in the spatial domain covary (see, for example, Space in language and cognition: explorations in linguistic diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, in press; Language 74 (1998) 557): the most plausible interpretation is that different languages induce distinct conceptual codings. Arguing against this, Li and Gleitman attempt to show that in an American student population they can obtain any of the relevant conceptual codings just by varying spatial cues, holding language constant. They then argue that our findings are better interpreted in terms of ecologically-induced distinct cognitive styles reflected in language. Linguistic coding, they argue, has no causal effects on non-linguistic thinking - it simply reflects antecedently existing conceptual distinctions. We here show that Li and Gleitman did not make a crucial distinction between frames of spatial reference relevant to our line of research. We report a series of experiments designed to show that they have, as a consequence, misinterpreted the results of their own experiments, which are in fact in line with our hypothesis. Their attempts to reinterpret the large cross-cultural study, and to enlist support from animal and infant studies, fail for the same reasons. We further try to discern exactly what theory drives their presumption that language can have no cognitive efficacy, and conclude that their position is undermined by a wide range of considerations.</div>
</front>
</TEI>
<inist><standard h6="B"><pA><fA01 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>0010-0277</s0>
</fA01>
<fA02 i1="01"><s0>CGTNAU</s0>
</fA02>
<fA03 i2="1"><s0>Cognition</s0>
</fA03>
<fA05><s2>84</s2>
</fA05>
<fA06><s2>2</s2>
</fA06>
<fA08 i1="01" i2="1" l="ENG"><s1>Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning</s1>
</fA08>
<fA11 i1="01" i2="1"><s1>LEVINSON (Stephen C.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="02" i2="1"><s1>KITA (Sotaro)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="03" i2="1"><s1>HAUN (Daniel B. M.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA11 i1="04" i2="1"><s1>RASCH (Björn H.)</s1>
</fA11>
<fA14 i1="01"><s1>Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics</s1>
<s2>Nijmegen</s2>
<s3>NLD</s3>
<sZ>1 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>2 aut.</sZ>
<sZ>3 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA14 i1="02"><s1>Department of Psychology, University of Trier</s1>
<s2>Trier</s2>
<s3>DEU</s3>
<sZ>4 aut.</sZ>
</fA14>
<fA20><s1>155-188</s1>
</fA20>
<fA21><s1>2002</s1>
</fA21>
<fA23 i1="01"><s0>ENG</s0>
</fA23>
<fA43 i1="01"><s1>INIST</s1>
<s2>15966</s2>
<s5>354000101402350020</s5>
</fA43>
<fA44><s0>0000</s0>
<s1>© 2002 INIST-CNRS. All rights reserved.</s1>
</fA44>
<fA45><s0>1 p.3/4</s0>
</fA45>
<fA47 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>02-0344443</s0>
</fA47>
<fA60><s1>P</s1>
</fA60>
<fA61><s0>A</s0>
</fA61>
<fA64 i1="01" i2="1"><s0>Cognition</s0>
</fA64>
<fA66 i1="01"><s0>NLD</s0>
</fA66>
<fC01 i1="01" l="ENG"><s0>Li and Gleitman (Turning the tables: language and spatial reasoning. Cognition, in press) seek to undermine a large-scale cross-cultural comparison of spatial language and cognition which claims to have demonstrated that language and conceptual coding in the spatial domain covary (see, for example, Space in language and cognition: explorations in linguistic diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, in press; Language 74 (1998) 557): the most plausible interpretation is that different languages induce distinct conceptual codings. Arguing against this, Li and Gleitman attempt to show that in an American student population they can obtain any of the relevant conceptual codings just by varying spatial cues, holding language constant. They then argue that our findings are better interpreted in terms of ecologically-induced distinct cognitive styles reflected in language. Linguistic coding, they argue, has no causal effects on non-linguistic thinking - it simply reflects antecedently existing conceptual distinctions. We here show that Li and Gleitman did not make a crucial distinction between frames of spatial reference relevant to our line of research. We report a series of experiments designed to show that they have, as a consequence, misinterpreted the results of their own experiments, which are in fact in line with our hypothesis. Their attempts to reinterpret the large cross-cultural study, and to enlist support from animal and infant studies, fail for the same reasons. We further try to discern exactly what theory drives their presumption that language can have no cognitive efficacy, and conclude that their position is undermined by a wide range of considerations.</s0>
</fC01>
<fC02 i1="01" i2="X"><s0>002A26I06</s0>
</fC02>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Langage</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Language</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="01" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Lenguaje</s0>
<s5>01</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Espace</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Space</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="02" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Espacio</s0>
<s5>02</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Etude expérimentale</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Experimental study</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="03" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Estudio experimental</s0>
<s5>06</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Cognition</s0>
<s5>17</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Cognition</s0>
<s5>17</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="04" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Cognición</s0>
<s5>17</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="FRE"><s0>Homme</s0>
<s5>19</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="ENG"><s0>Human</s0>
<s5>19</s5>
</fC03>
<fC03 i1="05" i2="X" l="SPA"><s0>Hombre</s0>
<s5>19</s5>
</fC03>
<fN21><s1>189</s1>
</fN21>
<fN82><s1>PSI</s1>
</fN82>
</pA>
</standard>
<server><NO>PASCAL 02-0344443 INIST</NO>
<ET>Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning</ET>
<AU>LEVINSON (Stephen C.); KITA (Sotaro); HAUN (Daniel B. M.); RASCH (Björn H.)</AU>
<AF>Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics/Nijmegen/Pays-Bas (1 aut., 2 aut., 3 aut.); Department of Psychology, University of Trier/Trier/Allemagne (4 aut.)</AF>
<DT>Publication en série; Niveau analytique</DT>
<SO>Cognition; ISSN 0010-0277; Coden CGTNAU; Pays-Bas; Da. 2002; Vol. 84; No. 2; Pp. 155-188; Bibl. 1 p.3/4</SO>
<LA>Anglais</LA>
<EA>Li and Gleitman (Turning the tables: language and spatial reasoning. Cognition, in press) seek to undermine a large-scale cross-cultural comparison of spatial language and cognition which claims to have demonstrated that language and conceptual coding in the spatial domain covary (see, for example, Space in language and cognition: explorations in linguistic diversity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, in press; Language 74 (1998) 557): the most plausible interpretation is that different languages induce distinct conceptual codings. Arguing against this, Li and Gleitman attempt to show that in an American student population they can obtain any of the relevant conceptual codings just by varying spatial cues, holding language constant. They then argue that our findings are better interpreted in terms of ecologically-induced distinct cognitive styles reflected in language. Linguistic coding, they argue, has no causal effects on non-linguistic thinking - it simply reflects antecedently existing conceptual distinctions. We here show that Li and Gleitman did not make a crucial distinction between frames of spatial reference relevant to our line of research. We report a series of experiments designed to show that they have, as a consequence, misinterpreted the results of their own experiments, which are in fact in line with our hypothesis. Their attempts to reinterpret the large cross-cultural study, and to enlist support from animal and infant studies, fail for the same reasons. We further try to discern exactly what theory drives their presumption that language can have no cognitive efficacy, and conclude that their position is undermined by a wide range of considerations.</EA>
<CC>002A26I06</CC>
<FD>Langage; Espace; Etude expérimentale; Cognition; Homme</FD>
<ED>Language; Space; Experimental study; Cognition; Human</ED>
<SD>Lenguaje; Espacio; Estudio experimental; Cognición; Hombre</SD>
<LO>INIST-15966.354000101402350020</LO>
<ID>02-0344443</ID>
</server>
</inist>
</record>

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 000D43 | SxmlIndent | more

HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PascalFrancis/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 000D43 | SxmlIndent | more

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri

{{Explor lien
   |wiki=    Wicri/Rhénanie
   |area=    UnivTrevesV1
   |flux=    PascalFrancis
   |étape=   Corpus
   |type=    RBID
   |clé=     Pascal:02-0344443
   |texte=   Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning
}}

This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31.
Data generation: Sat Jul 22 16:29:01 2017. Site generation: Wed Feb 28 14:55:37 2024

	Serveur d'exploration sur l'Université de Trèves
	Attention, ce site est en cours de développement ! Attention, site généré par des moyens informatiques à partir de corpus bruts. Les informations ne sont donc pas validées.

Serveur d'exploration sur l'Université de Trèves

Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning

Returning the tables: language affects spatial reasoning

Source :

Descripteurs français

English descriptors

Abstract

Notice en format standard (ISO 2709)

Format Inist (serveur)

Links to Exploration step

Le document en format XML

Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)

Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri