Prasada Sandeep, Ferenz Krag, Haskell Todd
Center for Cognitive Science, Rutgers University, New Brunswick, NJ, USA.
Cognition. 2002 Mar;83(2):141-65. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(01)00173-1.
What is the difference between conceiving of an entity as an object of some kind and conceiving of it as an amount of solid stuff? We propose that the difference lies in how one thinks about the entity's structure. Object construals require thinking of the structure as being nonarbitrary, whereas substance construals require thinking of the structure as being arbitrary. We report six experiments that provide empirical support for this proposal. Regularity of structure, repetition of structure, and the existence of structure-dependent functions, all of which provide reasons to consider the structure of an entity to be nonarbitrary, were shown to bias participants towards object construals. We also discuss how the proposed account of what it means to construe an entity as an object or as some stuff can account for a range of findings in the literature on lexical development. These include the relation between cohesiveness and ontological category, shape and ontological category, and complexity of shape and ontological category. Finally, we discuss the nature of construals and the relation of object and substance construals to the physical, design, and intentional stances.
将一个实体构想为某种对象与将其构想为一定数量的固体物质之间有什么区别?我们认为,区别在于人们如何思考该实体的结构。对象构想要求将结构视为非任意的,而物质构想则要求将结构视为任意的。我们报告了六个实验,这些实验为这一观点提供了实证支持。结构的规律性、结构的重复性以及依赖于结构的功能的存在,所有这些都为将实体的结构视为非任意的提供了理由,结果表明这些因素会使参与者倾向于对象构想。我们还讨论了所提出的关于将实体构想为对象或某种物质意味着什么的解释,如何能够解释词汇发展文献中的一系列研究结果。这些结果包括内聚性与本体类别之间的关系、形状与本体类别之间的关系以及形状复杂性与本体类别之间的关系。最后,我们讨论了构想的本质以及对象构想和物质构想与物理立场、设计立场和意向立场之间的关系。