• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

感知/认知和语言对空间分类的相对贡献。

Relative contribution of perception/cognition and language on spatial categorization.

机构信息

Department of Linguistics and Asian/Middle Eastern Languages, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA 92182-7727, USA.

出版信息

Cogn Sci. 2012 Jan-Feb;36(1):102-29. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01201.x. Epub 2011 Oct 4.

DOI:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01201.x
PMID:21972797
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3257354/
Abstract

This study investigated the relative contribution of perception/cognition and language-specific semantics in nonverbal categorization of spatial relations. English and Korean speakers completed a video-based similarity judgment task involving containment, support, tight fit, and loose fit. Both perception/cognition and language served as resources for categorization, and allocation between the two depended on the target relation and the features contrasted in the choices. Whereas perceptual/cognitive salience for containment and tight-fit features guided categorization in many contexts, language-specific semantics influenced categorization where the two features competed for similarity judgment and when the target relation was tight support, a domain where spatial relations are perceptually diverse. In the latter contexts, each group categorized more in line with semantics of their language, that is, containment/support for English and tight/loose fit for Korean. We conclude that language guides spatial categorization when perception/cognition alone is not sufficient. In this way, language is an integral part of our cognitive domain of space.

摘要

本研究调查了知觉/认知和语言特定语义在非言语空间关系分类中的相对贡献。英语和韩语使用者完成了一项基于视频的相似性判断任务,涉及包含、支撑、紧密贴合和宽松贴合。知觉/认知和语言都是分类的资源,两者的分配取决于目标关系和选择中对比的特征。虽然在许多情况下,包含和紧密贴合特征的知觉/认知显著性指导了分类,但当两个特征在相似性判断中竞争,并且目标关系是紧密支撑时,语言特定语义会影响分类,而在这个领域中,空间关系是多样化的。在后一种情况下,每个群体的分类更符合其语言的语义,即英语中的包含/支撑和韩语中的紧密/宽松贴合。我们的结论是,当仅靠知觉/认知不足以进行分类时,语言会指导空间分类。这样,语言就成为我们空间认知领域的一个组成部分。

相似文献

1
Relative contribution of perception/cognition and language on spatial categorization.感知/认知和语言对空间分类的相对贡献。
Cogn Sci. 2012 Jan-Feb;36(1):102-29. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01201.x. Epub 2011 Oct 4.
2
Spatial Semantics, Cognition, and Their Interaction: A Comparative Study of Spatial Categorization in English and Korean.空间语义学、认知及其相互作用:英语和韩语空间范畴的比较研究
Cogn Sci. 2018 May 22. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12622.
3
What Develops in Infants' Spatial Categorization? Korean Infants' Categorization of Containment and Tight-Fit Relations.婴儿的空间分类是如何发展的?韩国婴儿对包含和紧密贴合关系的分类。
Child Dev. 2018 Jul;89(4):e382-e396. doi: 10.1111/cdev.12903. Epub 2017 Aug 3.
4
Understanding spatial relations: flexible infants, lexical adults.理解空间关系:灵活的婴儿,有语言能力的成年人。
Cogn Psychol. 2003 May;46(3):229-59. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0285(02)00514-5.
5
Tight and loose are not created equal: an asymmetry underlying the representation of fit in English- and Korean-speakers.“紧”与“松”并非等同:英韩双语者对“合身”概念的表征存在潜在不对称性。
Cognition. 2008 Dec;109(3):316-25. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.019. Epub 2008 Nov 17.
6
Revisiting the role of language in spatial cognition: Categorical perception of spatial relations in English and Korean speakers.重新审视语言在空间认知中的作用:英语和韩语使用者对空间关系的范畴知觉。
Psychon Bull Rev. 2017 Dec;24(6):2031-2036. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1268-x.
7
Six-month-old infants' categorization of containment spatial relations.6个月大婴儿对包容空间关系的分类。
Child Dev. 2003 May-Jun;74(3):679-93. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00562.
8
Effects of Language Background on Gaze Behavior: A Crosslinguistic Comparison Between Korean and German Speakers.语言背景对注视行为的影响:韩语和德语使用者的跨语言比较
Adv Cogn Psychol. 2017 Dec 31;13(4):267-279. doi: 10.5709/acp-0227-z. eCollection 2017.
9
To generalize or not to generalize: spatial categories are influenced by physical attributes and language.归纳还是不归纳:空间类别受物理属性和语言的影响。
Dev Sci. 2009 Jan;12(1):88-95. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00749.x.
10
What does children's spatial language reveal about spatial concepts? Evidence from the use of containment expressions.儿童的空间语言揭示了哪些关于空间概念的信息?来自容器表达使用的证据。
Cogn Sci. 2014 Jun;38(5):881-910. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12106. Epub 2014 Mar 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Effects of Language Background on Gaze Behavior: A Crosslinguistic Comparison Between Korean and German Speakers.语言背景对注视行为的影响:韩语和德语使用者的跨语言比较
Adv Cogn Psychol. 2017 Dec 31;13(4):267-279. doi: 10.5709/acp-0227-z. eCollection 2017.
2
One Label or Two? Linguistic Influences on the Similarity Judgment of Objects between English and Japanese Speakers.一个标签还是两个?语言对英语和日语使用者物体相似性判断的影响。
Front Psychol. 2017 Sep 26;8:1637. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01637. eCollection 2017.
3
How language impacts memory of motion events in English and French.

本文引用的文献

1
Learning to form a spatial category of tight-fit relations: how experience with a label can give a boost.学习形成紧身贴合关系的空间类别:标签体验如何起到促进作用。
Dev Psychol. 2009 May;45(3):711-23. doi: 10.1037/a0015475.
2
To generalize or not to generalize: spatial categories are influenced by physical attributes and language.归纳还是不归纳:空间类别受物理属性和语言的影响。
Dev Sci. 2009 Jan;12(1):88-95. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00749.x.
3
Tight and loose are not created equal: an asymmetry underlying the representation of fit in English- and Korean-speakers.
语言如何影响英语和法语使用者对运动事件的记忆。
Cogn Process. 2015 Sep;16 Suppl 1:209-13. doi: 10.1007/s10339-015-0696-7.
4
Is the left hemisphere androcentric? Evidence of the learned categorical perception of gender.左半球以男性为中心吗?性别习得性分类感知的证据。
Laterality. 2015;20(5):571-84. doi: 10.1080/1357650X.2015.1016529. Epub 2015 Mar 5.
5
Carving the world for language: how neuroscientific research can enrich the study of first and second language learning.为语言塑造世界:神经科学研究如何丰富第一语言和第二语言学习的研究
Dev Neuropsychol. 2014;39(4):262-84. doi: 10.1080/87565641.2014.906602.
“紧”与“松”并非等同:英韩双语者对“合身”概念的表征存在潜在不对称性。
Cognition. 2008 Dec;109(3):316-25. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.019. Epub 2008 Nov 17.
4
Does language guide event perception? Evidence from eye movements.语言会引导事件感知吗?来自眼动的证据。
Cognition. 2008 Jul;108(1):155-84. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.02.007. Epub 2008 Apr 18.
5
Do novel words facilitate 18-month-olds' spatial categorization?新颖的词汇是否有助于18个月大的幼儿进行空间分类?
Child Dev. 2007 Nov-Dec;78(6):1818-29. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.01100.x.
6
When less is more: how infants learn to form an abstract categorical representation of support.少即是多:婴儿如何学会形成关于支撑的抽象类别表征。
Child Dev. 2005 Jan-Feb;76(1):279-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00844.x.
7
Can language do the driving? The effect of linguistic input on infants' categorization of support spatial relations.语言能起到引导作用吗?语言输入对婴儿支持性空间关系分类的影响。
Dev Psychol. 2005 Jan;41(1):183-92. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.41.1.183.
8
Can language restructure cognition? The case for space.语言能重构认知吗?以空间为例。
Trends Cogn Sci. 2004 Mar;8(3):108-14. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.01.003.
9
Conceptual precursors to language.语言的概念先驱。
Nature. 2004 Jul 22;430(6998):453-6. doi: 10.1038/nature02634.
10
Six-month-old infants' categorization of containment spatial relations.6个月大婴儿对包容空间关系的分类。
Child Dev. 2003 May-Jun;74(3):679-93. doi: 10.1111/1467-8624.00562.