El lenguaje como metáfora de nuestra animalidad: un estudio sobre la teoría del embodiment aplicada al signo lingüístico
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25267/Pragmalinguistica.2010.i18.07Información
Autores/as
- Claudia Sánchez Gutierrez (ES) Universidad de Salamanca
Resumen
En este trabajo se exponen diferentes descubrimientos científicos que han permitido confirmar, o al menos dar credibilidad, a la idea de que el cuerpo está a la base del significado lingüístico. Esta idea se concreta en los postulados de la teoría del embodiment, la cual defiende que el lenguaje consiste en una simulación de nuestra interacción real con el mundo que nos rodea. Partiendo de los resultados obtenidos en esta línea de investigación, tratamos de sacar conclusiones sobre cuáles pueden ser sus consecuencias para la concepción tradicional del signo lingüístico saussureano.
Palabras clave
Descargas
Cómo citar
Licencia
Derechos de autor 2018 Pragmalingüística
Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-CompartirIgual 4.0.
Citas
AUSTIN, J. (1962) [1988]. Cómo hacer cosas con palabras. Barcelona: Paidós.
AZIZ-ZADEH, L., IACOBONI, M., ZAIDEL, E., WILSON, S. & J. MAZZIOTTA (2004). “Left Hemisphere Motor Facilitation in Response to Manual Action Sounds”. European Journal of Neurosciences. 19, 9: pp. 2609-2612.
AZIZ-ZADEH, L., KOSKI, L., ZAIDEL, E., MAZZIOTTA, J. & M. IACOBONI (2006). “Lateralization of the Human Mirror Neuron System”. Journal of Neuroscience. 26, 11: pp. 2964-2970.
AZIZ-ZADEH, L., WILSON, S., RIZZOLATTI, G. & M. IACOBONI (2006). “Congruent Embodied Representations for Visually Presented Actions and Linguistic Phrases Describing Actions”. Current Biology. 16, 18: pp. 1818-1823.
BAK, T. & J. HODGES (1999). “Cognition, Language and Behaviour in Motor Neurone Disease: Evidence of Frontotemporal Dysfunction”. Dement Geriatrical Cognitive Disorders. 10, Suppl. 1: pp. 29-32.
— (2004). “The Effects of Motor Neurone Disease on Language: Further Evidence”. Brain Language. 89, 2: pp. 354-361.
BALOTA, D. & J. COANE (2008). “Semantic Memory”. En BYRNE, EICHENBAUM, MENZEL, ROEDIGER, AND SWEATT (eds.). Handbook of Learning and Memory: A Comprehensive Reference. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
BLOOMFIELD, L. (1933). Language. New York: Henry Holt.
BOBROW, S. & S. BELL (1973). “On Catching On to Idiomatic Expressions”. Memory and Cognition. 1: pp. 343-346.
BORODITSKY, L. & M. RAMSCAR (2002). “The Roles of Body and Mind in Abstract Thought”. Psychological Science. 13, 2: pp. 185-188.
BURGESS, C. & K. LUND (2000).”The Dynamics of Meaning in Memory”. En E. Dietrich & A. Markman (eds.). Cognitive Dynamics. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
CACCIARI, C. & P. TABOSSI (1988). “The Comprehension of Idioms”. Journal of Memory and Language. 27: pp. 668-683.
— (1993). Idioms. Processing Structure and Interpretation. Hillsdale, N.J., Erlbaum. DI PELLEGRINO, G., FADIGA, L., FOGASSI, L., GALLESE, V. & G. RIZZOLATTI (1992).
“Understanding Motor Events: A Neurophysiological Study”. Experimental Brain Research. 91, 1: pp. 176-180.
GALLESE, V. & G. LAKOFF (2005). “The Brains Concepts: The Role of the Sensory-motor System in Reason and Language”. Cognitive Neuropsychology. 22: pp. 455-479.
GIBBS, R. (2006). Embodiment and Cognitive Science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
— (2003). “Embodied Experience and Linguistic Meaning”. Brain and Language. 84: pp. 1-15.
GLENBERG, A. (1999). “Why Mental Models Need to Be Embodied”. Mental Models in Discourse Processing. En G. RICKERT & C. HABEL (eds.) Mental models in Discourse Processing Amsterdam: Elsevier: pp. 77-90.
— (2010). “Embodiment as a Unifying Perspective for Psychology”. Cognitive Science 1 (4): pp. 586-596.
— & M. KASCHAK (2002). “Grounding Language in Action”. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review. 9: pp. 558-565.
GLUCKSBERG, S. (1991). “Beyond Literal Meanings: The Psychology of Allusion” Psychological Science. 2: pp. 146-152.
HAUK, O., JOHNSRUDE, I. & F. PULVERMULLER (2004). “Somatotopic Representation of Action Words in Human Motor and Premotor Cortex”. Neuron. 41, 2: pp. 301-307
KASCHAK, M., MADDEN, C., THERRIAULT, D., YAXLEY, R., AVEYARD, M., BLANCHARD, A., & R. ZWAAN (2005). “Perception of Motion Affects Language Processing”. Cognition. 94, B79-B89.
LAKOFF, G. & M. JOHNSON (1980). Metaphors We Live By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (citas de la traducción española: (2009) Metáforas de la vida cotidiana. Madrid. Cátedra.
— (1999). Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and Its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.
LANDAUER, T. & S. DUMAIS (1997). “A Solution to Plato’s Problem: The Latent Semantic Analysis Theory of Acquisition, Induction and Representation of Knowledge”. Psychological Review. 104: pp. 211-240.
PULVERMULLER, F. (1999). “Words in the Brain’s Language”. Behavioral Brain Science. 22, 2: pp. 253-279.
— (2005). “Brain Mechanisms Linking Language and Action”. Natural Review Neuroscience. 6, 7: pp. 576-582.
— & HAUK, O., NIKULIN, V. & R. ILMONIEMI (2005). “Functional links between motor and language systems”. European Journal Neurosciences. 21, 3: pp. 793-797.
RIZZOLATTI, G. & L. CRAIGHERO, (2004). “The Mirror-neuron System”. Annual Review Neuroscience. 27: pp. 169-192.
RIZZOLATTI, G., GENTILUCCI, M., FOGASSI, L., LUPPINO, G., MATELLI, M. & S. PONZONI-MAGGI (1987). “Neurons Related to Goal-directed Motor Acts in Inferior area 6 of the Macaque Monkey”. Experimental Brain Research. 67, 1: pp. 220-224.
ROSCH, E. (1975). “Cognitive Representation of Semantic Categories”. Journal of Experimental Psychology. 104, 3: pp. 192-233.
ROSCH, E., MERVIS, C., GRAY, W., JOHNSON, D. & P. BOYES-BRAEM (1976). “Basic Objects in Natural Categories”. Cognitive Psychology. 8: pp. 382-439.
ROTHI, L., HEILMAN, K. & R. WATSON (1985). “Pantomime Comprehension and Ideomotor Apraxia”. Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery and Psychiatry. 48, 3: pp. 207-210.
SEARLE, J. (1969). Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
— (1980). “Minds, Brains, and Programs”. Brain and Behavioral Science. 4: pp. 414-427.
SMITH, L. (2005). “Action Alters Shape Categories”. Cognitive Science. 29: pp. 665-679.
SWINNEY, D. & A. CUTLER (1979). “Access and Processing of Idiomatic Expressions”. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 18, 5: p. 523.
TABOSSI, P., FANARI, R. & K. WOLF (2009). “Why Are Idioms Recognized Fast?”. Memory & Cognition. 37, 4: pp. 529-540.
TITONE, D. & C. CONNINE. (1994). “Descriptive Norms for 171 Idiomatic Expressions: Familiarity, Predictability and Literality”. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity. 9: pp. 247-270.
WANG, L. & H. GOODGLASS (1992). “Pantomime, Praxis, and Aphasia”. Brain Language. 42, 4: pp. 402-418.