At the Mercy of Strategies: The Role of Motor Representations in Language Understanding

Abstract

Classical cognitive theories hold that word representations in the brain are abstract and amodal, and are independent of the objects’ sensorimotor properties they refer to. An alternative hypothesis emphasizes the importance of bodily processes in cognition: the representation of a concept appears to be crucially dependent upon perceptual-motor processes that relate to it. Thus, understanding action-related words would rely upon the same motor structures that also support the execution of the same actions. In this context, motor simulation represents a key component. Our approach is to draw parallels between the literature on mental rotation and the literature on action verb/sentence processing. Here we will discuss recent studies on mental imagery, mental rotation, and language that clearly demonstrate how motor simulation is neither automatic nor necessary to language understanding. These studies have shown that motor representations can or cannot be activated depending on the type of strategy the participants adopt to perform tasks involving motor phrases. On the one hand, participants may imagine the movement with the body parts used to carry out the actions described by the verbs (i.e., motor strategy); on the other, individuals may solve the task without simulating the corresponding movements (i.e., visual strategy). While it is not surprising that the motor strategy is at work when participants process action-related verbs, it is however striking that sensorimotor activation has been reported also for imageable concrete words with no motor content, for “non-words” with regular phonology, for pseudo-verb stimuli, and also for negations. Based on the extant literature, we will argue that implicit motor imagery is not uniquely used when a body-related stimulus is encountered, and that it is not the type of stimulus that automatically triggers the motor simulation but the type of strategy. Finally, we will also comment on the view that sensorimotor activations are subjected to a top-down modulation.

Are the motor features of verb meanings represented in the precentral motor cortices? Yes, but within the context of a flexible, multilevel architecture for conceptual knowledge

“…However, there is growing evidence that when action verbs are perceived, the mobilization of the relevant precentral motor cortices is not completely autonomous and independent of higher-level cognitive influences but is instead susceptible to modulation by the task and context (for a review see Tomasino & Rumiati, 2013; see also Kiefer et al, 2012). Here are some examples.…”

Observing, Performing, and Understanding Actions: Revisiting the Role of Cortical Motor Areas in Processing of Action Words

“…Likewise, words with no motor meaning, which are used to imply a request for action (e.g., "it is hot in here" spoken in the context of a closed window), do activate sensory-motor areas reliably (Van Ackeren, Casasanto, Hagoort, Bekkering, & Rueschemeyer, 2012), suggesting that lexical forms are not necessary to elicit motor activation. Finally, words presented in the context of a motor task are more likely to elicit activation patterns consistent with an embodied framework of words presented in nonmotoric contexts (e.g., Tomasino & Rumiati, 2013;Papeo, Rumiati, Cecchetto, & Tomasino, 2012). Thus, the recruitment of sensory-motor areas appears to be a flexible enterprise that is affected by linguistic and pragmatic context as well as task demands.…”

“…It is worth noting that the involvement of the cortical motor areas in processing lexical-semantic meaning has been shown to be influenced by task demands (Tomasino & Rumiati, 2013;Papeo et al, 2012;Van Dam et al, 2012). Specifically, it has been argued that words elicit more reliable activation with cortical motor areas in language and situational contexts that highlight motor acts (e.g., performing mental rotation, thinking about actions vs. forms, etc.).…”

Visual and Motor Features of the Meanings of Action Verbs: A Cognitive Neuroscience Perspective

“…On the other hand, some of the most interesting and valuable insights in this field of research have come from recent studies showing that the degree to which motor representations are involved in action verb comprehension depends on both the task and the context (for a review, see Tomasino and Rumiati 2013). As an illustration of task effects, in a behavioral study Sato et al (2008) found that although verbs for arm/hand actions interfered with button presses when subjects performed a semantic task, they did not do so when subjects performed a lexical decision task.…”