2006
DOI: 10.1007/s11023-006-9027-1
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dedre Gentner and Susan Goldin-Meadow (eds): Language in Mind: Advances in␣the Study of Language and Thought.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
2
2

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 6 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Language thereby invites the child to construct a particular system of categories (Bowerman and Choi 2003) and to follow a particular "mold" when organizing information in discourse (thinking for speaking, Slobin 1996). Opponents (e.g., Jackendoff 1996;Landau and Jackendoff 1993;Landau 2003;Clark 2003) reject this approach on several grounds, highlighting especially the problem of circularity in empirical attempts to demonstrate the impact of language on cognition merely on the basis of data concerning language use. Although some admit that language-specific properties (or at least some of them, such as obligatory markings) might influence our language behaviors, they argue against the idea that such properties can influence our representations beyond language itself and that our variable language behaviors should reflect variables modes of cognitive organization.…”
Section: Part Iii: Space Language and Cognitionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Language thereby invites the child to construct a particular system of categories (Bowerman and Choi 2003) and to follow a particular "mold" when organizing information in discourse (thinking for speaking, Slobin 1996). Opponents (e.g., Jackendoff 1996;Landau and Jackendoff 1993;Landau 2003;Clark 2003) reject this approach on several grounds, highlighting especially the problem of circularity in empirical attempts to demonstrate the impact of language on cognition merely on the basis of data concerning language use. Although some admit that language-specific properties (or at least some of them, such as obligatory markings) might influence our language behaviors, they argue against the idea that such properties can influence our representations beyond language itself and that our variable language behaviors should reflect variables modes of cognitive organization.…”
Section: Part Iii: Space Language and Cognitionmentioning
confidence: 99%