Grounding language in the neglected senses of touch, taste, and smell

Abstract

Grounded theories hold sensorimotor activation is critical to language processing. Such theories have focused predominantly on the dominant senses of sight and hearing. Relatively fewer studies have assessed mental simulation within touch, taste, and smell, even though they are critically implicated in communication for important domains, such as health and wellbeing. We review work that sheds light on whether perceptual activation from lesser studied modalities contribute to meaning in language. We critically evaluate data from behavioural, imaging, and cross-cultural studies. We conclude that evidence for sensorimotor simulation in touch, taste, and smell is weak. Comprehending language related to these senses may instead rely on simulation of emotion, as well as crossmodal simulation of the "higher" senses of vision and audition. Overall, the data suggest the need for a refinement of embodiment theories, as not all sensory modalities provide equally strong evidence for mental simulation.

Olfactory Language Requires an Integrative and Interdisciplinary Approach

“…Olofsson and Pierzchajlo note that the real world provides multisensory contextual support that scaffolds the odor concept. I agree and have likewise argued so elsewhere [8,9]. I also agree that experimental studies will be crucial to adjudicate between different mechanistic accounts of olfactory language and its relation to other cognitive processes.…”

Human Olfaction at the Intersection of Language, Culture, and Biology

“…In fact, the imaging studies do not paint such a clear picture, as many studies fail to find activation of piriform cortex from smellassociated words [117][118][119] (see [120] for a critical review). Moreover, for those proposing an asymmetrical account, it is unclear what specifically is activated from smell-associated words: is it unique object-templates associated with distinct odors, as suggested by some [115], broader smell categories [46,120], or merely valence [30]? These possibilities can be distinguished using a match/mismatch paradigm.…”

Limitations in odour simulation may originate from differential sensory embodiment

“…fish) terms [66,70]. Odour terms like fish or orange can help a person access a 'fish' or 'orange' odour from memory (although see [71]), and enable mental mixtures of the two, even if the mixture is perceptually novel [72]. However, it is harder to envisage how a person who has never smelled a fish or an orange odour could simulate them.…”