摘要：

具体概念加工中的感知运动仿真是概念表征的核心加工过程。本研究系统探讨了语言因素(语言类型：第一语言和第二语言)和情境因素(知觉情境：空间知觉情境和语义知觉情境)对具体概念加工中感知运动仿真的影响。实验1采用语义相关判断范式探讨了第二语言加工过程中是否存在感知运动仿真, 以及第二语言中的仿真和第一语言中的仿真是否存在差异。研究发现, 第二语言加工中依然存在感知运动仿真, 但是第一语言的感知运动仿真具有一定的优势。实验2采用语义相关判断范式及其变式, 通过2个分实验分别探讨了个体加工概念时空间知觉信息和语义知觉信息对于概念表征过程中感知运动仿真的影响。研究发现, 无论是在较弱的空间信息知觉条件下还是在较浅的语义信息知觉条件下, 具体概念加工过程中都产生了感知运动仿真。本研究的发现弥补了知觉符号理论未对第二语言中的感知运动仿真提出针对性预测的不足, 表明感知运动仿真具有一定的跨语言稳定性。同时, 具体概念加工中的感知运动仿真不受空间信息和语义信息的调节, 这表明感知运动仿真能在一定程度上自动化产生。

Abstract:

How concepts are represented in the brain is an important topic in cognitive science. There are two different theories on this research question, i.e., propositional symbol theory and perceptual symbol theory. The difference between these two theories is how to treat the relationship between the internal symbol and the external archetype. The propositional symbol theory holds that the relationship between the two is arbitrary. Perceptual information does not participate in the processing of concepts. While perceptual symbols theory holds that the relationship between the two is similar. Perceptual information participates in the processing of concepts.
People learn conceptual information in the vertical space. The spatial information is stored in long-term memory along with the representation of concepts. This hypothesis has been supported by many studies and is in line with the perceptual symbol theory. However, few studies have tested what factors influence sensorimotor simulation in conceptual processing. In this study, the semantic relevance judgment paradigm is used to test this question. The present study examined whether the sensorimotor simulation participates in conceptual processing in the first and second languages. Then, the present study examined how situational information modulates conceptual processing, by manipulating the intensity of spatial information and the level of semantic processing.
In Experiment 1, the semantic relevance judgment paradigm is used to test whether sensorimotor simulation is involved in the second language processing and whether there is any difference between the first language and second language processing. The results of Experiment 1 show that the sensorimotor simulation has participated in the second language processing. However, there is an accuracy advantage in the sensorimotor simulation in the first language. In Experiment 2, two experiments are conducted to test the effect of the perceptual situation on sensorimotor simulation. Experiment 2a tests the influence of perceptual situation on sensorimotor simulation by changing the intensity of individual perceptual in vertical spatial axis. The results show that the sensorimotor simulation can be found in both strong and weak spatial perception. The effect of semantic processing level on perceptual motion simulation is tested in Experiment 2b. The experiment manipulates the level of semantic processing by using the semantic relevance judgment task and word judgment task. The results show that sensorimotor simulation participates in the processing of concepts, while semantic situational did not modulate this effect. The results of Experiment 2 suggest that sensorimotor stimulation may be automatic in conceptual processing.
The present study conducted two experiments to test the role of sensorimotor simulation in conceptual processing. Results found that the sensorimotor simulation participates in conceptual representation, supporting the perceptual symbol theory. Furthermore, the sensorimotor simulation takes place in both Chinese and English. This finding extends the perceptual symbol theory. Finally, results found that sensorimotor stimulation may be automatic in conceptual representation and is not affected by spatial information and semantic processing.

Key words: concrete concept, conceptual representation, sensorimotor simulation, perceptual symbol theory Barsalou, L. W. (1999). Perceptions of perceptual symbols. Behavioral and Brain Sciences , 22 (4), 637-660. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X99532147 Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology , 59 (1), 617-645. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639 Barsalou, L. W., Dutriaux, L., & Scheepers, C. (2018). Moving beyond the distinction between concrete and abstract concepts. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences , 373 (1752). Baumeister, J. C., Foroni, F., Conrad, M., Rumiati, R. I., & Winkielman, P. (2017). Embodiment and emotional memory in first vs. second language. Frontiers in Psychology , 8 (8), 394. Bergen, B., Lau, T. T. C., Narayan, S., Stojanovic, D., & Wheeler, K. (2010). Body part representations in verbal semantics. Memory & Cognition , 38 (7), 969-981. doi: 10.3758/MC.38.7.969 Chen, D., Wang, R., Zhang, J., & Liu, C. (2020). Perceptual representations in L1, L2 and L3 comprehension: Delayed sentence-picture verification. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research , 49 (1), 41-57. doi: 10.1007/s10936-019-09670-x Costa, A., Santesteban, M. & Cano, A. (2005). On facilitatory effect cognate words in bilingual speech produefion. Brain and Language , 94 (9): 94-103. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2004.12.002 Dudschig, C., de la Vega, I., de Filippis, M., & Kaup, B. (2014). Language and vertical space: On the automaticity of language action interconnections. Cortex , 58 , 151-160. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2014.06.003 pmid: 25016318 Dudschig, C., de la Vega, I., & Kaup, B. (2014). Embodiment and second-language: Automatic activation of motor responses during processing spatially associated L2 words and emotion L2 words in a vertical stroop paradigm. Brain and Language , 132 , 14-21. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2014.02.002 pmid: 24681402 Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2017). Is it all task-specific? The role of binary responses, verbal mediation, and saliency for eliciting language-space associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 43 (2), 259- 270. doi: 10.1037/xlm0000297 Dudschig, C., Lachmair, M., de la Vega, I., de Filippis, M., & Kaup, B. (2012). From top to bottom: Spatial shifts of attention caused by linguistic stimuli. Cognitive Processing , 13 (1), 151-154. Dudschig, C., Souman, J., Lachmair, M., de la Vega, I., & Kaup, B. (2013). Reading “sun” and looking up: The influence of language on saccadic eye movements in the vertical dimension. Plos One , 8 (2), e56872. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0056872 Dunn, B., Kamide, Y., & Scheepers, C. (2014). Hearing “moon” and looking up:Word-related spatial associations facilitate saccades to congruent locations. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (Vol. 36 , No. 36 Eilola, T. M., & Havelka, J. (2010). Behavioural and physiological responses to the emotional and taboo stroop tasks in native and non-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism , 15 (3), 353- 369. doi: 10.1177/1367006910379263 Estes, Z., & Barsalou, L. W. (2018). A comprehensive meta- analysis of spatial interference from linguistic cues: Beyond Petrova et al. (2018). Psychological Science , 29 (9), 1558- 1564. doi: 10.1177/0956797618794131 Fodor, J. A. (1975). The language of thought . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Glenberg, A. M., & Gallese, V. (2012). Action-based language: A theory of language acquisition, comprehension, and production. Cortex , 48 (7), 905-922. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2011.04.010 pmid: 21601842 Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 9 (3), 558-565. doi: 10.3758/BF03196313 Grauwe, S. D., Willems, R. M., Rueschemeyer, S. A., Lemhöfer, K., & Schriefers, H. (2014). Embodied language in first- and second-language speakers: Neural correlates of processing motor verbs. Neuropsychologia , 56 , 334-349. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.02.003 Günther, F., Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2018). Symbol grounding without direct experience: Do words inherit sensorimotor activation from purely linguistic context?. Cognitive Science , 42 , 336-374. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12549 Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D Nonlinear Phenomena , 42 (1-3), 335-346. doi: 10.1016/0167-2789(90)90063-U Harris, C. L., Ayçíçeğí, A., & Gleason, J. B. (2003). Taboo words and reprimands elicit greater autonomic reactivity in a first language than in a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics , 24 (4), 561-579. doi: 10.1017/S0142716403000286 Jared, D., Pei Yun Poh, R., & Paivio, A. (2013). L1 and L2 picture naming in Mandarin-English bilinguals: A test of bilingual dual coding theory. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , 16 (2), 383-396. doi: 10.1017/S1366728912000685 Lachmair, M., Dudschig, C., Filippis, M. D., Vega, I., & Kaup, B. (2011). Root versus roof: Automatic activation of location information during word processing. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 18 (6), 1180-1188. doi: 10.3758/s13423-011-0158-x Lakens, D. (2012). Polarity correspondence in metaphor congruency effects: Structural overlap predicts categorization times for bipolar concepts presented in vertical space. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition , 38 (3), 726-736. doi: 10.1037/a0024955 Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by . Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Lebois, L. A., Wilson-Mendenhall, C. D., & Barsalou, L. W. (2014). Are automatic conceptual cores the gold standard of semantic processing? The context - dependence of spatial meaning in grounded congruency effects. Cognitive Science , 39 (8), 1764-1801. doi: 10.1111/cogs.12174 Lewis, M. P., Simons, G. F., & Fennig, C. D. (2015). Ethnologue: Languages of the world (18th ed.). SIL International . Liu, W. J., Li, Y., & Wang, R. M. (2015). The role of sensorimotor information in conceptual representation. Journal of Psychological Science , 38 (6), 1347-1352. Liu, W. J., Shen, M. Q., Li, Y., & Wang, R. M. (2016). The interaction between emotional concept processing and emotional face perception. Acta Psychologica Sinica , 48 (2), 163-173. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2016.00163 Nielsen, A. K. S., & Rendall, D. (2013). Parsing the role of consonants versus vowels in the classic Takete-Maluma phenomenon. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology , 67 (2), 153-163. doi: 10.1037/a0030553 ÖTTL, B., Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2017). Forming associations between language and sensorimotor traces during novel word learning. Language and Cognition , 9 (1), 156-171. doi: 10.1017/langcog.2016.5 Proctor, R. W., & Xiong, A. (2015). Polarity correspondence as a general compatibility principle. Current Directions in Psychological Science , 24 (6), 446-451. doi: 10.1177/0963721415607305 Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1984). Computation and cognition . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Strozyk, J. V., Dudschig, C., & Kaup, B. (2019). Do I need to have my hands free to understand hand-related language? Investigating the functional relevance of experiential simulations. Psychological Research , 83 (3), 406-418. doi: 10.1007/s00426-017-0900-8 Vukovic, N., & Shtyrov, Y. (2014). Cortical motor systems are involved in second-language comprehension: Evidence from rapid mu-rhythm desynchronisation. NeuroImage , 102 , 695-703. doi: 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2014.08.039 Wang, R. M., Mo, L., Li, L., Wang, S. P., & Wu, J. (2005). Perceptual symbol representation and propositional symbol representation in language comprehension. Acta Psychologica Sinica , 37 (2), 143-150. Zhao, T. Y., Huang, Y. L., Chen, D. G., Jiao, L., Ramos, F. M., Wang, R. M., & Xie, J. S. (2020). The modality switching costs of Chinese - English bilinguals in the processing of L1 and L2. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology , 73 (3) 396-412. doi: 10.1177/1747021819878089 Zwaan, R. A., & Madden, C. J. (2005). Embodied sentence comprehension. In D. Pecher & R. Zwaan (Eds.), Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking (pp. 224-245) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R., & Yaxley, R. H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychological Science , 13 (2), 168-171. pmid: 11934002 Zwaan, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2003). Spatial iconicity affects semantic relatedness judgments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review , 10 (4), 954-958. doi: 10.3758/BF03196557 地址：北京市朝阳区林萃路16号院
邮编：100101
电话：010-64850861
E-mail： [email protected]
备案编号： 京ICP备10049795号-1 京公网安备110402500018号
本系统由北京玛格泰克科技发展有限公司设计开发