COULD SIGN-BASED SEMANTICS AND EMBODIED SEMANTICS BENEFIT ONE ANOTHER?
Manuscrito March 22, 2022 DOI: 10.1590/0100-6045.2022.v45n1.cm via DOAJ
Summary
Embodied semantics, which grounds meaning in bodily simulation, and Duffley's sign-based semantics can complement each other as foundational and semantic theories respectively. The argument examines three areas—analysis of FOR, verbs of positive and negative recall, and causative verbs—where Duffley's approach gains support from embodied simulation. Conversely, Duffley's theory may help address two challenges facing embodied semantics: accounting for abstract language and sentence-level simulations. The paper proposes a mutually beneficial relationship between these two theoretical frameworks.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Keywords | Linguistic meaning Foundations of meaning Embodied cognition |
| Citations | 1 |
| Key finding | Duffley's sign-based semantics and embodied semantics can be mutually beneficial when conceived as a semantic theory and a foundational theory, respectively. |
Abstract
Abstract I argue that Duffley’s sign-based semantics and embodied semantics may be mutually beneficial if we conceive them as a semantic theory and as a foundational theory, respectively. First, I describe embodied semantics as a research program that conceives the foundations of meaning in terms of embodied simulation. Afterwards, I draw attention to three points (the analysis of FOR, verbs of positive and negative recall, and causative verbs) where Duffley’s semantics could find support in such a foundational theory. Finally, I suggest that two pressing challenges currently on the agenda of embodied semantics (abstract language and sentence-level simulations) could be met by Duffley’s theory.