Cognitive Linguistics’ seven deadly sins

Abstract

Cognitive Linguistics is an approach to language study based on three central premises: that the function of language is to convey meaning, that linguistic description must rely on constructs that are psychologically real, and that grammar emerges from usage. Over the last 40 years, this approach to studying language has made enormous strides in virtually every aspect of linguistic inquiry, achieving major insights as well as bringing about a conceptual unification of the language sciences. However, it has also faced problems, which, I argue, must be addressed if the approach is to continue to flourish. Some of these are shared with generative linguistics, while some are peculiar to the cognitive approach. The former include excessive reliance on introspective evidence; paying only lip service to the Cognitive Commitment; too much focus on hypothesis formulation (and not enough on hypothesis testing); ignoring individual differences; and neglecting the social aspects of language. The latter include assuming that we can deduce mental representations from patterns of use and equating distribution with meaning. I conclude by sketching out how these pitfalls could be avoided.

Differential effects of internal and external factors in early bilingual vocabulary learning: The case of Singapore

“…Findings for the second question demonstrated the modulation of general learning context on the relationship between external and internal factors in bilingual children's vocabulary learning. While some researchers within the tradition of usage-based theory give primary recognition to the role of input properties such as frequency information (e.g., Ellis, 2002), we might consider adopting a more eclectic view about the weight of internal and external factors on language acquisition, answering the call of Dąbrowska (e.g., 2012, 2016), who addresses the importance of paying more attention to examining individual differences in learners’ internal and external resources while examining learning outcomes (see Verhagen & Mos, 2016). Cognitive processes, such as categorization, chunking, rich memory, analogy, and cross-modal association, have been found to influence language development (Bybee, 2010), yet it remains unclear under which circumstances these factors better demonstrate their prominence.…”

“…One issue that deserves our attention is that most of the existing studies on internal/external factors and child bilingual vocabulary development address the contribution of individual factors to vocabulary acquisition, and very few of them took internal versus external factors as two contrastive sets of predictors nor explored their interdependence on child vocabulary learning. The exploration of such interdependence is both meaningful and necessary as it would reveal the mechanism of cognition and environment in shaping language, providing specific predictions and illustrations under the realm of usage-based theory and addressing the individual differences in language learning (Dąbrowska, 2012, 2016).…”

“…Both internal and external factors have been found to significantly predict children's bilingual development (e.g., Paradis, 2011; Unsworth, 2016); however, the relationship between internal and external factors is not fully understood, and few papers have touched upon the issue explicitly (but see Paradis, 2011; Sunderman & Kroll, 2009). Our understanding of the interdependence between internal and external factors in language acquisition would benefit from further exploration, as it will provide us “a unique window onto the cognitive and experiential underpinnings of language” (Dabrowska, 2016, p. 485). It is important to develop a “consistent research agenda that addresses the interaction of individual cognitive abilities and the differential aspects of learning contexts” (Collentine & Freed, 2004, p. 165) to optimize learning processes and outcomes at an individual level.…”

What Is Cognitive In Discourse?

“…It is analyzed as a communicative event, manifestation of text in a particular extra-linguistic environment, a situational context of language use. According to Fairclough (1992), "any discursive 'event' (i.e. any instance of discourse) is seen as being simultaneously a piece of text, an instance of discursive practice, and an instance of social practice" (p. 4).…”

Sensory Linguistics

“…In contrast to conceptual metaphor theory, for which there is abundant nonlinguistic evidence (see, e.g., Boroditsky & Ramscar, 2002;Casasanto & Boroditsky, 2008;Landau et al, 2010), a lot of research on synesthetic metaphors has not addressed the circularity concerns that haunted early work on conceptual metaphors (cf. Gibbs, 2007;Murphy, 1996Murphy, , 1997 and continues to haunt cognitive linguistics to this day (Dąbrowska, 2016a).…”