Manipulating Objects and Telling Words: A Study on Concrete and Abstract Words Acquisition

Abstract

Four experiments (E1–E2–E3–E4) investigated whether different acquisition modalities lead to the emergence of differences typically found between concrete and abstract words, as argued by the words as tools (WAT) proposal. To mimic the acquisition of concrete and abstract concepts, participants either manipulated novel objects or observed groups of objects interacting in novel ways (Training 1). In TEST 1 participants decided whether two elements belonged to the same category. Later they read the category labels (Training 2); labels could be accompanied by an explanation of their meaning. Then participants observed previously seen exemplars and other elements, and were asked which of them could be named with a given label (TEST 2). Across the experiments, it was more difficult to form abstract than concrete categories (TEST 1); even when adding labels, abstract words remained more difficult than concrete words (TEST 2). TEST 3 differed across the experiments. In E1 participants performed a feature production task. Crucially, the associations produced with the novel words reflected the pattern evoked by existing concrete and abstract words, as the first evoked more perceptual properties. In E2–E3–E4, TEST 3 consisted of a color verification task with manual/verbal (keyboard–microphone) responses. Results showed the microphone use to have an advantage over keyboard use for abstract words, especially in the explanation condition. This supports WAT: due to their acquisition modality, concrete words evoke more manual information; abstract words elicit more verbal information. This advantage was not present when linguistic information contrasted with perceptual one. Implications for theories and computational models of language grounding are discussed.

Early lexico-semantic modulation of motor related areas during action and non-action verb processing

“…When a child obtains language, the meaning of an abstract word has to be explained linguistically. This would be a bodily experience as well which might lead to face-related motor activity during abstract word processing (Borghi, Flumini, Cimatti, Marocco, & Scorolli, 2011;Scorolli et al, 2012). This research group also reports arm-related sensorimotor activity during abstract word processing in a later postlexical stage (Scorolli et al, 2012).…”

Toward a brain-based componential semantic representation

“…Several authors have emphasized the role of affective and social experiences in abstract concept acquisition and embodiment (Borghi, Flumini, Cimatti, Marocco, & Scorolli, 2011;Kousta, Vigliocco, Vinson, Andrews, & Del Campo, 2011;Vigliocco, Meteyard, Andrews, & Kousta, 2009;Wiemer-Hastings & Xu, 2005;Zdrazilova & Pexman, 2013). Crutch et al (Crutch, Williams, Ridgway, & Borgenicht, 2012) obtained ratings for 200 abstract and 200 concrete nouns on the relatedness of each word to concepts of time, space, quantity, emotion, polarity (positive or negative), social interaction, morality, and thought, in addition to the more physical dimensions of sensation and action.…”

Getting the point: Tracing worked examples enhances learning

“…While most of the previous studies in grounding focused on representations of concrete words, objects and action, recent studies have begun to provide evidence to demonstrate the grounding of abstract concepts, for example, grounding time in the representation of space (Flusberg, Thibodeau, Sternberg, & Glick, 2010). Borghi, Flumini, Cimatti, Marocco, and Scorolli (2011) suggested that even though abstract concepts are not grounded on a single concrete object, they can be grounded on relationships between different objects. It should be noted that the grounded view of cognition particularly emphasizes that cognitive processes can be grounded in many ways such as simulations, situated action and bodily states, and the involvement of the body is not always necessary, which seems to differ from the general idea of "embodied" cognition (Barsalou, 2008(Barsalou, , 2010.…”