Motor cognition–motor semantics: Action perception theory of cognition and communication

Pulvermüller, Friedemann; Moseley, Rachel; Egorova, Natalia; Shebani, Zubaida; Boulenger, Véronique

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.12.002

Cited by 77 publications

(63 citation statements)

References 112 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the suggestion that these cells behave in an atypical manner in ASC appears consistent with the literature. In Sections 4 and 5, we shall go on to suggest more specific mechanisms interlinking perception and motor information, which may be necessary for integrating action with perception knowledge and, likewise, for 'building' mirror neurons and the sensorimotor circuits they are likely embedded in (Pulvermü ller, Moseley, Egorova, Shebani, & Boulenger, 2014). As relates to autism, we suggest it preferable to speak about deficits in action-perception mapping, rather than solely ascribing these mapping problems to one single type of neuron.…”

Section: The Neuroanatomical Correlates Of Movement Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

What can autism teach us about the role of sensorimotor systems in higher cognition? New clues from studies on language, action semantics, and abstract emotional concept processing

Moseley

Pulvermüller

2018

Cortex

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Neuroanatomical Correlates Of Movement Impairmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

What can autism teach us about the role of sensorimotor systems in higher cognition? New clues from studies on language, action semantics, and abstract emotional concept processing

Moseley

Pulvermüller

2018

Cortex

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…An influential suggestion holds that communicators are mutually primed by each other's behaviors, with associative mechanisms automatically coordinating the production of communicative signals and the comprehension of their meanings (4)(5)(6)(7)(8). In this framework, mutual understanding arises by virtue of individual experiences with a signal's properties, as when linguistic features of a word are biased by recent experience of those features (9,10).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cerebral coherence between communicators marks the emergence of meaning

Stolk

Noordzij

Verhagen

et al. 2014

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

How can we understand each other during communicative interactions? An influential suggestion holds that communicators are primed by each other's behaviors, with associative mechanisms automatically coordinating the production of communicative signals and the comprehension of their meanings. An alternative suggestion posits that mutual understanding requires shared conceptualizations of a signal's use, i.e., "conceptual pacts" that are abstracted away from specific experiences. Both accounts predict coherent neural dynamics across communicators, aligned either to the occurrence of a signal or to the dynamics of conceptual pacts. Using coherence spectral-density analysis of cerebral activity simultaneously measured in pairs of communicators, this study shows that establishing mutual understanding of novel signals synchronizes cerebral dynamics across communicators' right temporal lobes. This interpersonal cerebral coherence occurred only within pairs with a shared communicative history, and at temporal scales independent from signals' occurrences. These findings favor the notion that meaning emerges from shared conceptualizations of a signal's use.social interaction | theory of mind | experimental semiotics | dual functional magnetic resonance imaging | conceptual knowledge H uman sociality is built on the capacity for mutual understanding, but its principles and mechanisms remain poorly understood (1). Given the pervasive ambiguity of communicative signals (2), how can we expect to understand each other? For instance, I might think of tacitly asking my friend Tom to enter a pub by virtue of a pointing gesture toward a nearby bike, believing that both of us recognized the bike of his girlfriend Emma, only to realize how my gesture would be interpreted differently as Tom tells me about his recent split from Emma (2, 3).An influential suggestion holds that communicators are mutually primed by each other's behaviors, with associative mechanisms automatically coordinating the production of communicative signals and the comprehension of their meanings (4-8). In this framework, mutual understanding arises by virtue of individual experiences with a signal's properties, as when linguistic features of a word are biased by recent experience of those features (9, 10). Alternatively, mutual understanding might require shared conceptualizations of a signal's use, abstracted away from specific experiences during a communicative interaction (11)(12)(13)(14). In this framework, mutual understanding arises from what communicators mutually know, "conceptual pacts" that are negotiated by communicators over the course of their interactions (11). Although both possibilities emphasize that communicative signals are context dependent (15), they put different emphasis on the relevance of the communicative signal. Both possibilities predict that mutual understanding is neurally implemented through temporally coherent and spatially overlapping activity across communicators (7,(16)(17)(18), but with different cerebral dynamics. If meaning ...

show abstract

“…D ' Ausillio et al (2009) suggest that a listener implements the motor programs required to produce the speech sounds that they hear. The same effect probably simulates the sounds of written language while reading (Pulvermüller et al, 2014).…”

Section: Developments In the Understanding Of Neurophysiological Procmentioning

confidence: 73%

What’s the point? The role of punctuation in realising information structure in written English

Moore

2016

Functional Linguist.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main claim of this paper is that punctuation marks, in conjunction with spaces between words, function to provide visual rather than auditory cues for information structure in written English. INFORMATION STRUCTURE is defined here as dividing the flow of discourse into units, each containing a newsworthy element, and in contrast to the Systemic Functional systems of REFERENCE and THEME. A model of how these three systems interact is further supported by evidence from the historical development of reading and modern studies of the process of fluent silent reading. Reading silently does not require physical articulation and so written text is constrained by the saccading eye rather than the need to draw breath. The silent reader uses punctuation marks as a guide in a saccade to focus on the end of a clause which provides a non-arbitrary location for New information.Keywords: Punctuation, Information structure, Theme, Reference, Systemic Functional Linguistics, Embodiment Introduction Punctuation has vexed many writers past and present (e.g. Lowth, 1762;Truss, 2003). Surveys of the development of punctuation (e.g. Baron, 2001;Bruthiaux, 1993) reveal the longstanding divide between those that prescribe punctuation by prosodic principle and those that promote punctuation as the route to clarifying grammatical structure. This paper attempts to find a path through this apparent impasse by proposing not only that prosody and punctuation both realise the same function -that of information structure -but that they do so in a natural relationship to the spoken and written modes of language, respectively.The following section appraises a range of opinions on the topic of punctuation to reveal the contrast between punctuation by prosody and punctuation by grammar in written English. The next section examines the function and realisation of INFORMATION STRUCTURE within Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL), contrasting it with the systems of REFERENCE and THEME, and culminating in a model of how the three systems contribute to written text. The paper then attempts to provide explanations for the difference in the realisation of INFORMATION STRUCTURE between spoken and written English, investigating firstly important steps in the historical development of written English, and then examining current understanding of the process of silent reading. The discussion aims to reveal how texts

show abstract

Motor cognition–motor semantics: Action perception theory of cognition and communication

Cited by 77 publications

References 112 publications

What can autism teach us about the role of sensorimotor systems in higher cognition? New clues from studies on language, action semantics, and abstract emotional concept processing

What can autism teach us about the role of sensorimotor systems in higher cognition? New clues from studies on language, action semantics, and abstract emotional concept processing

Cerebral coherence between communicators marks the emergence of meaning

What’s the point? The role of punctuation in realising information structure in written English

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About