Spatial Terms

2019 ◽  
pp. 113-123
Author(s):  
Myrto Grigoroglou ◽  
Anna Papafragou
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Cognition ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Spatial Language ◽  
Frames Of Reference ◽  
Dynamic Displacement ◽  
Spatial Coordinate ◽  
Semantic Domain ◽  
Space Motion ◽  
Spatial Configurations ◽  
Spatial Terms

Across the world’s languages, spatial terms are organized around a set of basic, non-linguistic spatial notions. Nevertheless, there is also considerable cross-linguistic variation in terms of both the kinds of linguistic devices used to express spatial relations and the way these devices carve up the semantic domain of space. This chapter reviews literature on spatial terms cross-linguistically, focusing on three main sub-divisions of the spatial domain: location (i.e. the static position of an object in space); motion (i.e. the dynamic displacement of an object in space); and Frames of Reference (FoR; i.e. abstract spatial-coordinate axes imposed on spatial configurations). The intricate relation between spatial language and non-linguistic spatial cognition is discussed throughout the chapter.

THE HUMAN SEMANTIC POTENTIAL: SPATIAL LANGUAGE AND CONSTRAINED CONNECTIONISM.Terry Regier. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996. Pp. xvi + 220. $37.50 paper.

1997 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 517-518
Author(s):  
Barbara Abbott
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Exclusion ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Spatial Language ◽  
Connectionist Model ◽  
Structural Constraints ◽  
System Function ◽  
Negative Evidence ◽  
Connectionist Network ◽  
Closed Class ◽  
Spatial Terms

The semantic potential referred to in the title of this book is the ability of humans to learn the (closed-class) terms for basic spatial relations, such as (for English) onto, above, and through. Regier presents a modified connectionist model of this ability designed to address three questions: (a) What kind of system can learn spatial terms? (b) How can this system function without negative evidence? and (c) What are the universal constraints on learnable spatial terms? The answers suggested to these questions are: (a) a modified connectionist network—one which incorporates structural constraints motivated by human physiology; (b) the assumption of mutual exclusion, that is, that different terms have mutually exclusive denotations; and (c) the structural constraints that are incorporated into the network.

Elaborating time in space: the structure and function of space–motion metaphors of time

2016 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 191-253 ◽  
Author(s):  
KEVIN EZRA MOORE
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Structure And Function ◽  
Frame Of Reference ◽  
Frames Of Reference ◽  
Conceptual Blending ◽  
External Reality ◽  
Generic Structure ◽  
Temporal Concepts ◽  
Space Motion ◽  
And Function

abstractThis paper studies the principles according to which spatial and motion concepts metaphorically structure temporal concepts in some languages. There are two types of space–motion metaphor of time, distinguished by whether or not the metaphor is structured by a person’s perspective. “Christmas is approaching” and “We are approaching Christmas” are perspectival. “New Year’s follows Christmas” is not. This contrast in deixis and frame of reference is linguistically relevant whether the contrast has to do with imagination or external reality. Study of experiential motivations and analysis into primary metaphors helps reveal the particular ways spatial and motion concepts function in each type of metaphor. One focus is accounting for the contrasting temporal meanings that words for in-front and behind can have. For example, “Ahead of us” is later than Now, while “ahead of Christmas” is earlier than Christmas. We find that the temporal ‘directions’ expressed in the contrasting frames of reference are not opposites. Rather, they are motivated by different kinds of temporal experience. This project investigates the fundamental spatial relations that structure temporal concepts; for example co-location vs. separation. But since motion involves time, purely spatial structure is limited. Conceptual blending analysis reveals that the source and target frames of the perspectival metaphors share an aspectual – i.e., temporal – generic structure. Thus a dichotomy between ‘space’ and ‘time’ is of limited utility in describing space–motion metaphors of time. Instead, the analysis has to deal with the specific spatial and temporal concepts that function in each metaphor.

scholarly journals Variation in spatial concepts: Different frames of reference on different axes

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Pitt ◽  
Alexandra Carstensen ◽  
Edward Gibson ◽  
Steven T. Piantadosi
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Spatial Language ◽  
Frames Of Reference ◽  
Spatial Thinking ◽  
Initial Test ◽  
Spatial Concepts ◽  
Spatial Frames Of Reference ◽  
Language And Cognition ◽  
Lateral Axis ◽  
The Way

Spatial language and cognition vary across contexts. In some groups, people tend to use egocentric space (e.g. left, right) to encode the locations of objects, while in other groups, people use allocentric space (e.g. upriver, downriver) to describe the same spatial scene. These different spatial Frames of Reference (FoRs) characterize both the way people talk about spatial relations and the way they think about them, even when they are not using language. These patterns of spatial language and spatial thinking tend to covary, but the root causes of this variation are unclear. Here we propose that this variation in FoR use reflects variation in the spatial discriminability of the relevant spatial continua. In an initial test of this proposal, we compared FoR use across spatial axes that are known to differ in discriminability. In two non-verbal tests, a group of indigenous Bolivians used different FoRs on different spatial axes; on the lateral axis, where egocentric (left-right) discrimination is difficult, their behavior was predominantly allocentric; on the sagittal axis, where egocentric (front-back) discrimination is relatively easy, their behavior was predominantly egocentric. These findings support the spatial discriminability hypothesis, which may explain variation in spatial concepts not only across axes, but also across groups, between individuals, and over development.

Frames of reference in discourse: Spatial descriptions in Bashkir (Turkic)

2018 ◽  
Vol 29 (3) ◽  
pp. 495-544
Author(s):  
Tatiana Nikitina
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Cognition ◽  
Reference Frame ◽  
Frames Of Reference ◽  
Linguistic Relativity ◽  
Matching Task ◽  
Spatial Reference ◽  
Lexical Choice ◽  
Linguistic Strategies ◽  
Coding Strategies ◽  
Growing Body

AbstractIn spite of the growing body of research on frames of spatial reference, a number of important questions remain unanswered. This study explores reference frame use in Bashkir, based on a linguistic matching task and a nonverbal task. In the linguistic task, speakers relied freely on intrinsic and relative frames. In intrinsic descriptions, two different kinds of mapping were attested: a mapping based on the Ground’s function, and a mapping based on the Ground’s shape. Several factors were identified that affect the choice of linguistic description, including lexical choice, the chair’s orientation with respect to the viewer, and the speaker’s age. Interference from Russian was not a significant factor. The repair strategies speakers used when encountering misunderstanding suggest that they were not aware of the source of their difficulties. A number of previous studies reported, for different languages, a correlation between reference frame use in linguistic and nonlinguistic tasks, supporting the linguistic relativity hypothesis. The data from Bashkir shows no such correlation: nonverbal coding strategies did not correspond to the same individual’s linguistic strategies, but correlated with the use of Russian in linguistic descriptions. I interpret this finding tentatively as pointing toward a mediated relationship between spatial cognition and language.

scholarly journals Examining Infant Relation Categorization Through Deep Neural Networks

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Guy Davidson ◽  
Brenden M. Lake
Keyword(s):  
Neural Networks ◽  
Spatial Cognition ◽  
Deep Neural Networks ◽  
Relational Learning ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Computational Experiments ◽  
Visual Understanding

Categorizing spatial relations is central to the development of visual understanding and spatial cognition, with roots in the first few months of life. Quinn (2003) reviews two findings in infant relation categorization: categorizing one object as above/below another precedes categorizing an object as between other objects, and categorizing relations over specific objects predates abstract relations over varying objects. We model these phenomena with deep neural networks, including contemporary architectures specialized for relational learning and vision models pretrained on baby headcam footage (Sullivan et al., 2020). Across two computational experiments, we can account for most of the developmental findings, suggesting these models are useful for studying the computational mechanisms of infant categorization.

scholarly journals Bagaimana Mengembangkan Kemampuan Spasial dalam Pembelajaran Matematika di Sekolah?: Suatu Tinjauan Literatur

2020 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 60-72
Author(s):  
S Sudirman ◽  
Fiki Alghadari
Keyword(s):  
Video Games ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Everyday Life ◽  
Spatial Ability ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Spatial Visualization ◽  
Spatial Abilities ◽  
Spatial Language ◽  
Learning Mathematics ◽  
Folding Paper

Spatial ability is an important one of the abilities for completing many tasks in everyday life successfully. Spatial ability is considered a type of different ability to others. Therefore, there needs a study on how are the characteristics of spatial abilities and to develop in schools. This paper is to reveal the ways are developing spatial abilities in learning mathematics. Based on literature review from some research, at least that there are six ways to develop spatial abilities in learning mathematics, namely: (1) using spatial language in daily interactions; (2) teaching for sketching and drawing; (3) using a suitable game; (4) using a tangram; (5) using video games; and (6) origami and folding paper. Playing video games like Tetris are exercises for spatial relations, mental rotation, spatial orientation, and spatial visualization.

Spatial Dynamics: Some Conceptual and Mathematical Issues

1980 ◽  
Vol 12 (9) ◽  
pp. 1051-1071 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Liossatos
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Dynamics ◽  
Spatial Relations ◽  
Qualitative Change ◽  
Dissipative Structures ◽  
Marxian Theory ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Social Phenomena ◽  
Social Forms ◽  
Spatial Configurations ◽  
Basic Ideas

Spatial dynamics—the study of the spatiotemporal dimension of socioeconomic activities—is grounded on highly questionable premises. These are implicit or explicit philosophical theses regarding knowledge (empiricism) and society (methodological individualism). As a consequence of these premises—it is argued—the scientific knowledge of social phenomena becomes problematic if not impossible. It is further demonstrated that the dominant paradigm in the social sciences (based on empiricism and individualism) is not the only possible one. A fairly comprehensive overview of an alternative is presented, which draws upon recent advances in Marxian theory. In this perspective, the constitution and transformation of spatial configurations cannot be understood in terms of observable spatial relations; as social forms, spatial patterns must be explained in terms of the dynamics of the underlying social structure. Accordingly, ‘spatial dynamics’ must be reconstructed as the dynamics of spatial forms: the study of the formation and transformation of spatial configurations as expressions of the expanded reproduction of the capitalist mode of production in capitalist social formations. It is further argued—from the very nature of the capitalist process—that the transformation of spatial forms should be viewed as a process of evolution through instabilities and fluctuations. Accordingly, there is a sound theoretical motivation for experimenting with ‘dissipative structures’ and catastrophe theory. The basic ideas of nonequilibrium thermodynamics and dissipative structures are presented via two simple mathematical models. The latter do not intend to formalize Marx's or Schumpeter's theory. Their only function in the discourse of this paper is to illustrate how the ideas of structural determination, crises, and qualitative change can be captured in rigorous mathematical terms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document