PL:

JĘZYK JAKO WARUNEK KONIECZNY
ZŁOŻONEJ TREŚCI MENTALNEJ: PRZEGLĄD BADAŃ NAD MYŚLENIEM PRZESTRZENNYM I MATEMATYCZNYM

  
Źódło/source:

Roczniki Filozoficzne, 66 (2018), nr 3

  
Strony/pages: 33-56  

 

http://dx.doi.org/10.18290/rf.2018.66.3-2

 

Streszczenie

W niniejszym artykule dokonujemy przeglądu badań z zakresu psychologii poznawczej, które skupiają się na hipotezie języka jako integratora treści zaczerpniętych z oddzielnych modułów po­znawczych. W pierwszej kolejności przedstawiamy teoretyczną stronę badań, a następnie prze­chodzimy do prezentacji dwóch obszarów badan empirycznych eksplorujących hipotezę języka jako integratora treści. Punktem wyjścia tych badań jest fakt, że w obydwu przypadkach mamy do czynienia z dwoma rodzajami informacji, przetwarzanych przez dwa oddzielne moduły. Dla myślenia przestrzennego są to informacja geometryczna na temat lokacji przedmiotu w prze­strzeni oraz informacja na temat właściwości inherentnych przedmiotowi, takich jak kolor czy wielkość. W przypadku matematycznego myślenia, dwa moduły przetwarzają kolejno informację na temat absolutnych ale małych ilości oraz przybliżonych wielkości. Celem badań w tych dwóch obszarach jest wykazanie, że język jest koniecznym warunkiem ku temu, aby informacja z oby­dwu modułów została zintegrowana. W końcowej części artykułu oferujemy kilka komentarzy na temat teoretycznej strony przedstawionych badań.

 

 

Summary

In this article we review the discussion over the thesis that language serves as an integrator of contents coming from different cognitive modules. After presenting the theoretical considera­tions, we examine two strands of empirical research that tested the hypothesis—spatial cognition and mathematical cognition. The idea shared by both of them is that each is composed of two separate modules processing information of a specific kind. For spatial thinking these are geo­metric information about the location of the object and the information about the object’s pro­perties such as color or size. For mathematical thinking, they are the absolute representation of small numbers and the approximate representation of numerosities. Language is said to integrate the two kinds of information within each of these domains, which the reviewed data demon­strates. In the final part of the paper, we offer some comments on the theoretical side of the discussion.

 

  

Słowa kluczowe: myślenie matematyczne; modularność; myślenie przestrzenne; język.

Key words: mathematical thinking; modularity; spatial thinking; language.

 

 

Bibliografia/References:

 

  1. Anderson, Ursula, & Sara Cordes. 2013. “1 < 2 and 2 < 3: non-linguistic appreciations of nume­rical order.” Frontiers in Psychology vol. 4, 5. DOI:  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013. 00005.

  2. Baddeley, Alan D. 1986. Working memory. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  3. Barrow, John D. 1992. Pi in the sky: Counting, thinking, and being. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

  4. Bermudez, José Luis. 2002. “Domain-generality and the relative pronoun.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences vol. 25, issue 6: 676–77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X02240121.

  5. Bermúdez, José Luis. 2003. Thinking without words. (Philosophy of mind series). New York, Ox­ford: Oxford University Press.

  6. Bialystok, Ellen. 1999. “Cognitive Complexity and Attentional Control in the Bilingual Mind.” Child Development vol. 70, No. 3: 636–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00046.

  7. Brannon, Elizabeth M. 2002. “The development of ordinal numerical knowledge in infancy.” Cognition vol. 83, issue 3: 223–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00005-7.

  8. Carey, Susan. 2009. The Origin of Concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Carey, Susan, & Elizabeth S. Spelke. 1994. “Domain-specific knowledge and conceptual change.” In Lawrence A. Hirschfeld & Susan A. Gelman (eds.).

  9. Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity in Cognition and Culture, 169–200. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  10. Carruthers, Peter. 1996. Language, thought and consciousness: An essay in philosophical psy­chology. Cambridge, England, New York, N.Y: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&scope=site&db=nlebk&db= nlabk &AN=54512

  11. Carruthers, Peter. 2002. “The cognitive functions of language.” Behavioral and Brain Scie­nces, vol. 25, issue 6: 657–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X02000122.

  12. Carruthers, Peter. 2003a. “Moderately massive modularity.” In Royal Institute of Philosophy supplement, 1358-2461. Vol. 53: Minds and persons, edited by Anthony O’Hear, 67–90. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  13. Carruthers, Peter. 2003b. “On Fodor’s Problem.” Mind and Language vol. 18, No. 5: 502–23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0017.00240.

  14. Carruthers, Peter. 2012. “Language in cognition.” In Eric Margolis, Richard Samuels, & Stephen P. Stich (eds.). Oxford handbooks online. The Oxford handbook of philosophy of cognitive science, 382–401. New York: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/ 10.1093/ oxfordhb/9780195309799.013.0016.

  15. Cheng, Ken. 1986. “A purely geometric module in the rat’s spatial representation.” Cognition vol. 23, issue 2: 149–78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(86)90041-7.

  16. Cheng, Ken, Janellen Huttenlocher, & Nora S. Newcombe. 2013. “25 years of research on the use of geometry in spatial reorientation: a current theoretical perspective.” Psychonomic Bulletin & Review vol. 20, issue 6: 1033–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0416-1,

  17. Chomsky, Noam. 1972/2006. Language and mind. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  18. Cipolotti, Lisa, & N.J. van Harskamp. 2001. “Disturbances of number processing and calcu­la­tion.” In Handbook of neuropsychology. Vol. 3. Language and aphasia, edited by R[ita] S[loan] Berndt. 2nd ed., 305–44. Amsterdam, London: Elsevier.

  19. Cordes, Sara, & Elizabeth M. Brannon. 2009. “The relative salience of discrete and continuous quantity in young infants.” Developmental Science vol. 12, No. 3: 453–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00781.x.

  20. Davidson, Donald. 1984/2001. “Thought and Talk.” In Donald Davidson. Philosophical essays. Vol. 2. Inquiries into truth and interpretation. 2nd ed., 155–70. Oxford: Clarendon Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/0199246297.003.0011.

  21. Dehaene, Stanislas. 1999. The number sense: How the mind creates mathematics (Oxford Univ. Press pbk. ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Dehaene, S[tanislas], E[lizabeth] Spelke, P. Pinel, R. Stanescu, & Sanna Tsivkin. 1999). “Sour­ces of mathema­ti­cal thinking: behavioral and brain-imaging evidence.” Science vol. 284 (5416): 970–74.

  22. Dummet, Michael. 1994. Origins of Analytic Philosophy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

  23. Feigenson, Lisa, & Susan Carey. (2005). “On the limits of infants’ quantification of small ob­ject arrays.” Cognition vol. 97, issue 3: 295–313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cognition.2004.09.010.

  24. Feigenson, Lisa, Stanislas Dehaene, & Elizabet S. Spelke. 2004. “Core systems of number.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences vol. 8, issue 7: 307–14. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics. 2004.05.002.

  25. Gelman, Rochel, & Brian Butterworth. 2005. “Number and language: how are they related?” Trends in Cognitive Sciences vol. 9, issue 1: 6–10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics. 2004.11.004.

  26. Gentner, Dedre, & Susan Goldin-Meadow (eds.). 2003. A Bradford book. Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought. Cambridge, Mass., London: MIT Press.

  27. Gleitman, Lila R., & Anna Papafragou. 2005. “New perspectives on language and thought.” In Keith J. Holy­oak & Robert G. Morrison (eds.). The Cambridge handbook of thinking and reasoning. Cambridge 543–568. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press.

  28. Gordon, Peter. 2004. Numerical cognition without words: evidence from Amazonia. Science vol. 306 (5695), 496–99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1094492.

    Griffin, Donald R. 1992. Animal minds. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  29. Grosjean, François. 2001. Life with two languages: An introduction to bilingualism. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

  30. Gumperz, John J., & Stephen C. Levinson. 1996. Rethinking linguistic relativity. Studies n the social and cultural foundations of language. Vol. 17. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

  31. Hermer, Linda, & Elizabeth S. Spelke. 1996. “Modularity and development: the case of spatial reorientation.” Cognition vol. 61, issue 3: 195–232.

  32. Hermer-Vazquez, Linda, Elizabeth S. Spelke, & Alla S. Katsnelson. 1999. “Sources of flexi­bility in human cognition: dual-task studies of space and language.” Cognitive Psycho­logy vol. 39, issue 1: 3–36. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1998.0713.

  33. Hespos, Susan J., & Elizabeth S. Spelke. 2004. “Conceptual precursors to language.” Nature vol. 430 (6998): 453–456. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature02634.

  34. Izard, Véronique, Coralie Sann, Elizabeth S. Spelke, & Arlette Streri. 2009. “Newborn infants perceive abstract numbers.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America vol. 106 (25): 10382–85. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas. 0812142106

  35. Johnson-Laird, P[hilip] N. 1980. “Mental Models in Cognitive Science.” Cognitive Science vol. 4, issue 1: 71–115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0401_4.

  36. Kurcz, Ida. 1976. Psycholingwistyka. Przegląd problemów badawczych. Warszawa: Państwowe. Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

  37. Laurence, Stephen, & Eric Margolis. 2005. “Number and Natural Language.” In Peter Car­ruthers, Stephen Laurence, & Stephen Stich (eds.). Evolution and Cognition. The innate mind. Vol. 1. Structure and Contents, 216–35. New York, Oxford: Oxford Uni­versity Press.

  38. Laurence, Stephen, & Eric Margolis. 2008. “Linguistic determinism and the innate basis of number.” In Peter Carruthers, Stephen Laurence, & Stephen Stich (eds.). Evolution and Cognition. The innate mind. Vol. 3. Foundations and the Future, 139–61. New York, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  39. Le Corre, Mathieu, & Susan Carey. 2007. “One, two, three, four, nothing more: an investiga­tion of the conceptual sources of the verbal counting principles.” Cognition vol. 105, issue 2: 395–438. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.005.

  40. Lee, Sang Ah. 2017. “The boundary-based view of spatial cognition: a synthesis.” Current Opi­nion in Behavioral Sciences vol. 16: 58–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha. 2017.03.006

  41. Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1976. Philosophical papers and letters. 2nded., 2. print. (Synthese historical library vol 2). Dordrecht, Holland, Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

  42. Levelt, Willem J. M. 1989. Speaking: From intention to articulation. A Bradford book. Cam­bridge, Mass., London: MIT Press.

  43. Li, Peggy, & Lila Gleitman. (2002). “Turning the tables: language and spatial reasoning.” Cognition vol. 83, issue 3: 265–294. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(02)00009-4.

  44. Lipton, Jennifer S., & Elizabeth S. Spelke. 2005. “Preschool children’s mapping of number words to nonsymbolic numerosities.” Child Development vol. 76, No. 5: 978–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00891.x.

  45. Marzecová, Anna, Marcin Bukowski, Ángel Correa, Marianna Boros, Juan Lupiáñez, & Zo­fia Wodniecka. 2013. “Tracing the bilingual advantage in cognitive control: The role of flexibility in temporal preparation and category switching.” Journal of Cognitive Psy­chology vol. 25, issue 5: 586–604. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2013. 809348.

  46. McCrink, Koleen, & Karen Wynn. 2004. “Large-number addition and subtraction by 9-month-old infants.” Psychological Science vol. 15, issue 11: 776–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ j.0956-7976. 2004.00755.x

  47. Nęcka, Edward, Jarosław Orzechowski, & Błażej Szymura. 2006. Psychologia poznawcza. War­szawa: Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN, Academica Wydawnictwo SWPS.

  48. Nieder, Andreas, & Stanislas Dehaene. 2009. “Representation of number in the brain.” Annual Review of Neuroscience vol. 32: 185–208. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro. 051508.135550.

  49. Pica, Pierre, Cathy Lemer, Véronique Izard, & Stanislas Dehaene. 2004. “Exact and appro­ximate arithmetic in an Amazonian indigene group.” Science vol. 306 (5695): 499–503. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1102085.

  50. Picozzi, Marta, Maria Dolores de Hevia, Luisa Girelli, & Viola Macchi Cassia. 2010. “Seven-month-olds detect ordinal numerical relationships within temporal sequences.” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology vol. 107, issue 3: 359–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.jecp.2010.05.005.

  51. Rugani, Rosa, Laura Fontanari, Eleonora Simoni,  Lucia Regolin, & Giorgio Vallortigara. 2009. “Arithmetic in newborn chicks.” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences vol. 276 (1666): 2451–2460. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2009.0044.

  52. Sarnecka, Barbara W., Valentina G. Kamenskaya,  Yuko Yamana,  Tamiko Ogura & Yulia B. Yu­do­vina. 2007. “From grammatical number to exact numbers: early meanings of ‘one’, ‘two’, and ‘three’ in English, Russian, and Japanese.” Cognitive Psychology vpl. 55, issue 2: 136–68. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2006.09.001.

  53. Smith, Edward E. 1999. “Working Memory.” In Robert A. Wilson & Frank Keil (eds.). The MIT encyclopedia of the cognitive sciences, 888–889. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

  54. Spelke, Elizabeth S. 2003. “What makes us Smart: Core knowledge and natural language.” In Dedre Getner & Susan Goldin-Meadow (eds.). A Bradford book. Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought, 277–311. Cambridge, Mass., London: MIT Press.

  55. Spelke, Elizabeth S., & Sang Ah Lee. 2012. “Core systems of geometry in animal minds.” Philo­sophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, vol. 367 (1603): 2784–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0210.

  56. Spelke, Elizabeth S., & Sanna Tsivkin. 2001. “Language and number: a bilingual training study.” Cognition vol. 78, issue 1: 45–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(00)00108-6.

  57. Trick, Lana M., & Zenon W. Pylyshyn. 1994. “Why are small and large numbers enumerated differently? A limited-capacity preattentive stage in vision.” Psychological Review, vol. 101, issue 1: 80–102. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.101.1.80.

  58. Van Marle, Kristy, & Karen Wynn. 2011. “Tracking and quantifying objects and non-cohesive substances.” Developmental Science vol. 14, issue 3: 502–15. DOI: https://doi.org/10. 1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00998.x.

  59. Wodniecka, Zofia, Karolina Mieszkowska, Joanna Durlik, & Ewa Haman. (2018). “Kiedy 1 + 1 ≠ 2, czyli jak dwujęzyczni przyswajają i przetwarzają język(i): When 1 + 1 ≠ 2: how bilinguals acquire and process language(s).” In Ewa Czaplewska (ed.). Logopedia między­kulturowa, 92–131. Gdańsk: Harmonia Universalis.

  60. Wynn, Karen. 1992a. “Addition and subtraction by human infants.” Nature vol. 358 (6389), 749–750. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/358749a0.

  61. Wynn, Karen. 1992b. “Children’s acquisition of the number words and the counting system.” Cognitive Psychology vol. 24, issue 2: 220–51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285 (92)90008-P.

  62. Xu, Fei. 2003. “Numerosity discrimination in infants: Evidence for two systems of representa­tions.” Cognition vol. 89, issue 1: B15-B25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277 (03)00050-7.

  63. Xu, Fei., & Susan Carey. 1996. “Infants’ metaphysics: the case of numerical identity.” Cognitive Psychology vol. 30, issue 2: 111–53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1006/cogp.1996.0005.

  64. Xu, Fei., & Elizabeth S. Spelke. 2000. “Large number discrimination in 6-month-old infants.” Cognition vol. 74, issue: 1, B1-B11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(99)00066-9.

Informacja o autorach/Information about Authors:

Dr hab. Arkadiusz Gut, Prof. at KUL—Department of Theory of Knowledge at the Faculty of Philosophy of the John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin; address for correspondence: Al. Racławickie 14, 20-950 Lublin; e-mail: kupisa@kul.lublin.pl

Robert Mirski, MA—PhD student at the Department of Theory of Knowledge at the Faculty of Philosophy of the John Paul II Catholic University of Lu­blin; address for correspondence: Al. Racławickie 14, 20-950 Lublin; e-mail: robertmirski@kul.lublin.pl

 

 

Cytowanie/Citation information:

Gut, Arkadiusz. Mirski, Robert. 2018. Language as a Necessary Condition for Complex Mental Content: A Review of the Discussion on Spatial and Mathematical Thinking . "Roczniki Filozoficzne" 66, 3: 33-56, DOI: 10.18290/rf.2018.66.3-2.

 

 

 

Autor: Anna Karczewska
Ostatnia aktualizacja: 10.10.2018, godz. 09:22 - Anna Karczewska