Cover not available

Review published In: Metaphor Variation in Englishes around the World
Edited by Marcus Callies and Alexander Onysko
[Cognitive Linguistic Studies 4:1] 2017
► pp. 164–169

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required
Book review

R. C. Berwick and N. Chomsky: Why Only Us: Language and Evolution

Reviewed by
 | Stockholm University, Sweden
 | Stockholm University, Sweden
Published online: 16 October 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cogls.4.1.09tir
Article outline
  • Final thoughts
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (28)
References
Binder, J., & Desai, R. (2011). The neurobiology of semantic memory. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 15(11), 527–536. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brandon, R., & Hornstein, N. (1986). From icons to symbols: Some speculations on the origins of language. Biology and Philosophy, 11, 169–189. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bunge, M. (2014). The mind–body problem: A psychobiological approach. London: Pergamon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cardona, J., et al. (2014). How embodied is action language? Neurological evidence from motor diseases. Cognition, 131(2), 311–322. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cevasco, J., & Marmolejo-Ramos, F. (2013). The importance of studying the role of Prosody in the comprehension of spontaneous spoken discourse. Revista Latinoamericana de Psicología, 45 (1), 21–33.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chatterjee, A. (2010). Disembodying cognition. Language and Cognition, 2(1), 79–116. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1994). Language and thought. Washington, D.C.: Moyer Bell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, A. (1998). Embodiment and the philosophy of mind. Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 431, 35–51. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Dahl, C., Rasch, M., Tomonaga, M., & Adachi, I. (2013). The face inversion effect in non-human primates revisited: An investigation in chimpanzees (Pan Troglodytes). Scientific Reports, 31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Evans, N., & Levinson, S. (2009). The myth of language universals: Language diversity and its importance for cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 32(05), 429–448. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fernandino, L., et al. (2016). Concept representation reflects multimodal abstraction: A framework for embodied semantics. Cerebral Cortex, 26 (5), 2018–2034. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fitch, W. & Hauser, M. (2004). Computational constraints on syntactic processing in a nonhuman primate. Science, 303(5656), 377–380. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gentner, T., Fenn, K., Margoliash, D., & Nusbaum, H. (2006). Recursive syntactic pattern learning by Songbirds. Nature, 440(7088), 1204–1207. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. (2015). Few believe the world is flat: How embodiment is changing the scientific understanding of cognition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(2), 165–171. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena, 42(1–3), 335–346. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). The metaphorical structure of the human conceptual system. Cognitive Science, 4(2), 195–208. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lenneberg, E. (1964). A biological perspective of language. In E. Lenneberg (Ed.), New Directions in the Study of Language (pp. 65–88). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1962). The relationship of language to the formation of concepts. Synthese, 14(2), 103–109. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Leshinskaya, A., & Caramazza, A. (2016). For a cognitive neuroscience of concepts: moving beyond the grounding issue. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1–11. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mahon, B. (2015). The burden of embodied cognition. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 69(2), 172–178. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Merritt, D., Casasanto, D., & Brannon, E. (2010). Do monkeys think in metaphors? Representations of space and time in monkeys and humans. Cognition, 117(2), 191–202. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pinker, S. (1995). The language instinct: The new science of language and mind. London. Penguin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poyatos, F. (1984). The multichannel reality of discourse: Language-paralanguage-kinesics and the totality of communicative systems. Language Sciences, 6(2), 307–337. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pulvermüller, F. (2013). How neurons make meaning: Brain mechanisms for embodied and abstract-symbolic semantics. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(9), 458–470. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smith, L., & Colunga, E. (2012). Developing categories and concepts. In M. Spivey, K. McRae, & M. Joanisse (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 283–308). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Toivonen, I., Csúri, P., & van der Zee, E. (Eds.) (2016). Structures in the mind. Essays on language, music, and cognition in honor of Ray Jackendoff. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vannasing, P., et al. (2016). Distinct hemispheric specializations for native and non-native languages in one-day-old newborns identified by fNIRS. Neuropsychologia, 841, 63–69. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue