Article published In: Sensory Perceptions in Language and Cognition
Edited by Rosario Caballero and Carita Paradis
[Functions of Language 22:1] 2015
► pp. 44–68
Exploring the grammar of perception
A case study using data from Russian
Published online: 1 May 2015
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22.1.03div
https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22.1.03div
In this paper, I pursue the distributional hypothesis that the meaning of a word is derived from the linguistic contexts in which it occurs and apply it to verbs of perception. Differently from NLP implementations of the distributional hypothesis, I explicitly limit the range of variables to the grammatical domain and chart the way in which verbs of Vision, Hearing and Touch are used, morphologically and syntactically, in a representative sample of corpus data. Some aspects of experience are so central and pervasive that reference to them has grammaticalized (Divjak 2010; see also Janda & Lyashevskaya 2011; Newman 2008). The aim is, firstly, to determine to which extent a verb’s grammatical context alone allows us to classify utterances according to the perception type, and, secondly, to chart the similarities and differences in the verbs’ preference for morphological markers and syntactic constructions. If contexts are highly specialized, language structure, as it is witnessed in use, could assist sensory impaired speakers in building up viable representations of concepts, even if sensory experience is lacking. If, in addition, similarities between certain sensory perception verbs are high, sensory impaired speakers could use these similarities to perform analogical mapping across senses and ground concepts relating to the impaired sense in a cognate sensory experience. The findings are relevant for concept acquisition and representation in general and for concept acquisition and representation in sensory impaired populations, such as the blind, in particular.
References (28)
Apresjan, Jurij D. 1967. Экспериментальное исследование семантики русского глагола [Eksperimental’noe issledovanie semantiki russkogo glagola]. Moskva: Nauka.
Divjak, Dagmar. 2003. On trying in Russian: A tentative network model for near(er) synonyms. Belgian Contributions to the 13th international congress of Slavicists, Ljubljana, 15–21 August 2003. Slavica Gandensia 301. 25–58.
. 2006. Ways of intending: Delineating and structuring near-synonyms. In Stefan Th. Gries & Anatol Stefanowitsch (eds.), Corpora in Cognitive Linguistics. Corpus-based approaches to syntax and lexis, 19–56. Berlin: Mouton.
Divjak, Dagmar & Stefan Th. Gries. 2006. Ways of trying in Russian. Clustering behavioral profiles. Journal of Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory 2(1). 23–60.
Hofmann, Thomas. 1999. Probabilistic latent semantic analysis. Proceedings of the fifteenth conference on uncertainty in artificial intelligence (UAI’99).
Janda, Laura Alexis & Ol’ga Lyashevskaya. 2011. Grammatical profiles and the interaction of the lexicon with aspect, tense and mood in Russian. Cognitive Linguistics 22(4). 719–763.
Janda, Laura Alexis & Valery Solovyev. 2009. What constructional profiles reveal about synonymy: A case study of Russian words for sadness and happiness. Cognitive Linguistics 20(2). 367–393.
Karlsson, Fred. 1986. Frequency considerations in morphology. Zeitschrift fur Phonetik, Sprachwissenschaft und Kommunikationsforschung 391. 19–28.
Landau, Barbara & Lila Gleitman. 1985. Language and experience. Evidence from the blind child. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Landauer, Thomas K., Peter W. Foltz & Darrell Laham. 1998. Introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes 251. 259–284.
Levin, Beth. 1993. English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Li, Jianguo & Chris Brew. 2008. Which are the best features for automatic verb classification? In Proceedings of ACL-08: HLT. 434–442.
Louwerse, Max M. 2011. Symbol interdependency in symbolic and embodied cognition. TopiCS in Cognitive Science 31. 273–302.
Louwerse, Max M. & Patrick Jeuniaux. 2010. The linguistic and embodied nature of conceptual processing. Cognition 1141. 96–104.
Nesset, Tore, Laura A. Janda, Julia Kuznetsova, Ol’ga Lyashevskaya, Anastasia Makarova & Svetlana Sokolova. 2008. Why poslushat’, but uslyshat’? Poljarnyj Vestnik 111. 38–46.
Newman, John. 2008. Aiming low in linguistics: Low-level generalizations in corpus-based research. Downloaded from [URL]; page last accessed on 07.06.2013
The Oxford Russian-English Dictionary; 2nd Revised edition. 1993. Paul Falla, Marcus Wheeler & Boris Unbegaun (eds.). Oxford: OUP.
Paradis Carita & Mats Eeg-Olofsson. 2013. Describing sensory experience: The genre of wine reviews. In Rosario Caballero (guest ed.), Metaphor in and across genres. Thematic issue of Metaphor and Symbol 28(1). 22–40.
RNC. Национальный корпус русского языка. [[URL]. Data extracted July 2012].
Riordan, Brian & Michael N. Jones. 2011. Redundancy in perceptual and linguistic experience: Comparing feature-based and distributional models of semantic representation. TopiCS in Cognitive Science 31. 303–345.
Vigliocco, Gabriella, Lotte Meteyard, Mark Andrews & Stavroula Kousta. 2009. Toward a theory of semantic representation. Language and Cognition 1(2). 219–247.
Wilson, Margaret. 2002. Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review 9(4). 625–636.
Wnuk, Ewelina & Asifa Majid. 2012. Olfaction in a hunter-gatherer society: Insights from language and culture. In Naomi Miyake, David Peebles & Richard P. Cooper (eds.),
CogSci 2012: Proceedings of the 34th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society
, 1155–1160. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
Cited by (14)
Cited by 14 other publications
Ovsjannikova, Maria
Sonnenhauser, Barbara
Dai, Ying & Yicheng Wu
Baranyiné Kóczy, Judit
2023. Cultural conceptualizations of sight and cultural values. Cognitive Linguistic Studies 10:2 ► pp. 313 ff.
Divjak, Dagmar, Laurence Romain & Petar Milin
Wu, Shuqiong & Yue Ou
Novikova, Yana & Maria Kiose
Staniewski, Przemysław & Adam Gołębiowski
2021. To what extent can source-based olfactory verbs be classified as copulas?. In The Linguistics of Olfaction [Typological Studies in Language, 131], ► pp. 403 ff.
Divjak, Dagmar & Petar Milin
Kiose, Maria
Proos, Mariann
2019. Polysemy of the Estonian perception verb nägema ‘to see’. In Perception Metaphors [Converging Evidence in Language and Communication Research, 19], ► pp. 231 ff.
San Roque, Lila, Kobin H. Kendrick, Elisabeth Norcliffe & Asifa Majid
Nesset, Tore
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
