Skip to main content
Have a personal or library account? Click to login
The Ouroboros Model Embraces Its Sensory-Motoric Foundations And Learns To Talk Cover

The Ouroboros Model Embraces Its Sensory-Motoric Foundations And Learns To Talk

Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rhetoric
Volume 41 (2015): Issue 1 (June 2015)
By:   
Open Access
|Jul 2015
References

References

  1. Andone, C. (2014). Maneuvering with the burden of proof: confrontational strategies in dealing with political accountability.,, 59–78.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  2. Arunachalam, S., & Waxman, S. R. (2014). Let’s see a boy and a balloon: Argument labels and syntactic frame in verb learning., in press.
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. Bałaj, B. (2013). Visual scanning of figurative and abstract painting. Research on naïve in the field of art. Paper presented at Trends in Interdisciplinary Studies, 1st International Avant Conference, Toruń, Poland.
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. Boyd, J. R. (1976). Destruction and creation. U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. Retrieved from
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. Cinque, G. (1999).. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. Clark, E. V. (1973). What’s in a word? On the child’s acquisition of semantics in his first language. In T. E. Moore (Ed.),(pp. 65–110). New York: Academic Press.
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. Cotterill, R. (2001). Cooperation of the basal ganglia, cerebellum, sensory cerebrum and hippocampus: possible implications for cognition, consciousness, intelligence and creativity.,, 1–33.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  8. Citron, F. M., & Goldberg, A. E. (2014). Metaphorical sentences are more emotionally engaging than their literal counterparts., in press.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  9. Ferstl, E. C., & von Cramon, D. Y. (2001). The role of coherence and cohesion in text comprehension: an event-related fMRI study.,, 325–340.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  10. Genter, D. (1978). On relational meaning: The acquisition of verb meaning,,, 988–998.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  11. Gómez, D. M., Berent, I., Benavides-Varela, S., Bion, R. A. H., Catarossi, L., Nespor, M., & Mehler, J. (2014). Language universals at birth.,, 5837–5841.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  12. Guthrie, L. (2013). The hands that do the thinking: Interactivity in mental arithmetic. Paper presented at Trends in Interdisciplinary Studies, 1st International Avant Conference, Toruń, Poland.
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. Hagoort, P. (2005). On Broca, brain and binding: a new framework.,, 416–423.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  14. Haidarian H. S, Dinalankara, W., Fults, S., Wilson, S., Perlis, D., Schmill, M., Oates, T., Josyula, D. S., & Anderson, M. L. (2010). The metacognitive loop: An architecture for building robust intelligent systems., Vol. FS-10-02 of AAAI Technical Report. AAAI.
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. Haken, H. (1977).. Berlin: Springer.
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. Hartmann, N. (1935–1950).. 4 Bände. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem.,, 335–346.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  18. Jacquette, D. (2014). Collective referential intentionality in the semantics of dialogue.,, 143–159.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  19. Keidel, J. L., Davis, P. M., Gonzalez-Diaz, V. Martin, C. D., & Thierry, G. (2013). How Shekespeare tempests the brain: Neuroimaging insights.,, 913–919.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  20. Kibrik, A. A. (2012, June). Non-discrete effects in language, or the critique of pure reason 2. Paper presented at The Fifth International Conference in Cognitive Science, Kaliningrad.
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. Kupferberg, G. R., & Caplan, D (2003). Language dysfunctioon in schizophrenia. In R. B. Schiffer, S. M. Rao, & B. S. Fogel (Eds.):, 2nd ed. (pp. 444–466). Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. Ledoux, K., Traxler, M. J., & Swaab, T. Y. (2007). Syntactic priming in comprehension: Evidence from event-related potentials.,, 135–143.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  23. Lewis, A. G., Wang, L., & Bastiaansen, M. (2015). Fast oscillatory dynamics during language comprehension: Unification versus maintenance and prediction?, in press. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2015.01.003
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  24. Lind, A., Hall, L., Breidegard, B., Balkenius, C., & Johansson, P. (2014). Speaker’s acceptance of real-time speech exchange indicates that we use auditory feedback to specify the meaning of what we say.,(6), 1198–1205. doi: 10.1177/0956797614529797
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  25. Lucero, C., Zaharchuk, H., & Casasanto, D. (2014). Beat gestures facilitate speech production. In P. Bello, M. Guarini, M. McShane, & B. Scassellati (Eds.),(pp. 898–903). Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.
    Search in Google Scholar
  26. Mackenzie, J. (2014). From speech acts to semantics.,, 121–142.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  27. Moen, R., & Norman, C. (2009). Evolution of the PDCA cycle. Retrieved on 4 April 2014 from
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. Moore, J. W., & Fletcher, P. C. (2012). Sense of agency in health and disease: A review of cue integration approaches.,, 59–68.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  29. Noton, D., & Stark, L. (1971). Eye movements and visual perception.,, 35–43.
    Search in Google Scholar
  30. O’Regan, J. K. (2013). Why things feel the way they do: The sensorimotor approach to understanding phenomenal consciousness. Trends in Interdisciplinary Studies, 1st International Avant-Conference, Torun, Poland.
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. Orwell, G. (1949).. London: Secker & Warburg.
    Search in Google Scholar
  32. Pickering, M. J., & Garrod, S. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and comprehension.,, 1–64.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  33. Rączaszek-Leonardi, J. (2013). Thinking with Hands, Eyes, Things and Others. Trends in Interdisciplinary Studies, 1st International Avant Conference, Toruń, Poland.
    Search in Google Scholar
  34. Reitter, D., Keller, F., & Moore, J. D. (2011). A computational cognitive model of syntactic priming.,, 587–637.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  35. Schneider, S., Rapp, M. A., Haeußinger, F. B., Ernst, L. H., Hamm, F. Fallgatter, A. J., & Ehlis, A.-C. (2014). Beyond the N400: Complementary access to early neural correlates of novel metaphor comprehension using combined electrophysiological and haemodynamic measurements.,, 45–59.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  36. Searle, J. H. (2014). The Structure and functions of language.,, 27–40.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  37. Selz, O. (1913).. Stuttgart: Speemann.
    Search in Google Scholar
  38. Selz, O. (1922).. Bonn: Cohen.
    Search in Google Scholar
  39. Shewhart, W. A. (1939).. Washington, DC, The Graduate School, the Department of Agriculture, pp. 155.
    Search in Google Scholar
  40. Thomsen, K. (2010a). The Ouroboros Model in the light of venerable criteria.,, 121–128.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  41. Thomsen, K. (2010b). Concept formation in the Ouroboros Model. Third Conference on Artificial General Intelligence, AGI 2010, Lugano, Switzerland.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  42. Thomsen, K. (2011a). Consciousness for the Ouroboros Model.,, 163–175.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  43. Thomsen, K. (2011b). The Ouroboros Model, selected facets. In C. Hernández et al. (Eds.),(pp. 239–250). New York: Springer.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  44. Thomsen, K. (2013). The Ouroboros Model embraces its sensory-motoric foundations. Paper presented at Trends in Interdisciplinary Studies, 1st International Avant Conference, Toruń, Poland.
    Search in Google Scholar
  45. Thomsen, K. (2014). The cerebellum according to the Ouroboros Model, the “interpolator hypothesis”.,, 239–254.
    Search in Google Scholar
  46. Tydgat, I., Diepedaele, K., Hartsuiker, R. J., & Pickering, M. J. (2012). How lingering representations of abandoned context words affect speech production.,, 218–239.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  47. Willems, R. M., & Hagoort, P. (2007). Neural evidence for the interplay between language, gesture and action: A review., 278–289.
    Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
  48. Wittgenstein, L. (1953).(J. Schulte, Hrsg.). Frankfurt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/slgr-2015-0023 | Journal eISSN: 2199-6059 (formerly 0860-150X) | Journal ISSN: 0860-150X
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 105 - 125
Published on: Jul 24, 2015
Published by: University of Białystok
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Keywords:
schemata,
serial iterative processing,
anticipations,
consistency,
communication
Related subjects:
Philosophy,
Philosophy, other

© 2015 Knud Thomsen, published by University of Białystok
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Volume 41 (2015): Issue 1 (June 2015)
Previous article
Next article