References
- Altmann, G. T. M., & Mirković, J. (2009). Incrementality and prediction in human sentence processing. Cognitive Science, 33, 583–609. DOI: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01022.x
- Aravena, P., Delevoye-Turrell, Y., Deprez, V., Cheylus, A., Paulignan, Y., Frak, V., & Nazir, T. (2012). Grip force reveals the context sensitivity of language-induced motor activity during “action words” processing: evidence from sentential negation. PLoS One, 7(12),
e50287 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0050287 - Arbib, M. A., & Lee, J. (2008). Describing visual scenes: Towards a neurolinguistics based on construction grammar. Brain Research, 1225, 146–162. DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2008.04.075
- Ballard, D., Hayhoe, M., Pook, P., & Rao, R. (1997). Deictic codes for the embodiment of cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 20, 723–767. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X97001611
- Barsalou, L. W. (1999a). Language comprehension: archival memory or preparation for situated action? Discourse Processes, 28, 61–80. DOI: 10.1080/01638539909545069
- Barsalou, L. W. (1999b). Perceptual and symbol systems. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 22, 577–609. DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X99002149
- Bergen, B., & Chang, N. (2005).
Embodied construction grammar in simulation-based language understanding . In Östman, J.-O., & Fried, M. (Eds.), Construction Grammar(s): Cognitive grounding and theoretical extensions 147–190. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI: 10.1075/cal.3.08ber - Bergen, B., & Chang, N. (2013).
Embodied construction grammar . In Hoffmann, T., & Trousdale, G. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Construction Grammar, 168–190. Oxford: OUP. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780195396683.013.0010 - Bergen, B., & Wheeler, K. (2010). Grammatical aspect and mental simulation. Brain and Language, 112(3), 150–158. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2009.07.002
- Bicknell, K., Elman, J., Hare, M., McRae, K., & Kutas, M. (2010). Effects of event knowledge in processing verbal arguments. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 489–505. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2010.08.004
- Brooks, R., & Stein, L. (1994). Building brains for bodies. Autonomous Robots, 1, 7–25. DOI: 10.1007/BF00735340
- Bryant, J. E. (2008). Best-fit construction analysis. Phd thesis, University of California, Berkely.
- Buccino, G., Riggio, L., Melli, G., Binkofski, F., Gallese, V., & Rizzolattii, G. (2005). Listening to action-related sentences modulates the activity of the motor system: A combined tms and behavioral study. Cognitive Brain Research, 24, 355–363. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.02.020
- Chiel, H., & Beer, R. (1997). The brain has a body: adaptive behavior emerges from interactions of nervous system, body and environment. Trends in Neurosciences, 20, 553–557. DOI: 10.1016/S0166-2236(97)01149-1
- Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
- Clark, A. (1997). Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. The MIT Press. DOI: 10.7551/mitpress/1552.001.0001
- Connell, L., & Lynott, D. (2012). When does perception facilitate or interfere with conceptual processing? the effect of attentional modulation. Frontiers in Psychology, 3, 474. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00474
- Crocker, M. W., Knoeferle, P., & Mayberry, M. (2010). Situated sentence comprehension: The coordinated interplay account and a neurobehavioral model. Brain and Language, 112, 189–201. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2009.03.004
- Fodor, J. A., & Pylyshyn, Z. W. (1988). Connectionism and cognitive architecture: A critical analysis. Cognition, 28(1–2), 3–71. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(88)90031-5
- Frank, S., Koppen, M., Noordman, L., & Vonk, W. (2003). Modeling knowledge-based inferences in story comprehension. Cognitive Science, 27(6), 875–910. DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog2706_3
- Gallese, V., Fadiga, L., Fogassi, L., & Rizzolatti, G. (1996). Action recognition in the premotor cortex. Brain, 119, 593–609. DOI: 10.1093/brain/119.2.593
- Glenberg, A., & Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 9, 558–565. DOI: 10.3758/BF03196313
- Glenberg, A., & Robertson, D. A. (1999). Indexical understanding of instructions. Discourse Processes, 28(28), 1–26. DOI: 10.1080/01638539909545067
- Goldberg, A. (1996). Jackendoff and construction-based grammar. Cognitive Linguistics, 7(1), 3–19. DOI: 10.1515/cogl.1996.7.1.3
- Guerra, E., & Knoeferle, P. (2014). Spatial distance effects on incremental semantic interpretation of abstract sentences: Evidence from eye tracking. Cognition, 133, 535–552. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2014.07.007
- Hale, J. (2003). The information conveyed by words in sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32(1), 101–122. DOI: 10.1023/A:1022492123056
- Harnad, S. (1990). The symbol grounding problem. Physica D, 42, 335–346. DOI: 10.1016/0167-2789(90)90087-6
- Huette, S. (2016). Putting context into context: sources of context and a proposed mechanism for linguistic negation. Language, Cognition, & Neuroscience, 31(8), 1000–1014. DOI: 10.1080/23273798.2016.1161807
- Huettig, F., & Altmann, G. T. M. (2005). Word meaning and the control of eye fixation: semantic competitor effects and the visual world paradigm. Cognition, 96, B23–B32. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.10.003
- Jackendoff, R. (2002). Foundations of language: brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001
- Kamide, Y., Lindsay, S., Scheepers, C., & Kukona, A. (2016). Event processing in the visual world: projected motion paths during spoken sentence comprehension. J. Exp. Psychol. Learn. Mem. Cogn. DOI: 10.1037/xlm0000199
- Kaschak, M., Madden, C., Therriault, D., Yaxley, R., Aveyard, M., Blanchard, A., & Zwaan, R. (2005). Perception of motion affects language processing. Cognition, 94, B79–B89. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.06.005
- Kaschak, M. P., & Glenberg, A. M. (2000). Constructing meaning: The role of affordances and grammatical constructions in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 508–529. DOI: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2705
- Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J., & Maienborn, C. (2010). “the drawer is still closed”: Simulating past and future actions when processing sentences that describe a state. Brain and Language, 112(3), 159–166. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2009.08.009
- Knoeferle, P., Crocker, M., & Pulvermüller, F. (2010). Sentence processing and embodiment. Brain and Language, 112, 137–142. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2009.11.004
- Knoeferle, P., & Crocker, M. W. (2006). The coordinated interplay of scene, utterance, and world knowledge: evidence from eye tracking. Cognitive Science, 30, 481–529. DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog0000_65
- Knoeferle, P., & Crocker, M. W. (2007). The influence of recent scene events on spoken comprehension: evidence from eye-movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 75, 519–543. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.01.003
- Knoeferle, P., Urbach, T. P., & Kutas, M. (2014). Different mechanisms for role relations versus verb-action congruence effects: Evidence from ERPs in picture???sentence verification. Acta Psychologica, 152, 133–148. DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.08.004
- Knott, A. (2014). Syntactic structures as descriptions of sensorimotor processes. Biolinguistics, 8, 001–052.
- Kukona, A., & Tabor, W. (2011). Impulse processing: A dynamical systems model of incremental eye movements in the visual world paradigm. Cognitive Science, 35, 1009–1051. DOI: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2011.01180.x
- Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Lindsay, S., Scheepers, C., & Kamide, Y. (2013). To dash or to dawdle: verb-associated speed of motion influences eye movements during spoken sentence comprehension. PLOS ONE, 8(6),
e67187 . DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0067187 - Mayberry, M., Crocker, M. W., & Knoeferle, P. (2009). Learning to attend: A connectionist model of situated language comprehension. Cognitive Science, 33, 449–496. DOI: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01019.x
- Meteyard, L., Cuadrado, S. R., Bahrami, B., & Vigliocco, G. (2012). Coming of age: a review of embodiment and the neuroscience of semantics. Cortex, 48, 788–804. DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2010.11.002
- Metusalem, R., Kutas, M., Urbach, T. P., Hare, M., McRae, K., & Elman, J. (2012). Generalized event knowledge activation during online sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 66, 545–567. DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.01.001
- Münster, K., & Knoeferle, P. (2018). Extending situated language comprehension (accounts) with speaker and comprehender characteristics: Toward socially situated interpretation. Frontiers in Psychology, 8. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02267
- Myachykov, A., Scheepers, C., Fischer, M., & Kessler, K. (2014). Test: A tropic, embodied, and situated theory of cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 6, 442–460. DOI: 10.1111/tops.12024
- Ostarek, M., & Huettig, F. (2019). Six challenges for embodiment research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(6), 593–599. DOI: 10.1177/0963721419866441
- Pulvermüller, F., Härle, M., & Hummel, F. (2001). Walking or talking?: behavioural and neurophysiological correlates of action verb processing. Brain and Language, 78, 143–168. DOI: 10.1006/brln.2000.2390
- Pulvermüller, F., Lutzenberger, W., & Preissl, H. (1999). Nouns and verbs in the intact brain: evidence from event-related potentials and high-frequency cortical responses. Cerebral Cortex, 9, 498–508. DOI: 10.1093/cercor/9.5.497
- Rizzolatti, G., & Arbib, M. (1998). Language within our grasp. Trends in Neurosciences, 21, 188–194. DOI: 10.1016/S0166-2236(98)01260-0
- Roy, D., & Mukherjee, N. (2005). Towards situated speech understanding: visual context priming of language models. Computer Speech and Language, 19, 227–248. DOI: 10.1016/j.csl.2004.08.003
- Smolensky, P. (2001).
Grammar-based connectionist approaches to language . In Christianson, M. H., & Chater, N. (Eds.), Connectionist psycholinguistics, 319–347. Ablex Publishing Coorporation. - Speed, L. J., & Vigliocco, G. (2014). Eye movements reveal the dynamic simulation of speed in language. Cognitive Science, 38, 367–382. DOI: 10.1111/cogs.12096
- Spivey, M. J., & Geng, J. J. (2001). Oculomotor mechanisms activated by imagery and memory: eye movements to absent objects. Psychological Research, 65, 235–241. DOI: 10.1007/s004260100059
- Steedman, M. (1999). Connectionist sentence processing in perspective. Cognitive Science, 23(4), 615–634. DOI: 10.1207/s15516709cog2304_10
- Steels, L. (2017).
Verb phrase and uid construction grammar . In Steels, L., & Beuls, K. (Eds.), 178–225. John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI: 10.1075/cf.00002.ste - Steels, L., & Brooks, R. (Eds.). (1995). The artificial life route to artificial intelligence: Building embodied situated agents. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
- Tabor, W. (2009). A dynamical systems perspective on the relationship between symbolic and non-symbolic computation. Cognitive Neurodynamics, 3, 415–427. DOI: 10.1007/s11571-009-9099-8
- Takac, M., Benuskova, L., & Knott, A. (2012). Mapping sensorimotor sequences to word sequences: a connectionist model of language acquisition and sentence generation. Cognition, 125(2), 288–308. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2012.06.006
- Taylor, L. J., & Zwaan, R. A. (2008). Motor resonance and linguistic focus. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 896–904. DOI: 10.1080/17470210701625519
- Tettamanti, M., Buccino, G., Saccuman, M. C., Gallese, V., Danna, M., Scifo, P., Fazio, F., Rizzolatti, G., Cappa, S. F., & Perani, D. (2005). Listening to action-related sentences activates fronto-parietal motor circuits. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 273–281. DOI: 10.1162/0898929053124965
- Van Berkum, J., Van den Brink, D., Tesink, C., Kos, M., & Hagoort, P. (2008). The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 580–591. DOI: 10.1162/jocn.2008.20054
- Venhuizen, N., Crocker, M. W., & Brouwer, H. (2018). Expectation-based comprehension: modeling the interaction of world knowledge and linguistic experience. Discourse Processes, 56(3), 229–255. DOI: 10.1080/0163853X.2018.1448677
- Willems, R., & Francken, J. C. (2012). Embodied cognition: taking the next step. Frontiers in Psychology, 3,
Article 582 . DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00582 - Zwaan, R. (2014). Embodiment and language comprehension: reframing the discussion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 229–234. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2014.02.008
- Zwaan, R., Taylor, L., & de Boer, M. (2010). Motor resonance as a function of narrative time: Further tests of the linguistic focus hypothesis. Brain and Language, 112, 143–149. DOI: 10.1016/j.bandl.2008.11.004
- Zwaan, R. A., & Taylor, L. J. (2006). Seeing, acting, understanding: motor resonance in language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135, 1–11. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.135.1.1