Comprehending Chinese Sentences Involving Quantity Information: “More is Up” Space-Action Compatibility Effect

Abstract

Abstract: Previous research suggests that the left-right axis is useful in spatial representation of number and quantity, while cognitive linguistics found evidence pointing towards the use of the up-down axis. In this study, the space-action compatibility effect was examined while readers were reading sentences containing quantity information in Chinese text. In Experiment 1, participants pressed an upward or downward button to advance the sentence reading. In Experiment 2, participants pressed a button to make either left or right movement. The space-action compatibility effect was identified on the up-down axis, but not on the left-right axis. We discuss the results in the context of cognitive linguistics in terms of comprehending abstract language such as quantity information using “more is up” metaphor.

Key words: Chinese quantity, sentence processing, embodied cognition, perception and action planning, space-action compatibility effect.

摘要： 处理数量语义信息时存在左右轴表征作用，还是更多为上的隐喻语义表征。本文从具身认知观的视角，探讨中文数量语义信息处理时是否存在空间表征效应。阅读数量信息的句子，实验一受试用手指顺上下轴的方向（运动和非运动）转换按键来计时阅读，实验二，受试用手指顺左右轴的方向（运动和非运动）转换按键来计时阅读。研究发现空间动作一致性效应在上下轴中存在。本研究在认知语言学更多为上的隐喻原则基础上对数据结果进行了讨论。

关键词: 中文数量, 句子处理, 具身认知, 感知动觉计划, 空间动觉兼容性效应。

CLC Number:

B842

Guan Qun. Comprehending Chinese Sentences Involving Quantity Information: “More is Up” Space-Action Compatibility Effect[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2013, 11(5): 589-594.

官群. 中文数量语义更多为上的空间动觉一致性效应[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2013, 11(5): 589-594.

References

官群.(2007). 具身认知观对语言理解的新诠释-心理模拟: 语言理解的一种手段.心理科学, 30(5), 1252-1256.
许先文.(2009). 语言具身认知原理及英语理解的心理模型. 杭州师范大学学报, 6(1), 114-116.
叶浩生. (2010). 具身认知：认知心理学的新取向. 心理科学进展, 18(5), 705-710.
Badets, A., & Pesenti, M. (2010) Creating number semantics through finger movement perception. Cognition, 115(1), 46-53.
Badets, A., Andres, M, Di Luca, S., & Pesenti, M. (2007). Number magnitude potentiates action judgements. Experimental Brain Research, 180(3), 525-534.
Borghi, A. M, Glenberg, A. M., & Kaschak, M. P. (2004). Putting words in perspective. Memory and Cognition, 32, 863-873.
Bub, D. N., Masson, M. E. J., & Cree, G. S. (2008). Evocation of functional and volumetric gestural knowledge by objects and words. Cognition, 106(1), 27-58.
Chiou, R.Y.C., Chang, E.C., Tzeng, O.J.L., & Wu, D.H. (2009). The common magnitude code underlying numerical and size processing for action but not for perception. Experimental Brain Research, 194(4), 53-562.
Critchley, M. (1953). The Parietal Lobes. Hafner Press.
Dehaene, S., Bossini, S.,& Giraux, P. (1993). The mental representation of parity and number magnitude. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 122(3), 371-396.
Ferreira, F., &Clifton, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(3), 348-368.
Fischer, M.H. (2006). The future for SNARC could be stark. Cortex, 42(8), 1066-1068.
Fischer, M.H., Castel, A.D., Dodd, M.D., &Pratt, J. (2003). Perceiving numbers causes spatial shifts of attention. Nature Neuroscience, 6(6), 555-556.
Glenberg, A. M., Becker, R., Klotzer, S., Kolkano, L., Muller, S., & Rinck, M. (2009). Episodic affordances contribute to language comprehension. Language and Cognition, 1, 113-135.
Glenberg, A.M.,& Kaschak, M.P. (2002). Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(3), 558-5645.
Guan, C. Q. Meng, W-J, Yao, R., & Glenberg, A. (2013). Motor system contributions to the comprehension of abstract language. Brain & Language, in press.
Hubbard, E.M., Piazza, M., Pinel, P., & Dehaene, S. (2005). Interactions between number and space in parietal cortex. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 6(6), 435-448.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: The University of Chicago press.
Langston, W. (2002). Violating orientational metaphors slows reading. Discourse Processes, 34, 281-310.
Langston, W., Kramer, D.C., & Glenberg, A.M. (1998). The representation of space in mental models derived from text. Memory and Cognition 26(2), 247-262.
Micheal L. Anderson. (2004). Embodied Cognition: A Field Guide, Artificial Intelligence, www . elsevier com/ locat e/ art int.
Ouellet, M., Santiago, J., Funes, M.J., &Lupianez, J. (2010). Thinking about the future moves attention to the right. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Human Perception and Performance, 36(1), 17-24.
Pickering, M. J., & Garrod. S. (2007). Do people use language production to make prediction during comprehension? Trends in Cognitive Sciences. 11(3), 105-110.
Rizzolati, G., Sinigaglia, C., & Anderson, F. (2008). Mirrors in the brain: How our minds share actions and emotions. Oxford University Press.
Speer, N.K., & Zacks, J.A. (2005). Temporal changes as event boundaries: Processing and memory consequences of narrative time shifts. Journal of Memory and Language, 53(1), 125-140.
Walsh,V. (2003). A theory of magnitude: common cortical metrics of time, space and quantity. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7(11), 483-488.
Zwaan, R.A., & Taylor, L.J. (2006). Seeing, acting, understanding: Motor resonance in languae comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 135(1), 1-11.

[1]	ZHAO Shuai, LU Shiyi, CHEN Jing, LU Zhixuan, KUANG Liuxing, DENG Yujun, FU Chen. L1 Korean L2 Chinese Learners' Processing of V+N1+de+N2: An Eye Movement Research [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2019, 17(1): 15-23.
[2]	WANG Hanlin, MO Lei. “Action-Evaluation” Effect: The Interaction Between Body Movement and Cognitive Activity [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2017, 15(5): 626-632.
[3]	Fang Wei, Ge Liezhong, Gan Tian. Theories of Embodied Cognition in Morality [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2016, 14(6): 765-772.
[4]	Du Hongfei, Jin Hua, Mo Lei. BRAIN IMAGING STUDY ON SENTENCE PROCESSING [J]. , 2007, 5(1): 75-80.
[5]	Sun Bing,Liu Ming. AN EXPERIMENT ON THE SEMANTIC AND SYNTACTIC EFFECTS ON SENTENCE PROCESSING [J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2005, 3(2): 121-124.