Chapter published in:
Dynamism in Metaphor and Beyond
Edited by Herbert L. Colston, Teenie Matlock and Gerard J. Steen
[Metaphor in Language, Cognition, and Communication 9] 2022
► pp. 341356
Barsalou, L. W.
(1999) Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22 (4), 637–660. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bergen, B. K., Lindsay, S., Matlock, T., & Narayanan, S.
(2007) Spatial and linguistic aspects of visual imagery in sentence comprehension. Cognitive Science, 31 (5), 733–764. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Borghi, A. M., Barca, L., Binkofski, F., Castelfranchi, C., Pezzulo, G., & Tummolini, L.
(2019) Words as social tools: Language, sociality and inner grounding in abstract concepts. Physics of Life Reviews, 29 , 120–153. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Brugman, C., and Lakoff, G.
(1988) Cognitive topology and lexical networks. In S. Small, G. Cottrell, and M. Tanenhaus (Eds.), Lexical ambiguity resolution. pp.477–507. Palo Alto, CA: Morgan Kaufman. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J.
(2015) Language change. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cacciari, C., & Tabossi, P.
(1988) The comprehension of idioms. Journal of Memory and Language, 27 (6), 668–683. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, C. G., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Magnuson, J. S.
(2004) Actions and affordances in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of experimental psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30 (3), 687–696.Google Scholar
Chatterjee, A.
(2001) Language and space: Some interactions. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 5 (2), 55–61. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Chomsky, N.
(1980) Rules and representations. Columbia University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, A.
(1998) Being there: Putting brain, body, and world together again. MIT press.Google Scholar
(2008) Supersizing the mind: Embodiment, action, and cognitive extension. Oxford University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Clark, H. H.
(1992) Arenas of language use. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
(1996) Using language. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Coulson, S., & Van Petten, C.
(2002) Conceptual integration and metaphor: An event- related potential study. Memory & Cognition, 30 (6), 958–968. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Dale, R., Fusaroli, R., Duran, N. D., & Richardson, D. C.
(2013) The self-organization of human interaction. In Psychology of Learning and Motivation (Vol. 59, pp. 43–95). Academic Press.Google Scholar
Dale, R., & Kello, C. T.
(2018) “How do humans make sense?” multiscale dynamics and emergent meaning. New Ideas in Psychology, 50 , 61–72. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Desai, R. H., Conant, L. L., Binder, J. R., Park, H., & Seidenberg, M. S.
(2013) A piece of the action: modulation of sensory-motor regions by action idioms and metaphors. NeuroImage, 83 , 862–869. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Elman, J. L.
(2004) An alternative view of the mental lexicon. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8 (7), 301–306. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2009) On the meaning of words and dinosaur bones: Lexical knowledge without a lexicon. Cognitive Science, 33 (4), 547–582. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Falandays, J. B., Batzloff, B. J., Spevack, S. C., and Spivey, M. J.
(2018) Interactionism in language: From neural networks to bodies to dyads. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 1–16.Google Scholar
Falandays, J. B. & Spivey, M. J.
(2019) Abstract meanings may be more dynamic, due to their sociality. Physics of Life Reviews, 29 , 175–177. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Farmer, T. A., Christiansen, M. H., & Monaghan, P.
(2006) Phonological typicality influences on-line sentence comprehension. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 103 (32), 12203–12208. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fodor, J. A.
(1983) The modularity of mind. MIT press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Fusaroli, R., Bahrami, B., Olsen, K., Roepstorff, A., Rees, G., Frith, C., & Tylén, K.
(2012) Coming to terms: quantifying the benefits of linguistic coordination. Psychological Science, 23 (8), 931–939. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gennari, S. P., MacDonald, M. C., Postle, B. R., & Seidenberg, M. S.
(2007) Context- dependent interpretation of words: Evidence for interactive neural processes. Neuroimage, 35 (3), 1278–1286. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W.
(1980) Spilling the beans on understanding and memory for idioms in conversation. Memory & Cognition, 8 (2), 149–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(1994) The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2005) Embodiment and cognitive science. Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., & Colston, H. L.
(1995) The cognitive psychological reality of image schemas and their transformations. Cognitive Linguistics, 6 (4), 347–378. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., Ström, L. & Spivey-Knowlton, M.
(1997) Conceptual metaphors in mental imagery for proverbs. Journal of Mental Imagery, 21 , 83–110.Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. W., & Van Orden, G. C.
(2010) Adaptive cognition without massive modularity. Language and Cognition, 2 (2), 149–176. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2012) Pragmatic choice in conversation. Topics in Cognitive Science, 4 (1), 7–20. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Gow Jr, D. W., & Olson, B. B.
(2016) Sentential influences on acoustic-phonetic processing: A Granger causality analysis of multimodal imaging data. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31 (7), 841–855. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Huette, S., Winter, B., Matlock, T., Ardell, D. H., & Spivey, M.
(2014) Eye movements during listening reveal spontaneous grammatical processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 5 , 410. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hurley, S. L.
(1998) Vehicles, contents, conceptual structure, and externalism. Analysis, 58 (1), 1–6. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, M.
(1987) The body in the mind: The bodily basis of meaning, imagination, and reason. University of Chicago Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kawamoto, A. H.
(1993) Nonlinear dynamics in the resolution of lexical ambiguity: A parallel distributed processing account. Journal of Memory and Language, 32 (4), 474–516. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kello, C. T., Brown, G. D., Ferrer-i-Cancho, R., Holden, J. G., Linkenkaer-Hansen, K., Rhodes, T., & Van Orden, G. C.
(2010) Scaling laws in cognitive sciences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14 (5), 223–232. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kuhlen, A. K., Allefeld, C., & Haynes, J. D.
(2012) Content-specific coordination of listeners’ to speakers’ EEG during communication. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6 , 266. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G.
(1990) The invariance hypothesis: Is abstract reason based on image- schemas? Cognitive Linguistics 1(1): 39–74. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Kövecses, Z.
(1987) The cognitive model of anger inherent in American English, in N. Quinn and D. Holland (eds.), Cultural Models in Language and Thought. New York: Cambridge University Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lakoff, G. & Nuñéz, R.
(2000) Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. Basic Books.Google Scholar
Langacker, R.
(1991) Concept, Image, and Symbol: The Cognitive Basis of Grammar. Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Louwerse, M. M., Dale, R., Bard, E. G., & Jeuniaux, P.
(2012) Behavior matching in multimodal communication is synchronized. Cognitive Science, 36 (8), 1404–1426. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S.
(1994) The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101 (4), 676–703. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Mandler, J. M.
(1992) How to build a baby: II. Conceptual primitives. Psychological Review, 99 (4), 587–604. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Masten, J., Stallybrass, P., & Vickers, N. J.
(2016) Language machines: Technologies of literary and cultural production. Routledge. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Matlock, T.
(2004) Fictive motion as cognitive simulation. Memory & Cognition, 32 (8), 1389–1400. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McClelland, J. L.
(1993) Toward a theory of information processing in graded, random, and interactive networks. In D. E. Meyer & S. Kornblum (Eds.), Attention and performance 14: Synergies in experimental psychology, artificial intelligence, and cognitive neuroscience (pp. 655–688). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
McGurk, H., & MacDonald, J.
(1976) Hearing lips and seeing voices. Nature, 264 (5588), 746–748. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
McNeill, D.
(2008) Gesture and thought. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Onnis, L., & Spivey, M. J.
(2012) Toward a new scientific visualization for the language sciences. Information, 3 (1), 124–150. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Paxton, A., & Dale, R.
(2013) Argument disrupts interpersonal synchrony. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66 (11), 2092–2102. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pulvermüller, F.
(1999) Words in the brain’s language. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22 (2), 253–279. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Pulvermüller, F., Hauk, O., Nikulin, V. V., & Ilmoniemi, R. J.
(2005) Functional links between motor and language systems. European Journal of Neuroscience, 21 (3), 793–797. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, D. C., & Dale, R.
(2005) Looking to understand: The coupling between speakers’ and listeners’ eye movements and its relationship to discourse comprehension. Cognitive Science, 29 (6), 1045–1060. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, D. C., Dale, R., & Kirkham, N. Z.
(2007) The art of conversation is coordination. Psychological Science, 18 (5), 407–413. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, D. C., Spivey, M. J., Edelman, S., & Naples, A. D.
(2001) “Language is spatial”: Experimental evidence for image schemas of concrete and abstract verbs. In Proceedings of the 23rd annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 873–878). Mawhah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Richardson, D., & Matlock, T.
(2007) The integration of figurative language and static depictions: An eye movement study of fictive motion. Cognition, 102 (1), 129–138. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, D., Spivey, M., & Cheung, J.
(2001) Motor representations in memory and mental models. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. (pp.839–844) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Richardson, D., Spivey, M., Barsalou, L., & McRae, K.
(2003) Spatial representations activated during real-time comprehension of verbs. Cognitive Science, 27 , 767–780. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Richardson, D., Spivey, M., Edelman, S., & Naples, A.
(2001) “Language is spatial”: Experimental evidence for image schemas of concrete and abstract verbs. Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. (pp.845–850) Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Seidenberg, M.
(2017) Language at the speed of sight: How we read, why so many can’t, and what can be done about it. Basic Books.Google Scholar
Shebani, Z., & Pulvermüller, F.
(2013) Moving the hands and feet specifically impairs working memory for arm-and leg-related action words. Cortex, 49 (1), 222–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shockley, K., Richardson, D. C., & Dale, R.
(2009) Conversation and coordinative structures. Topics in Cognitive Science, 1 (2), 305–319. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Shockley, K., Santana, M. V., & Fowler, C. A.
(2003) Mutual interpersonal postural constraints are involved in cooperative conversation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29 (2), 326–332.Google Scholar
Spevack, S. C., Falandays, J. B., Batzloff, B. J., and Spivey, M. J.
(2018) Interactivity of language. Language and Linguistics Compass, e12282. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Spivey, M. J.
(2007) The continuity of mind. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
(2017) Fake news and false corroboration: Interactivity in rumor networks. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. (pp. 3229–3234).Google Scholar
(2020) Who you are: The science of connectedness. MIT Press. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Spivey, M. & Richardson, D.
(2009) Language processing embodied and embedded. In P. Robbins and M. Aydede (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Situated Cognition. (pp. 382–400). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Spivey, M. J. & Spevack, S. C.
(2017) An inclusive account of mind across spatiotemporal scales of cognition. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science, 1 , 25–38. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Spivey, M. & Tanenhaus, M.
(1998) Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24 , 1521–1543.Google Scholar
Stanfield, R. A., & Zwaan, R. A.
(2001) The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science, 12 (2), 153–156. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Swinney, D. A.
(1979) Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18 (6), 645–659. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Talmy, L.
(1988) Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive Science, 12 , 49–100. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2000) Toward a cognitive semantics (Vol. 2). MIT press.Google Scholar
Tanenhaus, M. K., Leiman, J. M., & Seidenberg, M. S.
(1979) Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic contexts. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18 (4), 427–440. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tanenhaus, M., Spivey-Knowlton, M., Eberhard, K., & Sedivy, J.
(1995) Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268 , 1632–1634. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. M.
(1994) Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 33 , 285–285. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Turner, M.
(2011) The embodied mind and the origins of human culture. In A. M. Abrantes & P. Hanenbarg (Eds.), Cognition and Culture: An Interdisciplinary Dialogue. (pp. 13–27). Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
Tyler, A., & Evans, V.
(2001) Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks: The case of over. Language, 724–765. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S.
(2018) The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359 (6380), 1146–1151. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vu, H., Kellas, G., & Paul, S. T.
(1998) Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution. Memory & Cognition, 26 (5), 979–1001. CrossrefGoogle Scholar