
Grounding Language Processing: The Added Value of Specifying Linguistic/Compositional Representations and Processes
Author(s) -
Pia Knoeferle
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
journal of cognition
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 2514-4820
DOI - 10.5334/joc.155
Subject(s) - computer science , rotation formalisms in three dimensions , comprehension , representation (politics) , set (abstract data type) , sentence , natural language processing , constant (computer programming) , cognition , cognitive science , complement (music) , perception , artificial intelligence , psychology , mathematics , programming language , biochemistry , chemistry , geometry , neuroscience , complementation , politics , political science , law , phenotype , gene
Abundant empirical evidence suggests that visual perception and motor responses are involved in language comprehension (‘grounding’). However, when modeling the grounding of sentence comprehension on a word-by-word basis, linguistic representations and cognitive processes are rarely made fully explicit. This article reviews representational formalisms and associated (computational) models with a view to accommodating incremental and compositional grounding effects. Are different representation formats equally suitable and what mechanisms and representations do models assume to accommodate grounding effects? I argue that we must minimally specify compositional semantic representations, a set of incremental processes/mechanisms, and an explicit link from the assumed processes to measured behavior. Different representational formats can be contrasted in psycholinguistic modeling by holding the set of processes/mechanisms constant; contrasting different processes/mechanisms is possible by holding representations constant. Such psycholinguistic modeling could be applied across a wide range of experimental investigations and complement computational modeling.