Cognitive Science 101-201
Linguistics 105
 
 
The Mind and Language
George Lakoff
 
Style Sheet
 
Final Exam!
 
Homeworks
HW8
HW7
HW6
HW5
HW4
 HW3
HW2
HW1
Sections
Office Hours
 
Spring 2000
GSI's: Heather Jones, Jason Patent, and Paula Rogers,
 
Overheads
Prototypes    Frames     Self      Art 
 
The Reader
(Available at Copy Central on Bancroft)

 

1. The List of Readings

2. Lecture Schedule and Reading Assignments

3. Course Syllabus 

4. The Readings Themselves  (see the course reader)

 

The List of Readings

Bowerman, Melissa. 1996. Learning how to structure space for language: A crosslinguistic perspective. Chapter 10 of Language and Space, eds. In Paul Bloom, Mary A. Peterson, Lynn Nadel, and Merrill F. Garrett. Cambridge MA: MIT Press. pp. 383-436.

Casad, Eugene and Ronald Langacker. 1985. `Inside' and `Outside' in Cora Grammar. International Journal of American Linguistics, pp. 247-281.

Chang, Nancy, Dan Gildea, and Srini Narayanan. A Dynamic Model of Aspectual Composition. ICSI Report. January 30, 1998.

Denny, J. Peter. What are Noun Classifiers Good For? In CLS 12.

Fauconnier, Gilles and Mark Turner. 1998. Conceptual Integration Networks. Cognitive Science. Vol. 22 (2) 1998, pp. 133-187.

Fillmore, Charles. 1982. Frame Semantics. In Linguistics in The Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshin.

Fillmore, Charles. 1985. Frames and the Semantics of Understanding. Quaderni di Semantica, VI, 2.

Gallie, W.B. 1956. Essentially Contested Concepts. Proceedings of the Philosophical Society, Vol. 51. London: Harrison and Sons, Ltd.

Lakoff, George. Hedges. 1973. Journal of Philosophical Logic, 2, 459-508.

Lakoff, George. 1988. Cognitive Semantics. In Umberto Eco, Marco Santambrogio, and Patrizia Violi, eds. Meaning and Mental Representations, Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.

Lakoff, George. 1993. The Contemporary Theory of Metaphor. In Ortony, Andrew (ed.) Metaphor and Thought (Second Edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lakoff, George. 1991. Metaphor and War. Distributed by electronic mail, December, 1990. Reprinted in Harry Kreisler (ed.) Confrontation in the Gulf: University of California Professors Talk About the War. Berkeley, CA: Institute of International Studies, 1992; also in Brien Hallet (ed.),  Engulfed in War: Just War and the Persian Gulf, Honolulu: Matsunaga Institute for Peace, 1991.

Lakoff, George. 1995. Metaphor, Morality, and Politics, Or Why Conservatives Have Left Liberals in the Dust. Social Research, 62, 2, 177-214.

Lakoff, George and Mark Johnson. Philosophy In the Flesh, Chapters 3, 4 and 5. New York: Basic Books. 1999.

Lakoff, George and Rafael Núñez. The Metaphorical Structure of Mathematics: Sketching Out Cognitive Foundations For a Mind-Based Mathematics. In Lyn English (Ed.), Mathematical Reasoning: Analogies, Metaphors, and Images. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. 1997.

Mervis, Carolyn and Eleanor Rosch. 1981. Categorization of Natural Objects. In Annual Review of Psychology, 32:89-115.

Regier, Terry. 1995. A Model of the Human Capacity for Categorizing Spatial Relations. Cognitive Linguistics, 6-1, 63-88.

Rosch, Eleanor. 1977. Human Categorization. In N. Warren (ed.) Advances in Cross-Cultural Psychology. London: Academic Press.

Schwartz, Alan. 1992. Contested Concepts in Cognitive Social Science. Bachelor's Thesis, Cognitive Science Program, University of California at Berkeley.

Sweetser, Eve. 1987. The Definition of Lie. In Holland, Dorothy and Naomi Quinn, Cultural models in Language and Thought, Cambridge University Press.

Talmy, Leonard. 1985. Force Dynamics In Language and Thought. In Parasession on Causatives and Agentivity, Chicago Linguistic Society, 21st Regional Meeting.

 

Lecture Schedule and Reading Assignments

How to decipher this schedule: 1Tu: 1/18 = ``First week of the course; Tuesday: January 18.'' The papers are in the reader in alphabetical order, not in the order of assignment.
 

1Tu: 1/18: The First and Second Generations in Cognitive Science. Early Prototype Theory: Wittgenstein through Rosch.

READ Lakoff, Cognitive Semantics and WF&DT 1 - 46 for Thursday

1Th: 1/20. Finish Early Prototype Theory. First assignment given out.

READ Fillmore 1982 and 1985, and Sweetser for Tuesday.

2Tu: 1/25: Frame Semantics 1.

2Th: 1/27: Frame Semantics 2.

READ WF&DT 46 - 90. Read Rosch; Mervis and Rosch.

3Tu: 2/1: Basic-level concepts.

3Th: 2/3: Types of Prototypes.

READ WF&DT 91 - 154 Lakoff paper on Hedges; Gallie; Schwartz;

4Tu: 2/8: Hedges; More on Cognitive Models; Radial Categories I.

4Th: 2/10: Radial Categories II and Contested Concepts.

READ Lakoff and Johnson, Phil/Flesh, Ch. 3, 4, 5 and appendix; Regier.

5Tu: 2/15: Intro To Image Schemas; Metaphor 1

5Th: 2/17: The Neural Theory of Language 1

READ Chang, Gildea, and Narayanan; Metaphors We Live By 1 - 105; .

6Tu: 2/22: Metaphor 2

6Th: 2/24: The Neural Theory of Language 2

READ WF&DT 380-415 on Anger; Lakoff, Contemporary Theory of Metaphor.

7Tu: 2/29: Metaphor 3

7Th: 3/2: Metaphor 4

READ Lakoff on Metaphor and War; and Talmy.

8Tu: 3/7: Metaphor 5

8Th: 3/9: Force Dynamics

READ WF&DT 416-461. Casad & Langacker, and Bowerman.

9Tu: 3/14: Over

9Th: 3/16: Conceptions of Space in NonWestern Languages

READ WF&DT 157 - 218 and 304-337.

10Tu: 3/21: Objectivism and What's Wrong With It

10Th: 3/23: Whorf and Relativism

SPRING BREAK (3/25- 4/2)

Read; Lakoff on Metaphor, Morality and Politics.

Read Fauconnier, Chapter 1.

NO WRITTEN ASSIGNMENT. START THINKING ABOUT TERM PAPER.

11Tu: 4/4: Cognitive Science and Politics

11Th: 4/6: Mental Spaces 1

READ WF&DT 260 - 303, Fauconnier Chapter 2, and Fauconnier and Turner.

12Tu: 4/11: Mental Spaces 2; Take-Home Final Given Out; Term Paper Prospectus Due.

12Th: 4/13: Blended Spaces

READ Lakoff and Núñez;

13Tu: 4/18: The Metaphorical Structure of Mathematics 1.

13Th: 4/20: The Metaphorical Structure of Mathematics 2.

READ WF&DT 219 - 259 and 338-373. FINISH TAKE-HOME FINAL

14Tu: 4/25: The Neural Theory of Language 3. Final Due -- at beginning of class! Do not miss class to finish work on the final.

14Th: 4/27: The Neural Theory of Language 4

FINISH TERM PAPER; No reading assignment

15Tu: 5/2: The Cognitive Science of Philosophy 1

15Th: 5/4: Last class. The Cognitive Science of Philosophy 2. Term Paper Due -- at beginning of class! Do not miss class to finish work on the paper.

 
The Mind and Language
Linguistics 105 / Cognitive Science 101 / Cognitive Science 201
George Lakoff
T, Th 2-3:30 50 Birge 4 Credits

GSI's: Heather Jones, Jason Patent, and Paula Rogers.

CCN for Ling 105: 52226

CCN for Cogsci 101: 15830

CCN for Cogsci 201: 15902

Note on Cognitive Science 201, the graduate section:

Graduate students should sign up for Cognitive Science 201, which includes an additional section taught by the instructor. Graduates students are also required to attend the ordinary section.

The section has temporarily been set at W4 -5 in 65 Evans. That is subject to change.

The purpose of the section will be to discuss the relevance of the course to the special fields of the students in the section, as well as to discuss the term projects. Term projects relevant to graduate studentsí field of study are strongly encouraged. The graduate section is not yet scheduled. Graduate students are also required to attend the ordinary sections of 105.

Syllabus Contents

Description

Working Groups

Sections

Grading

Grading System

Readings

Lecture Schedule and Reading Assignments

Readings in the Packet

Description

The first generation of cognitive science research was, for the most part, based on the following assumption:

Thought is the mechanical manipulation of arbitrary finitary symbols, as in a computer program. The symbols are meaningless in themselves, but get their meaning by being associated with things in the external mind-free world. The second generation of cognitive science research turned up considerable empirical evidence showing that the earlier view is incorrect, and that thought is not of this character at all. Instead, Thought is embodied, in the sense that it is grounded in and shaped by the sensorimotor systems and by our bodily interaction in the world. That is, reason grows out of the nature of the physical brain and body, rather than being something abstract and disembodied. Human reason also makes extensive and fundamental use of imaginative mechanisms such as metaphor and metonymy. This course reviews that evidence, much of which comes from the study of how people categorize, reason, and use language. The course also discusses the convergence between this evidence and computational neural modeling research, which, over the past decade, has considerably transformed the study of the mind.

These results have enormous implications for a wide variety of fields:

Philosophy: These results do not accord with most views in either Anglo-American or Continental philosophy; they affect not just the philosophy of mind and language, but also ethics, political philosophy, the philosophy of science, the philosophy of mathematics, and every other branch of philosophy. This leads to a rethinking of the nature of philosophy.

Artificial Intelligence: The traditional views of figures like Newell and Simon, Minsky, McCarthy, and Schank are brought into serious question by these results, as are the views of critics of AI such as Searle and Dreyfus.

The Social Sciences: Much research in the social sciences rests on views of the nature of rationality and of concepts that have been superceded by these results.

Postmodernism: This research is consistent with the antifoundationalism and historicism of postmodernist views, but is inconsistent with much of the remainder of postmodernist thought, for example, the arbitrariness of the sign, the purely contingent nature of concepts, the ungroundedness of meaning, radical relativism, etc.

Linguistics: These results challenge Chomskyan linguistics in the most fundamental way, and have led to the development of cognitive linguistics, a new and nongenerative linguistic theory. The course presents an introduction to the ideas on which the this field is based.

Working Groups

This course is cooperative, not competitive. You will not be graded on a curve. All assignments are to be worked on in groups, though written up individually. Group members take their own notes; no group notes are to be distributed. Group members do not go over each other's written assignments.

You form your own groups. On each written assignment, you list the members of your group. If anyone in your group has given you a particularly important idea, you say so in a footnote. The ideas generated by the group are to be used by all the members of the group. Since there is no competition for grades, you can only gain by working in groups. Because the assignments are difficult, you will find it particularly useful to discuss them with other group members. The course is designed so that much of what you learn will come from participation in working groups.

The take-home final and the term paper are also to be worked on in groups.

Typed Papers, Exams, and Homeworks
In 12 Point Type

To save the eyesight of those grading your homeworks, please hand them in typed. If you are using a computer, use 12 point type (this size).

Course Structure

Homeworks, papers, and exams must be handed in at the BEGINNING of class. DO NOT MISS CLASS so that you can hand in your homework at the very end of lecture. If your computer breaks down at the last minute, come to lecture anyway and make a special arragement to hand in the homework later in the day (but no later than that!).

Assignments will be given out on Tuesdays (except for the first week) and will be due the following Tuesday. Assignments will be returned (we hope) two days later on Thursday of the same week. All sections will be on Thursday (after class) and Friday. This will allow for section discussions of (1) the homeworks handed in on Tuesday, which should be fresh in your mind, (2) the homework due the following Tuesday, which you will have had two days to think about and to discuss in group, and (3) the previous week's lectures.

Since we are trying to get your assignments back to you after only two days, it is necessary that you hand them in on time!

Most of the main ideas in the course will be introduced in the first 10 weeks -- before spring break. There will be 9 weekly assignments during this period, and a lot of reading. After spring break, for the last five weeks of the course, there will be only a take-home final, a relatively short term paper, and relatively little reading. Thus, the most intense work in the course will come before spring break, leaving you a reasonable amount of time to work on your term paper and final and to think through the earlier portion of the course.

The final will be given out on the Tuesday of Week 12 and handed in on the Tuesday of Week 14. You should begin thinking about the term paper topic over spring break. A term paper prospectus will be due on the Tuesday of Week 12, so that you will have time to go over your term paper ideas with the instructor and TAs. The term paper will be due on the Tuesday of Week 15. We hope to be able to have both your final and your term paper returned to you with your final grade by the last class. You will have no course responsibilities during finals period.

Sections

Sections are mandatory and section attendance and participation will be part of your grade. There will be one 1 hour section meeting per week. The purpose of the sections is to provide further discussion of the readings and lectures. The sections are NOT for the discussion of pending assignments. Previous assignments that have been handed back may be discussed there.

Grading

There will be regular homeworks, a take-home final, and a short term paper. The homeworks will count 60%, the final will count 20%, the term paper will count 20%. Full section attendance and active section participation will raise your final grade a notch, e.g, from B+ to A-.

Late homeworks, finals, or term papers are unacceptable!

If you are seriously ill or some catastrophe happens, let us know and we'll do our best to accommodate you.

 

Grading System

Grades given on assignments will not correspond directly to letter grades: they are:

ïPlus: Excellent: above and beyond the call of duty. (Pluses are given very rarely.)

ïCheck plus: Very good work; completely competent.

ïCheck: Competent work.

ïCheck minus: There are very important things you don't understand.

ïMinus: You don't know what's going on.

The correspondence between these grades and letter grades are constrained by the following correspondences:

All pluses: an A+ (very rare).

All check pluses: an A.

All checks: a B.

All check minuses: a C-.

All minuses: F.

 
Readings

Required readings include:

Lakoff, George. 1987. Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About The Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

The first 105 pages of Lakoff and Johnson's Metaphors We Live By.

Gilles Fauconnierís Mental Spaces.

A Packet of Readings [Available at Copy Central on Bancroft (southside)]. Contents are listed below.