From words-as-mappings to words-as-cues: the role of language in semantic knowledge

References

• Allport, D. A. (1985). Distributed memory, modular subsystems and dysphasia. In S. K. Newman & R. Epstein (Eds.), Current perspectives in dysphasia (pp. 32–60). New York: Churchill Livingstone.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, A. J., Bruni, E., Bordignon, U., Poesio, M., & Baroni, M. (2013). Of words, eyes and brains: Correlating image-based distributional semantic models with neural representations of concepts. In Proceedings of the conference on empirical methods on natural language processing (pp. 1960–1970). Seattle, WA. Retrieved from http://www.aclweb.org/anthology/D13-1202
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. C., Pichert, J. W., Goetz, E. T., Schallert, D. L., Stevens, K. V., & Trollip, S. R. (1976). Instantiation of general terms. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15(6), 667–679.
   Google Scholar
• Anderson, R. C., & Shifrin, Z. (1980). The meaning of words in context. In R. J. Spiro, B. C. Bruce, & W. F. Brewer (Eds.), Theoretical issues in reading comprehension (pp. 331–348). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Andrews, M., Vigliocco, G., & Vinson, D. (2009). Integrating experiential and distributional data to learn semantic representations. Psychological Review, 116(3), 463–498. doi: 10.1037/a0016261
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asr, F., Willits, J., & Jones, M. (2016). Comparing predictive and co-occurrence based models of lexical semantics trained on child-directed speech. In Proceedings of the 37th meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 1092–1097). Retrieved from https://mindmodeling.org/cogsci2016/papers/0197/paper0197.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Balaban, M. T., & Waxman, S. R. (1997). Do words facilitate object categorization in 9-month-old infants? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64(1), 3–26.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baroni, M., Dinu, G., & Kruszewski, G. (2014). Don’t count, predict! A systematic comparison of context-counting vs. context-predicting semantic vectors. In Proceedings of the 52nd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics (pp. 238–247). Baltimore, MD. Retrieved from http://anthology.aclweb.org/P/P14/P14-1023.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Barrett, M. D. (1986). Early semantic representations and early word-usage. In S. A. I. Kuczaj & M. D. Barrett (Eds.), The development of word meaning (pp. 39–67). New York: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4612-4844-6_2
   Google Scholar
• Barsalou, L. W. (2008). Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology, 59(1), 617–645. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.59.103006.093639
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barsalou, L. W. (2016). On staying grounded and avoiding quixotic dead ends. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1–21. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1028-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bellebaum, C., Tettamanti, M., Marchetta, E., Della Rosa, P., Rizzo, G., Daum, I., & Cappa, S. F. (2013). Neural representations of unfamiliar objects are modulated by sensorimotor experience. Cortex; A Journal Devoted to the Study of the Nervous System and Behavior, 49(4), 1110–1125. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.03.023
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bickerton, D. (2014). Some problems for biolinguistics. Biolinguistics, 8, 73–96.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, L. (1995). The transition from infancy to language: Acquiring the power of expression (Revised ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bloom, P. (2002). How children learn the meanings of words. Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book.
   Google Scholar
• Bojanowski, P., Grave, E., Joulin, A., & Mikolov, T. (2016). Enriching word vectors with subword information. arXiv:1607.04606 [Cs]. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1607.04606
   Google Scholar
• Borghi, A. M., & Cimatti, F. (2009). Words as tools and the problem of abstract words meanings. In N. A. Taatgen & H. van Rijn (Eds.), Proceedings of the 31st annual conference of the cognitive science society. Retrieved from http://csjarchive.cogsci.rpi.edu/proceedings/2009/papers/536/index.html
   Google Scholar
• Borin, L. (2012). Core vocabulary: A useful but mystical concept in some kinds of linguistics. In D. Santos, K. Lindén, & W. Ng’ang’a (Eds.), Shall we play the festschrift game? (pp. 53–65). Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-3-642-30773-7_6
   Google Scholar
• Boutonnet, B., & Lupyan, G. (2015). Words jump-start vision: A label advantage in object recognition. The Journal of Neuroscience, 35(25), 9329–9335. doi: 10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5111-14.2015
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bowerman, M. (2000). Where do children’s word meanings come from? Rethinking the role of cognition in early semantic development. In L. Nucci & E. Saxe (Eds.), Culture, thought, and development (pp. 199–230). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=TsZ5AgAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PA173&ots=wQ71Nw1nVD&sig=uG37FVCKBMuJP3-Z2VamRRthWbs
   Google Scholar
• Bowerman, M., & Choi, S. (2003). Space under construction: Language-specific spatial categorization in first language acquisition. In D. Gentner & S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.), Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought (pp. 387–427). Cambride, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, R. (1958). Words and things. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bruni, E., Boleda, G., Baroni, M., & Tran, N.-K. (2012). Distributional semantics in technicolor. In Proceedings of the 50th annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics: Long papers-volume 1 (pp. 136–145). Association for Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2390544
   Google Scholar
• Bruni, E., Tran, N. K., & Baroni, M. (2014). Multimodal distributional semantics. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 49(1), 1–47.
   Google Scholar
• Brysbaert, M., Warriner, A. B., & Kuperman, V. (2014). Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 46(3), 904–911. doi: 10.3758/s13428-013-0403-5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caliskan, A., Bryson, J. J., & Narayanan, A. (2017). Semantics derived automatically from language corpora contain human-like biases. Science, 356(6334), 183–186. doi: 10.1126/science.aal4230
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carey, S. (2009). The origin of concepts. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Carruthers, P., & Boucher, J. (1998). Language and thought: Interdisciplinary themes. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Casasanto, D., & Lupyan, G. (2014). All concepts are ad hoc concepts. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Concepts: New directions (pp. 543–566). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Casasola, M. (2005). Can language do the driving? The effect of linguistic input on infants’ categorization of support spatial relations. Developmental Psychology, 41(1), 183–192. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.41.1.188
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chomsky, N. (2010). Some simple evo devo theses: How true might they be for language? In R. K. Larson, V. Déprez, & H. Yamakido (Eds.), The evolution of human language: Biolinguistic perspectives (pp. 45–62). Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511817755.003
   Google Scholar
• Clark, E. V. (1973). What's in a word? On the child's acquisition of semantics in his first language. In T. E. Moore (Ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. 65–110). New York: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Wilkes-Gibbs, D. (1986). Referring as a collaborative process. Cognition, 22(1), 1–39.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connolly, A. C., Gleitman, L. R., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2007). Effect of congenital blindness on the semantic representation of some everyday concepts. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(20), 8241–8246. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0702812104
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cross, E. S., Cohen, N. R., de Hamilton, A. F. C., Ramsey, R., Wolford, G., & Grafton, S. T. (2012). Physical experience leads to enhanced object perception in parietal cortex: Insights from knot tying. Neuropsychologia, 50(14), 3207–3217. doi: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2012.09.028
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davidoff, J., & Roberson, D. (2004). Preserved thematic and impaired taxonomic categorisation: A case study. Language and Cognitive Processes, 19(1), 137–174.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Deyne, S., Navarro, D. J., & Storms, G. (2013). Better explanations of lexical and semantic cognition using networks derived from continued rather than single-word associations. Behavior Research Methods, 45(2), 480–498. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0260-7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Devitt, M., & Sterelny, K. (1987). Language and reality: An introduction to the philosophy of language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Eco, U. (2008). Experiences in translation (1st ed.). Toronto: University of Toronto Press, Scholarly Publishing Division. A. McEwen, Trans.
   Google Scholar
• Edmiston, P., & Lupyan, G. (2015). What makes words special? Words as unmotivated cues. Cognition, 143, 93–100. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.06.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edmiston, P., & Lupyan, G. (2017). Visual interference disrupts visual knowledge. Journal of Memory and Language, 92, 281–292. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2016.07.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elman, J. L. (1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14(2), 179–211.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elman, J. L. (2004). An alternative view of the mental lexicon. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 8(7), 301–306. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.05.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elman, J. L. (2009). On the meaning of words and dinosaur bones: Lexical knowledge without a lexicon. Cognitive Science, 33(4), 547–582. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01023.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fasmer, M. (2009). Etimologicheskiy slovar russkogo yazyka. V 4 tomah. Tom 4. T-Yaschur. Moskva: AST.
   Google Scholar
• Firth, J. R. (1957). A synopsis of linguistic theory 1930–1955. In Studies in linguistic analysis (pp. 1–32). Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher, C., Hall, D. G., Rakowitz, S., & Gleitman, L. (1994). When it is better to receive than to give: Syntactic and conceptual constraints on vocabulary growth. Lingua, 92, 333–375. doi: 10.1016/0024-3841(94)90346-8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fodor, J. A. (1975). The language of thought. Cambride, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fodor, J. A. (2001). Language, thought and compositionality. Mind and Language, 16(1), 1–15. doi: 10.1111/1468-0017.00153
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fodor, J. A. (2010). LOT 2: The language of thought revisited. Oxford [u.a.]: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fodor, J. A., & Lepore, E. (1996). The red herring and the pet fish: Why concepts still can’t be prototypes. Cognition, 58(2), 253–270.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forder, L., & Lupyan, G. (2017a). Hearing words changes color perception: Facilitation of color discrimination by verbal vs. visual cues. Retrieved from https://psyarxiv.com/f83au
   Google Scholar
• Forder, L., & Lupyan, G. (2017b). Facilitation of color discrimination by verbal and visual cues. PsyArXiv Preprints. doi: 10.17605/OSF.IO/F83AU
   Google Scholar
• Frome, A., Corrado, G. S., Shlens, J., Bengio, S., Dean, J., Ranzato, M. A., & Mikolov, T. (2013). DeViSE: A deep visual-semantic embedding model. In C. J. C. Burges, L. Bottou, M. Welling, Z. Ghahramani, & K. Q. Weinberger (Eds.), Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 2121–2129). Curran Associates. Retrieved from http://papers.nips.cc/paper/5204-devise-a-deep-visual-semantic-embedding-model.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Fulkerson, A. L., & Waxman, S. R. (2007). Words (but not tones) facilitate object categorization: Evidence from 6- and 12-month-olds. Cognition, 105(1), 218–228.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garnham, A. (1979). Instantiation of verbs. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 31(2), 207–214. doi: 10.1080/14640747908400720
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gentner, D., & Boroditsky, L. (2001). Individuation, relational relativity and early word learning. In M. Bowerman, & S. C. Levinson (Eds.), Language acquisition and conceptual development (pp. 215–256). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gentner, D., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gerz, D., Vulić, I., Hill, F., Reichart, R., & Korhonen, A. (2016). Simverb-3500: A large-scale evaluation set of verb similarity. arXiv Preprint arXiv:1608.00869. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00869
   Google Scholar
• Gleitman, L. (1990). The structural sources of verb meanings. Language Acquisition, 1(1), 3–55.
   Google Scholar
• Gleitman, L., Armstrong, S. L., & Connolly, A. C. (2012). Can prototype representations support composition and decomposition? In M. Werning, W. Hinzen, & E. Machery (Eds.), Oxford handbook of compositionality (pp. 123–142). New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gleitman, L., & Fisher, C. (2005). Universal aspects of word learning. In J. McGilvray (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Chomsky (pp. 123–144). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=I6CZ6wpNKeEC&oi=fnd&pg=PA123&ots=ujaHwtyK8O&sig=N-te0BeTbB0IyV7aOmuwBAqwtCk
   Google Scholar
• Goddard, C., & Wierzbicka, A. (2002). Meaning and universal grammar: Theory and empirical findings. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Goldberg, A. E. (2003). Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(5), 219–224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grice, H. P. (1957). Meaning. The Philosophical Review, 66, 377–388.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hagoort, P., & Van Berkum, J. (2007). Beyond the sentence given. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 362(1481), 801–811. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2007.2089
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hill, F., Reichart, R., & Korhonen, A. (2016). Simlex-999: Evaluating semantic models with (genuine) similarity estimation. Computational Linguistics. Retrieved from http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/COLI_a_00237
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoff, E. (2013). Language development. Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.
   Google Scholar
• Hollis, G., & Westbury, C. (2016). The principals of meaning: Extracting semantic dimensions from co-occurrence models of semantics. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23(6), 1744–1756. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1053-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang, Y. T., & Snedeker, J. (2009). Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: Insight into the semantics–pragmatics interface. Cognitive Psychology, 58(3), 376–415.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ingraham, A. (1903). Swain school lectures. Open Court. Retrieved from https://archive.org/details/swainschoollect00ingrgoog
   Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. (1983). Semantics and cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Jackendoff, R. S. (1990). Semantic structures. Cambride, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Koemeda-Lutz, M., Cohen, R., & Meier, E. (1987). Organization of and access to semantic memory in aphasia. Brain and Language, 30(2), 321–337.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lakoff, G. (1990). Women, fire, and dangerous things. Chicogo, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Landauer, T. K., & Dumais, S. T. (1997). A solution to Plato’s problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review, 104(2), 211–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laurence, S., & Margolis, E. (1999). Concepts and cognitive science. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Concepts: Core readings (pp. 3–81). Cambridge, MA: A Bradford Book.
   Google Scholar
• Leavitt, J. (2011). Linguistic relativities: Language diversity and modern thought. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lenci, A. (2008). Distributional semantics in linguistic and cognitive research. Rivista Di Linguistica, 20(1), 1–31.
   Google Scholar
• Levinson, S. C. (1997). From outer to inner space: Linguistic categories and non-linguistic thinking. In J. Nuyts & E. Pederson (Eds.), Language and conceptualization (pp. 13–45). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Levy, O., & Goldberg, Y. (2014). Neural word embedding as implicit matrix factorization. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 2177–2185). Retrieved from http://papers.nips.cc/paper/5477-scalable-non-linear-learning-with-adaptive-polynomial-expansions.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, M. L., & Frank, M. C. (2013). An integrated model of concept learning and word-concept mapping. In Proceedings of the 35th annual meeting of the cognitive science society (pp. 882–887). Austin, TX. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.691.8652
   Google Scholar
• Lewis, M. L., & Frank, M. C. (2016). The length of words reflects their conceptual complexity. Cognition, 153, 182–195. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2016.04.003
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li, P., & Gleitman, L. (2002). Turning the tables: Language and spatial reasoning. Cognition, 83(3), 265–294.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Louwerse, M. M. (2011). Symbol interdependency in symbolic and embodied cognition. Topics in Cognitive Science, 3(2), 273–302. doi: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2010.01106.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lund, K., & Burgess, C. (1996). Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28(2), 203–208. doi: 10.3758/BF03204766
   Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G. (2008). The conceptual grouping effect: Categories matter (and named categories matter more). Cognition, 108(2), 566–577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G. (2009). Extracommunicative functions of language: Verbal interference causes selective categorization impairments. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16(4), 711–718. doi: 10.3758/PBR.16.4.711
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G. (2012). What do words do? Towards a theory of language-augmented thought. In B. H. Ross (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation (Vol. 57, pp. 255–297). Waltham, MA: Academic Press. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B9780123942937000078
   Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G. (2015). The paradox of the universal triangle: Concepts, language, and prototypes. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2015.1130730
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G. (2016). The centrality of language in human cognition. Language Learning, 66(3), 516–553. doi: 10.1111/lang.12155
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G. (2017). Changing what you see by changing what you know: The role of attention. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1055. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00553
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., & Bergen, B. (2015). How language programs the mind. Topics in Cognitive Science. doi: 10.1111/tops.12155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., & Casasanto, D. (2015). Meaningless words promote meaningful categorization. Language and Cognition, 7(2), 167–193. doi: 10.1017/langcog.2014.21
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., & Mirman, D. (2013). Linking language and categorization: Evidence from aphasia. Cortex, 49(5), 1187–1194. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2012.06.006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., Rakison, D. H., & McClelland, J. L. (2007). Language is not just for talking: Labels facilitate learning of novel categories. Psychological Science, 18(12), 1077–1083.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., & Spivey, M. J. (2008). Perceptual processing is facilitated by ascribing meaning to novel stimuli. Current Biology, 18(10), R410–R412.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., & Spivey, M. J. (2010a). Making the invisible visible: Auditory cues facilitate visual object detection. PLoS ONE, 5(7), e11452. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0011452
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., & Spivey, M. J. (2010b). Redundant spoken labels facilitate perception of multiple items. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 72(8), 2236–2253. doi: 10.3758/APP.72.8.2236
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2012). The evocative power of words: Activation of concepts by verbal and nonverbal means. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(1), 170–186. doi: 10.1037/a0024904
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lupyan, G., & Ward, E. J. (2013). Language can boost otherwise unseen objects into visual awareness. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110(35), 14196–14201. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1303312110
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahon, B. Z., & Caramazza, A. (2008). A critical look at the embodied cognition hypothesis and a new proposal for grounding conceptual content. Journal of Physiology-Paris, 102(1), 59–70
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahon, B. Z., & Hickok, G. (2016). Arguments about the nature of concepts: Symbols, embodiment, and beyond. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 1–18. doi: 10.3758/s13423-016-1045-2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majid, A. (2015). Comparing lexicons cross-linguistically. In John R. Taylor (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of the word (pp. 364–379). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Malt, B. C., Gennari, S., Imai, M., Ameel, E., Saji, N., & Majid, A. (2015). Where are the concepts? What words can and can’t reveal. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Concepts: New directions. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Malt, B. C., Gennari, S. P., Imai, M., Ameel, E., Saji, N., & Majid, A. (in press). Where are the concepts? What words can and can’t reveal. In E. Margolis & S. Laurence (Eds.), Concepts: New directions. Camrbridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Marmor, G. S. (1978). Age at onset of blindness and the development of the semantics of color names. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 25(2), 267–278. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(78)90082-6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McMurray, B., Horst, J. S., & Samuelson, L. K. (2012). Word learning emerges from the interaction of online referent selection and slow associative learning. Psychological Review, 119(4), 831–877. doi: 10.1037/a0029872
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mikolov, T., Chen, K., Corrado, G., & Dean, J. (2013). Efficient estimation of word representations in vector space. arXiv Preprint arXiv:1301.3781. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1301.3781
   Google Scholar
• Mikolov, T., Sutskever, I., Chen, K., Corrado, G., & Dean, J. (2013). Distributed Representations of Words and Phrases and their Compositionality. arXiv:1310.4546 [Cs, Stat]. Retrieved from http://arxiv.org/abs/1310.4546
   Google Scholar
• Mitchell, J., & Lapata, M. (2010). Composition in distributional models of semantics. Cognitive Science, 34(8), 1388–1429. doi: 10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01106.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Munroe, R. P. (2010, May 4). Color survey results. Retrieved from http://blog.xkcd.com/2010/05/03/color-survey-results/
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, G. L. (2002). The big book of concepts. Cambride, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, M. L. (2010). Meaning variation: Polysemy, homonymy, and vagueness. In Lexical meaning. Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511780684.009
   Google Scholar
• Murphy, G. L., & Medin, D. (1985). The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review, 92(3), 289–316. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.92.3.289
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson, D. L., McEvoy, C. L., & Schreiber, T. A. (2004). The University of South Florida free association, rhyme, and word fragment norms. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(3), 402–407. doi: 10.3758/BF03195588
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Nerlich, B. (2003). Polysemy: Flexible patterns of meaning in mind and language. New York, NY: Walter de Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Painter, C. (2005). Learning through language in early childhood. New York, NY: A&C Black.
   Google Scholar
• Pennington, J., Socher, R., & Manning, C. D. (2014). Glove: Global vectors for word representation. In EMNLP (Vol. 14, pp. 1532–1543). Retrieved from https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b397/ed9a08ca46566aa8c35be51e6b466643e5fb.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Perry, L. K., & Lupyan, G. (2014). The role of language in multi-dimensional categorization: Evidence from transcranial direct current stimulation and exposure to verbal labels. Brain and Language, 135, 66–72. doi: 10.1016/j.bandl.2014.05.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct. New York: Harper Collins.
   Google Scholar
• Robinson, C. W., Best, C. A., Deng, W. (Sophia), & Sloutsky, V. M. (2012). The role of words in cognitive tasks: What, when, and how? Frontiers in Psychology, 3. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00095
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roth, E. M., & Shoben, E. J. (1983). The effect of context on the structure of categories. Cognitive Psychology, 15(3), 346–378. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(83)90012-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumelhart, D. E. (1979). Some problems with the notion that words have literal meanings. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 71–82). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Saji, N., Imai, M., Saalbach, H., Zhang, Y., Shu, H., & Okada, H. (2011). Word learning does not end at fast-mapping: Evolution of verb meanings through reorganization of an entire semantic domain. Cognition, 118(1), 45–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandra, D., & Rice, S. (1995). Network analyses of prepositional meaning: Mirroring whose mind—the linguist’s or the language user’s? Cognitive Linguistics, 6(1), 89–130. doi: 10.1515/cogl.1995.6.1.89
   Google Scholar
• Shepard, R. N., Hovland, C. I., & Jenkins, H. M. (1961). Learning and memorization of classifications. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 75(13), 1–42. doi: 10.1037/h0093825
   Google Scholar
• Silberer, C., Ferrari, V., & Lapata, M. (2016). Visually grounded meaning representations. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence. doi: 10.1109/TPAMI.2016.2635138
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Siskind, J. M. (1996). A computational study of cross-situational techniques for learning word-to-meaning mappings. Cognition, 61(1), 39–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snedeker, J., & Gleitman, L. (2004). Why is it hard to label our concepts? In D. G. Hall & S. R. Waxman (Eds.), Weaving a lexicon (illustrated ed., pp. 257–294). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tabossi, P., & Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1980). Linguistic context and the priming of semantic information. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 32(4), 595–603. doi: 10.1080/14640748008401848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomasello, M. (2001). Could we please lose the mapping metaphor, please? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(6), 1119–1120.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tyler, A., & Evans, V. (2001). Reconsidering prepositional polysemy networks: The case of over. Language, 77(4), 724–765.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uspenskij, L. (1962). Слово о словах (Slovo o slovah). Лениздат (Lenizdat). Retrieved from http://www.speakrus.ru/uspens/
   Google Scholar
• Van Berkum, J. J. (2008). Understanding sentences in context: What brain waves can tell us. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 17(6), 376–380.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Berkum, J. J., van den Brink, D., Tesink, C. M. J. Y., Kos, M., & Hagoort, P. (2008). The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(4), 580–591. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2008.20054
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, K., Dobkins, K., & Barner, D. (2013). Slow mapping: Color word learning as a gradual inductive process. Cognition, 127(3), 307–317. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.01.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waxman, S. R., & Leddon, E. M. (2010). Early word-learning and conceptual development. In U. Goswami (Ed.), The Wiley-Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (pp. 180–208). Wiley-Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781444325485.ch7
   Google Scholar
• Waxman, S. R., & Markow, D. B. (1995). Words as invitations to form categories: Evidence from 12- to 13-month-old infants. Cognitive Psychology, 29(3), 257–302.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought, and reality. ( J. B. Carroll, Ed.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wierzbicka, A. (1996). Semantics: Primes and universals. Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=ZN029Pmbnu4C&oi=fnd&pg=PA3&dq=info:QazMfnERxREJ:scholar.google.com&ots=u-f4yd6owJ&sig=JYdRS-9zbrFun-1S4B_h0GOHFdY
   Google Scholar
• Wierzbicka, A. (2009). All people eat and drink. Does this mean that “eat” and “drink” are universal human concepts? In J. Newman (Ed.), Typological studies in language (Vol. 84, pp. 65–89). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.84.05wie
   Google Scholar
• Wierzbicka, A. (2013). Imprisoned in English: The Hazards of English as a default language (1st ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Willits, J. A., Amato, M. S., & MacDonald, M. C. (2015). Language knowledge and event knowledge in language use. Cognitive Psychology, 78, 1–27.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xu, F., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2007). Word learning as Bayesian inference. Psychological Review, 114(2), 245–272. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.114.2.245
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yee, E., Jones, K., & McRae. (in press). Semantic memory. In J. W. & S. Thompson-Schill (Eds.), The Stevens’ handbook of experimental psychology and neuroscience, fourth edition. Wiley. Retrieved from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/book/10.1002/9781119170174.
   Google Scholar
• Zwaan, R. A. (2014). Embodiment and language comprehension: Reframing the discussion. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18(5), 229–234. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2014.02.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R. A., & Yaxley, R. H. (2002). Language comprehenders mentally represent the shapes of objects. Psychological Science, 13(2), 168–171. doi: 10.1111/1467-9280.00430
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar