Volume 30, Issue 1
  • ISSN 0774-5141
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9676
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes


Computational simulation models of cognitive linguistics are relatively scarce (cf Valenzuela, 2010 ). This is due, among other things, to the inherent complexity of the movement’s conception of language. Cognitive linguistics places great emphasis on the integration of language with sensorimotor and conceptual structure, as well as on the embodied nature of cognition and the perspective of language as a social construct. This has made it difficult for cognitive linguistics to take advantage of the benefits of computational simulation (cf McClelland 2009 ).

The robotic paradigm of Luc Steels ( Steels 1998 , 2000 , 2004 , 2005 ) offers one of the most complete implementations of cognitive linguistics to date. In this paradigm, autonomous robotic agents play communication games in which linguistic information is represented by a version of construction grammar called “Fluid Construction Grammar”. The present chapter explains how this simulation is a true implementation of the theoretical proposals made by cognitive linguistics. More specifically, we show how these proposals have been operationalized for their use in the system.

Computational simulations like the one described here should be of great interest to any cognitive linguist. They provide an excellent testing ground for any theoretical proposal, bringing cognitive linguistics even closer to the cognitive-science enterprise.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. Amant, Robert St. , Clayton Morrison , Yu-Han Chang , Paul Cohen , and Carole Beal
    2006 “An Image Schema Language.” InProceedings of the 7th International Conference on Cognitive Modelling (ICCM 2006), 292–297.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Baker, Christopher F. , Charles J. Fillmore , and John B. Lowe
    1998 “The Berkeley FrameNet project.” InProceedings of the 17th International Conference on Computational Linguistics, 86–90. Morristown, NJ: Association for Computational Linguistics. doi: 10.3115/980451.980860
    https://doi.org/10.3115/980451.980860 [Google Scholar]
  3. Barlow, Michael , and Kemmer, Suzanne
    2000Usage-Based Models of Language. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bergen, Benjamin K. , and Nancy Chang
    2005 “Embodied Construction Grammar in Simulation-based Language Understanding.” InConstruction Grammar(s): Cognitive Grounding and Theoretical Extensions, ed. by Jan-Ola Östman , and Mirjam Fried , 147–190. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/cal.3.08ber
    https://doi.org/10.1075/cal.3.08ber [Google Scholar]
  5. Boas, Hans C.
    2001 “Frame Semantics as a Framework for Describing Polysemy and Syntactic Structures of English and German Motion Verbs in Contrastive Computational Lexicography.” InProceedings of the Corpus Linguistics 2001 conference, ed. by Paul Rayson , Andrew Wilson , Tony McEnery , Andrew Hardie , and Shereen Khoja , 64–73. Lancaster: University Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. 2005 “Semantic Frames as Interlingual Representations for Multilingual Lexical Databases.” International Journal of Lexicography18 (4): 445–478. doi: 10.1093/ijl/eci043
    https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/eci043 [Google Scholar]
  7. Bowerman, Margaret , and Sonja Choi
    2001 “Shaping Meanings for Language: Universal and Language-specific in the Acquisition of Semantic Categories.” InLanguage Acquisition and Conceptual Development, ed. by Melissa Bowerman , and Stephen C. Levinson , 475–511. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511620669.018
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511620669.018 [Google Scholar]
  8. 2003 “Space under Construction: Language-specific Spatial Categorization in First Language Acquisition.” InLanguage in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Thought, ed. by Dedre Gentner , and Susan Goldin-Meadow , 387–427. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Chang, Nancy , Srini Narayanan , and Miriam R. L. Petruck
    2002 “From Frames to Inference.” InProceedings of the First International Workshop on Scalable Natural Language Understanding, 478–484. Heidelberg: International Committee on Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Copestake, Ann
    2002Implementing Typed Feature Structure Grammars. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Coventry, Kenny. R. , Mercè Prat-Sala , and Lynn Richards
    2001 “The Interplay between Geometry and Function in the Comprehension of Over, Under, Above and Below .” Journal of Memory and Language44: 376–398. doi: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2742
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2000.2742 [Google Scholar]
  12. Croft, William
    2001Radical Construction Grammar: Syntactic Theory in Typological Perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198299554.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  13. Croft, William , and D. Alan Cruse
    2004Cognitive Linguistics. Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511803864
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511803864 [Google Scholar]
  14. Dik, Simon
    1992Functional Grammar in Prolog: An Integrated Implementation for English, French, and Dutch. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110850451
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110850451 [Google Scholar]
  15. Ellis, Nick , and Diane Larsen-Freeman
    (eds) 2009Language as a Complex Adaptive System. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Elman, Jeffrey L. , and Mary L. Hare
    1997Single Mechanism = Single Representation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Fillmore, Charles J.
    1985 “Frames and the Semantics of Understanding.” Quaderni di Semantica6: 222–254.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Geeraerts, Dirk
    2006 “Methodology in Cognitive Linguistics.” InCognitive Linguistics: Current Applications and Future Perspectives, ed. by Gitte Kristiansen , Michel Achard , René Dirven , and Francisco Ruiz de Mendoza Ibáñez , 21–49. Berlin: Mouton De Gruyter.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Geeraerts, Dirk , Stefan Grondelaers , and Peter Bakema
    1994The Structure of Lexical Variation: Meaning, naming, and context. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. doi: 10.1515/9783110873061
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110873061 [Google Scholar]
  20. Gerasymova, Kateryna , Luc Steels , and Remi van Trijp
    2009 “Aspectual Morphology of Russian Verbs in Fluid Construction Grammar.” InProceedings of the 31th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. by N. A. Taatgen , and H. van Rijn , 1370–1375. Austin: Cognitive Science Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Gibson, Edward , and Evelina Fedorenko
    2010 “Weak quantitative standards in linguistics research.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 14: 233–234. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2010.03.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2010.03.005 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gonzalez-Marquez, Monica , Irene Mittelberg , Seana Coulson , and Michael J. Spivey
    (eds) 2007Methods in Cognitive Linguistics. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/hcp.18
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.18 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gopnik, Myma , and Martha Crago
    1991 “Familial Aggregation of a Developmental Language Disorder.” Cognition39: 1–50. doi: 10.1016/0010‑0277(91)90058‑C
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(91)90058-C [Google Scholar]
  24. Harnad, Stephen
    1990 “The Symbol Grounding Problem.” Physica D42: 335–346. doi: 10.1016/0167‑2789(90)90087‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(90)90087-6 [Google Scholar]
  25. Hartmann, Stephan
    2005 “The World as a Process: Simulations in the Natural and Social Sciences.” In: Modelling and Simulation in the Social Sciences from the Philosophy of Science Point of View, ed. by R. Hegselmann et al. , 77–100. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Ibarretxe-Antuñano, Iraide , and Javier Valenzuela
    2010 “Language as a Complex System: A View from Cognitive Linguistics.” InLanguage as a Complex System: Interdisciplinary Challenges, ed. by Gemma Bel-Enguix , and M. Dolores Jiménez López , 3–38. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholar Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Jaeger, Jeri J. , Alan H. Lockwood , David L. Kemmerer , Robert D. Van Valin , Vrian W. Murphy , and Hanif G. Khalak
    1996 “A Positron Emission Tomographic Study of Regular and Irregular Verb Morphology in English.” Language72: 451–497. doi: 10.2307/416276
    https://doi.org/10.2307/416276 [Google Scholar]
  28. Janda, Laura A.
    2004 “A Metaphor in Search of a Source Domain: The Categories of Slavic Aspect.” Cognitive Linguistics15: 471–527. doi: 10.1515/cogl.2004.15.4.471
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.2004.15.4.471 [Google Scholar]
  29. 2008 “Semantic Motivations for Aspectual Clusters of Russian Verbs.” InAmerican Contributions to the 14th International Congress of Slavists, Ohrid, September 2008, ed. by Christina Y. Bethin , 181–196. Bloomington: Slavica Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Joanisse, Mark F. , and Mark S. Seidenberg
    1999 “Impairments in Verb Morphology after Brain Injury: A Connectionist Model.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA96: 7592–7597. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.13.7592
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.96.13.7592 [Google Scholar]
  31. Johnson, Mark
    1987The Body in the Mind: The Bodily Basis of Meaning, Imagination, and Reason. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kay, Paul , and Charles J. Fillmore
    1999 “Grammatical Constructions and Linguistic Generalizations: The What's X Doing Y? construction.” Language75: 1–33. doi: 10.2307/417472
    https://doi.org/10.2307/417472 [Google Scholar]
  33. Lakoff, George
    1987Women, Fire, and Dangerous Things: What Categories Reveal About the Mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. doi: 10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226471013.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  34. Lakoff, George , and Mark Johnson
    1999Philosophy in the Flesh: The Embodied Mind and its Challenge to Western Thought. New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Langacker, Ronald W.
    1987Foundations of Cognitive Grammar. Volume 1: Theoretical Prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Lecomte, Alain
    2003 “A Computational Approach to Minimalism.” InProceedings of ICON-2003, International Conference on Natural Language, 20–31. Mysore: Central Institute of Indian Languages.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Lemmens, Maarten
    2002 “The Semantic Network of Dutch Posture Verbs.” InThe Linguistics of Sitting, Standing and Lying, ed. by John Newman (Ed.), 103–139. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. doi: 10.1075/tsl.51.07lem
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.51.07lem [Google Scholar]
  38. Loetzsch, Martin , Remi van Trijp , and Luc Steels
    2008 “Typological and Computational Investigations of Spatial Perspective.” InModeling Communication for Robots and Virtual Humans, ed. by Ipke Wachsmuth , and Günther Knoblich , 125–142. Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/978‑3‑540‑79037‑2_7
    https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-79037-2_7 [Google Scholar]
  39. Mandler, Jean M.
    1992 “How to Build a Baby II: Conceptual Primitives.” Psychological Review99: 587–604. doi: 10.1037/0033‑295X.99.4.587
    https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.99.4.587 [Google Scholar]
  40. 2010 “The Spatial Foundations of the Conceptual System.” Language and Cognition2: 21–44. doi: 10.1515/langcog.2010.002
    https://doi.org/10.1515/langcog.2010.002 [Google Scholar]
  41. Majid, Asifa , Melissa Bowerman , Sotaro Kita , Daniel Haun , and Stephen C. Levinson
    2004 “Can Language Restructure Cognition? The Case for Space.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences8: 108–114. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2004.01.003
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2004.01.003 [Google Scholar]
  42. Matthiessen, Christian M.I.M. , and John A. Bateman
    1991Text Generation and Systemic-Functional Linguistics: Experiences from English and Japanese. London: Pinter Publishers.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. McClelland, James L.
    2009 “The Place of Modeling in Cognitive Science.” Topics in Cognitive Science1: 11–38. doi: 10.1111/j.1756‑8765.2008.01003.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1756-8765.2008.01003.x [Google Scholar]
  44. Micelli, Vanessa , Remi van Trijp , and Joachim De Beule
    2009 “Framing Fluid Construction Grammar.” InProceedings of the 31th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. by N. A. Taatgen , and H. van Rijn , 3023–3027. Austin: Cognitive Science Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Micelli, Vanessa , and Remi van Trijp
    . Submitted. “Information Structure in Grounded Embodied Agents.”
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Michaelis, Laura
    2013 “Sign-based Construction Grammar.” InThe Oxford Handbook of Construction Grammar, ed. by Thomas Hoffman , and Graeme Trousdale , 133–152. New York: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Piaget, Jean
    1954The Construction of Reality in the Child. Translated by Margaret Cook . New York: Basic Books. Originally appeared as Piaget 1937, La construction du réel chez l'enfant.
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Pinker, Steven , and Alan Prince
    1988 “On Language and Connectionism: Analysis of a Parallel Distributed Processing Model of Language Acquisition.” Cognition28: 73–193. doi: 10.1016/0010‑0277(88)90032‑7
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(88)90032-7 [Google Scholar]
  49. Plunkett, Kim , and Virginia Marchman
    1993 “From Rote Learning to System Building – Acquiring Verb Morphology in Children and Connectionist Nets.” Cognition48: 21–69. doi: 10.1016/0010‑0277(93)90057‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(93)90057-3 [Google Scholar]
  50. Rager, John , and George Berg
    1992 “A Connectionist Model of Motion and Government on Chomsky's Government-binding Theory.” Connection Science2: 35–52. doi: 10.1080/09540099008915661
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09540099008915661 [Google Scholar]
  51. Regier, Terry
    1996The Human Semantic Potential. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Rumelhart, David , and James McClelland
    1986 “On Learning the Past Tenses of English Verbs: Implicit Rules or Parallel Distributed Processing?” InParallel Distributed Processing: Explorations in the Microstructure of Cognition, ed. by James McClelland , David Rumelhart , and the PDP Research Group, 216–271. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Seidenberg, Mark S. , and James H. Hoeffner
    1998 “Evaluating Behavioral and Neuroimaging Data on Past Tense Processing.” Language74: 104–122. doi: 10.1353/lan.1998.0087
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.1998.0087 [Google Scholar]
  54. Shieber, Stuart M.
    1986An Introduction to Unification-Based Approaches to Grammar. Volume4. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Siskind, Jeffrey M.
    2001 “Grounding the Lexical Semantics of Verbs in Visual Perception Using Force Dynamics and Event Logic.” Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research (JAIR) 15: 31–90.
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Smith, Linda B. , and Esther Thelen
    2003 “Development as a Dynamic System.” Trends in Cognitive Sciences7: 343–348. doi: 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00156‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00156-6 [Google Scholar]
  57. Speelman, Dirk , Stefan Grondelaers , and Dirk Geeraerts
    2003 “Profile-based Linguistic Uniformity as a Generic Method for Comparing Language Varieties.” Computers and the Humanities37: 317–337. doi: 10.1023/A:1025019216574
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025019216574 [Google Scholar]
  58. Spranger, Michael , and Martin Loetzsch
    2009 “The Semantics of SIT, STAND, and LIE Embodied in Robots.” InProceedings of the 31th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, ed. by N. A. Taatgen , and H. van Rijn , 2546–2552. Austin: Cognitive Science Society.
    [Google Scholar]
  59. Steels, Luc
    1997 “Synthesising the Origins of Language and Meaning Using Co-evolution, Self-organisation and Level Formation.” InApproaches to the Evolution of Language: Social and Cognitive Bases, ed. by J. Hurford , C. Knight , and M. Studdert-Kennedy , 384–404. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  60. 1998 “The Origins of Syntax in Visually Grounded Robotic Agents.” Artificial Intelligence103: 133–156. doi: 10.1016/S0004‑3702(98)00066‑6
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0004-3702(98)00066-6 [Google Scholar]
  61. 2000 “Language as a Complex Adaptive System.” InParallel Problem Solving from Nature – PPSN-VI, ed. by Marc Schoenauer et al. , 17–26. Berlin: Springer. doi: 10.1007/3‑540‑45356‑3_2
    https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45356-3_2 [Google Scholar]
  62. 2001 “Language Games for Autonomous Robots.” IEEE Intelligent SystemsSeptember/October 2001: 16–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  63. 2004 “Constructivist Development of Grounded Construction Grammars.” InProceedings of the 42nd Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics, ed. by D. Scott , W. Daelemans , and M. Walker , 9–19. Barcelona: Association for Computational Linguistics.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. 2005 “The Emergence and Evolution of Linguistic Structure: From Lexical to Grammatical Communication Systems.” Connection Science17: 213–230. doi: 10.1080/09540090500269088
    https://doi.org/10.1080/09540090500269088 [Google Scholar]
  65. Steels, Luc , and Tony Belpaeme
    2005 “Coordinating Perceptually Grounded Categories through Language: A Case Study for Colour.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28: 469–489. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X05000087
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X05000087 [Google Scholar]
  66. Subirats-Rüggeberg, Carlos , and Miriam R. L. Petruck
    2003 “Surprise: Spanish FrameNet!” InProceedings of the Workshop on Frame Semantics, XVII International Congress of Linguists (CIL), Prague, Czech Republic, ed. by Eva Hajičová et al , CD-ROM. Prague: Matfyzpress.
    [Google Scholar]
  67. Tomasello, Michael
    2003Constructing a Language: A Usage-based Theory of Language Acquisition. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Ullman, Michael T. , Suzanne Corkin , Marie Coppola , Gregory Hickok , John H. Growdon , Walter J. Koroshetz , and Steven Pinker
    1997 “A Neural Dissociation within Language: Evidence that the Mental Dictionary is Part of Declarative Memory, and that Grammatical Rules are Processed by the Procedural System.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience9: 266–276. doi: 10.1162/jocn.1997.9.2.266
    https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1997.9.2.266 [Google Scholar]
  69. Valenzuela, Javier
    2010 “Cognitive Linguistics and Computational Modeling.” Textus13: 763–794.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. van Trijp, Remi
    2008Analogy and Multi-Level Selection in the Formation of a Case Grammar. A Case Study in Fluid Construction Grammar. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Antwerp.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. 2010 “Cognitive Mechanisms Need to be Operationalized. Commentary on Sonia Cristofaro: Semantic Maps and Mental Representation.” Linguistic Discovery8, Issue1. Special Issue on Semantic Maps: Methods and Applications, edited by Michael Cysouw , Martin Haspelmath and Andrej Malchukov . doi: 10.1349/PS1.1537‑0852.A.363.
    https://doi.org/10.1349/PS1.1537-0852.A.363 [Google Scholar]
  72. Wellens, Pieter , and Joachim De Beule
    2010 “Priming through Constructional Dependencies: A Case Study in Fluid Construction Grammar.” InThe Evolution of Language (EVOLANG8), ed. by Andrew Smith , Marieke Schouwstra , Bart de Boer , and Kenny Smith , 344–351. Singapore: World Scientific. doi: 10.1142/9789814295222_0044
    https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814295222_0044 [Google Scholar]
  73. Zeschel, Arne
    2008 “Introduction: Usage-based Models of Language Processing and Representation.” Cognitive Linguistics19: 345–355. doi: 10.1515/COGL.2008.013
    https://doi.org/10.1515/COGL.2008.013 [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error