对话式认知

IF 1.7 2区 文学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Language Sciences Pub Date : 2024-03-15 DOI:10.1016/j.langsci.2024.101615
Sarah Bro Trasmundi , Sune Vork Steffensen
{"title":"对话式认知","authors":"Sarah Bro Trasmundi ,&nbsp;Sune Vork Steffensen","doi":"10.1016/j.langsci.2024.101615","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In this article we review Per Linell's work within the last five decades that led to his dialogism framework, which he defines as a general epistemology of language, cognition and communication. We critically discuss how his contribution on the one hand, altered and qualified existent models within language, communication and cognitive science, because dialogism removed language and cognition from their abstract and mental seat in the brain, and embedded them instead in situational contexts and embodied interaction. In that sense, his dialogism successfully replaced monological assumptions about the mind, action and thinking with more contextual and temporally distributed ones. On the other hand, we also question why Linell has not pursued a more rigorous empirical program for studying human cognition, when he did establish a theoretical apparatus for approaching cognition from a dialogical starting point. In going through Linell's arguments over the past five decades we suggest that this absence of an empirical program is due to his humanistic roots which both have sensitised him to appreciating the contingencies and dynamics of human sense making and cognition, and have impeded him from buying into a necessary condition for pursuing a cognitive analysis, even if he conceptually and methodologically accepts a distributed view on cognition. The outcome of this discussion leads to an empirical-based cognitive analysis of a medical interaction. Altogether, the purpose of this article is to show how Linell's conceptual framework can be put to use in ways that make a dialogical cognitive science achievable.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":51592,"journal":{"name":"Language Sciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0388000124000044/pdfft?md5=a499e5a6e680aebd4b5ff0a24ee5fbdc&pid=1-s2.0-S0388000124000044-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dialogical cognition\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Bro Trasmundi ,&nbsp;Sune Vork Steffensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.langsci.2024.101615\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>In this article we review Per Linell's work within the last five decades that led to his dialogism framework, which he defines as a general epistemology of language, cognition and communication. We critically discuss how his contribution on the one hand, altered and qualified existent models within language, communication and cognitive science, because dialogism removed language and cognition from their abstract and mental seat in the brain, and embedded them instead in situational contexts and embodied interaction. In that sense, his dialogism successfully replaced monological assumptions about the mind, action and thinking with more contextual and temporally distributed ones. On the other hand, we also question why Linell has not pursued a more rigorous empirical program for studying human cognition, when he did establish a theoretical apparatus for approaching cognition from a dialogical starting point. In going through Linell's arguments over the past five decades we suggest that this absence of an empirical program is due to his humanistic roots which both have sensitised him to appreciating the contingencies and dynamics of human sense making and cognition, and have impeded him from buying into a necessary condition for pursuing a cognitive analysis, even if he conceptually and methodologically accepts a distributed view on cognition. The outcome of this discussion leads to an empirical-based cognitive analysis of a medical interaction. Altogether, the purpose of this article is to show how Linell's conceptual framework can be put to use in ways that make a dialogical cognitive science achievable.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51592,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Language Sciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0388000124000044/pdfft?md5=a499e5a6e680aebd4b5ff0a24ee5fbdc&pid=1-s2.0-S0388000124000044-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Language Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0388000124000044\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0388000124000044","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在这篇文章中,我们回顾了佩尔-利内尔在过去五十年中的工作,这些工作促成了他的对话主义框架,他将这一框架定义为语言、认知和交流的一般认识论。我们批判性地讨论了他的贡献是如何一方面改变和完善语言、交流和认知科学中的现有模式的,因为对话主义将语言和认知从大脑中抽象和精神的位置上移开,转而将其嵌入情景语境和体现性互动中。从这个意义上说,他的对话主义成功地用更具情境性和时间分布性的假设取代了关于心智、行动和思维的一元论假设。另一方面,我们也要问,既然利内尔已经建立了从对话起点出发研究认知的理论机制,为什么他没有采取更严格的实证方案来研究人类认知呢?通过梳理利内尔过去五十年的论述,我们认为,他之所以没有制定实证研究计划,是因为他的人文主义根基使他敏感地认识到人类感官制造和认知的偶然性和动态性,同时也阻碍了他接受进行认知分析的必要条件,即使他在概念和方法上接受了关于认知的分布式观点。讨论的结果是对医疗互动进行基于经验的认知分析。总之,本文的目的在于展示如何利用利内尔的概念框架来实现对话式认知科学。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Dialogical cognition

In this article we review Per Linell's work within the last five decades that led to his dialogism framework, which he defines as a general epistemology of language, cognition and communication. We critically discuss how his contribution on the one hand, altered and qualified existent models within language, communication and cognitive science, because dialogism removed language and cognition from their abstract and mental seat in the brain, and embedded them instead in situational contexts and embodied interaction. In that sense, his dialogism successfully replaced monological assumptions about the mind, action and thinking with more contextual and temporally distributed ones. On the other hand, we also question why Linell has not pursued a more rigorous empirical program for studying human cognition, when he did establish a theoretical apparatus for approaching cognition from a dialogical starting point. In going through Linell's arguments over the past five decades we suggest that this absence of an empirical program is due to his humanistic roots which both have sensitised him to appreciating the contingencies and dynamics of human sense making and cognition, and have impeded him from buying into a necessary condition for pursuing a cognitive analysis, even if he conceptually and methodologically accepts a distributed view on cognition. The outcome of this discussion leads to an empirical-based cognitive analysis of a medical interaction. Altogether, the purpose of this article is to show how Linell's conceptual framework can be put to use in ways that make a dialogical cognitive science achievable.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Language Sciences
Language Sciences Multiple-
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
期刊介绍: Language Sciences is a forum for debate, conducted so as to be of interest to the widest possible audience, on conceptual and theoretical issues in the various branches of general linguistics. The journal is also concerned with bringing to linguists attention current thinking about language within disciplines other than linguistics itself; relevant contributions from anthropologists, philosophers, psychologists and sociologists, among others, will be warmly received. In addition, the Editor is particularly keen to encourage the submission of essays on topics in the history and philosophy of language studies, and review articles discussing the import of significant recent works on language and linguistics.
期刊最新文献
A study of visual path expressions in Mandarin Chinese from the perspective of motion event typology The etymology of opaque place names based on a cognitive and interdisciplinary method Third-way linguistics: generative and usage-based theories are both right Further semantic change of the derogatory sociomorpheme tái in Chinese gender-related Internet neologisms Science mapping the literature in Applied Linguistics secondary research: navigating knowledge evolution from an epistemic perspective (1970–2022)
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1