From: Gudmundur Ingi Markusson (email@example.com)
Date: Sat 22 Feb 2003 - 13:07:09 GMT
>>I am. These guys are quite skeptical about the notion that the brain is a computer passing patterns of bits hither and yon. They don't have much of anything to say about what neurons are up to.
>>Frames is a different notion entirely. The term was coined by Minsky in the 1970s, etc. Fauconnier and Turner are skeptical about Minsky.
>Are you sure they and Minsky are using the term in the same way to mean the same thing? Do you have any references that express what the various individuals have to say about that?
The cognitive linguists (Turner, Fauconnier, Lakoff, etc.) seem to be referring to the frame concept of Charles J. Fillmore; cf. his widely cited article “Frame Semantics” (The Linguistic Society of Korea (ed.) 1982: Linguistics in the Morning Calm. Seoul: Hanshon Publishing Co.). As far as I can discern, Fillmore’s frames are more or less the same as Fauconnier’s mental spaces (1994: Mental Spaces. Cambridge UP; 1997: Mappings in Thought and Language. Cambridge UP).
About the computer-mind metaphor that is entirely unacceptable to those people, as anyone can see from scanning Lakoff and Johnson. In a sense, their aversion to MIT/Chomskyan linguistics defines the identity of cognitive linguistics.
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more
This was distributed via the memetics list associated with the
Journal of Memetics - Evolutionary Models of Information Transmission
For information about the journal and the list (e.g. unsubscribing)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat 22 Feb 2003 - 13:04:39 GMT