Perspective in the conceptualization of categories

Is Phonology Embodied? Evidence from Mechanical Stimulation

Across languages, certain syllables are systematically preferred to others (e.g., plaf > ptaf). Here, we examine whether these preferences arise from motor simulation. In the simulation account, ill-formed syllables (e.g., ptaf) are disliked because their motor plans are harder to simulate. Four experiments compared sensitivity to the syllable structure of labial- vs. corona-initial speech stimuli (e.g., plaf > pnaf > ptaf vs. traf > tmaf > tpaf); meanwhile, participants (English vs. Russian speakers) lightly bit on their lips or tongues. Results suggested that the perception of these stimuli was selectively modulated by motor stimulation (e.g., stimulating the tongue differentially affected sensitivity to labial vs. coronal stimuli). Remarkably, stimulation did not affect sensitivity to syllable structure. This dissociation suggests that some (e.g., phonetic) aspects of speech perception are reliant on motor simulation, hence, embodied; others (e.g., phonology), however, are possibly abstract. These conclusions speak to the role of embodiment in the language system, and the separation between phonology and phonetics, specifically.

Differences and similarities in the conceptualization of COVID-19 and other diseases in the first Italian lockdown

Several studies have highlighted the flexible character of our conceptual system. However, less is known about the construction of meaning and the impact of novel concepts on the structuring of our conceptual space. We addressed these questions by collecting free listing data from Italian participants on a newly-and yet nowadays critical-introduced concept, i.e., COVID-19, during the first Italian lockdown. We also collected data for other five illness-related concepts. Our results show that COVID-19's representation is mostly couched in the emotional sphere, predominantly evoking fear-linked to both possible health-related concerns and social-emotional ones. In contrast with initial public debates we found that participants did not assimilate COVID-19 neither completely to severe illnesses (e.g., tumor) nor completely to mild illnesses (e.g., flu). Moreover, we also found that COVID-19 has shaped conceptual relations of other concepts in the illness domain, making certain features and associations more salient (e.g., flu-fear; disease-mask). Overall, our results show for the first time how a novel, real concept molds existing conceptual relations, testifying the malleability of our conceptual system.