Language Communities, Corpora, and Cognition

  • Huei-Ling Lai
  • Kawai Chui
  • Wen-Hui Sah
  • Siaw-Fong Chung
  • Chao-Lin Liu
Part of the Computational Social Sciences book series (CSS)


Language data are digitized for analyzing and computing patterns of linguistic form, meaning, and use shaped and reshaped in the interactions of the users in social–cultural contexts in homogeneous or heterogeneous language communities. In this chapter, the rationale and tenets of the corpus-driven paradigm are introduced. Then, three areas of studies of linguistic patterns and cognition based on digitized corpus data collected from different language communities are discussed so as to understand what kinds of corpus data are employed in language studies, how the corpus data manifest the recurrent patterns of linguistic form, meaning, and use in various social–cultural contexts, and how the linguistic patterns reveal the linguistic cognition of a language community. In the first study, the corpus-based linguistic findings in news media demonstrate the intricate patterns of language in the social–cultural discourse in Taiwan. In the second, the use of language and gesture in Taiwan Mandarin shows the cross-modal behaviors and cognition embodied in people’s perceptual and bodily experiences in recurrent individual and social–cultural practices. Finally, in the third study, the narrative data produced by typical and atypical children in Taiwan Mandarin sheds light on the developmental integration of social–emotional, cognitive, and linguistic abilities across the two groups of young language users.


Language communities Corpora Cognition Recontextualization Narrative ability Linguistic-gestural behaviors 


  1. Bavelas, J. B., & Chovil, N. (2006). Hand gestures and facial displays as part of language use in face-to-face dialogue. In V. Manusov & M. L. Patterson (Eds.), The Sage handbook of nonverbal communication (pp. 97–115). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beckner, C., Blythe, R., Bybee, J., Christiansen, M. H., Croft, W., Ellis, N. C., et al. (2009). Language is a complex adaptive system: Position paper. Language Learning, 59(s1), 1–26.Google Scholar
  3. Biber, D. (2010). Corpus-based and corpus-driven analyses of language variation and use. In B. Heine & H. Narrog (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic analysis (pp. 195–223). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Boers, F. (1999). When a bodily source domain becomes prominent: The joy of counting metaphors in the socio-economic domain. In R. W. Gibbs Jr. & G. J. Steen (Eds.), Metaphor in cognitive linguistics (pp. 47–56). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cameron, L. J., & Deignan, A. (2006). The emergence of metaphor in discourse. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 671–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chafe, W. (1994). Discourse, consciousness, and time: The flow and displacement of conscious experience in speaking and writing. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Clancy, P. M. (1982). Written and spoken style in Japanese narratives. In D. Tannen (Ed.), Spoken and written language: Exploring orality and literacy (pp. 55–76). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
  8. Clark, H. H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Colle, L., Baron-Cohen, S., Wheelwright, S., & van der Lely, H. K. (2008). Narrative discourse in adults with high-functioning autism or Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 38(1), 28–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Deignan, A. (2005). Metaphor and corpus linguistics. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Deignan, A. (2008). Corpus linguistics and metaphor. In R. W. Gibbs Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 280–294). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Deignan, A. (2012). Figurative language in discourse. In H. J. Schmidt (Ed.), Cognitive pragmatics (pp. 437–462). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  13. Dick, A. S., Mok, E. H., Beharelle, A. R., Goldin-Meadow, S., & Small, S. L. (2014). Frontal and temporal contributions to understanding the iconic co-speech gestures that accompany speech. Human Brain Mapping, 35(3), 900–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Geeraerts, D. (2010). Theories of lexical semantics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Glynn, D. (2010). Corpus-driven Cognitive semantics: Introduction to the field. In D. Glynn & F. Kerstin (Eds.), Quantitative methods in cognitive semantics: Corpus-driven approaches (pp. 1–41). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goldin-Meadow, S. (1999). The role of gesture in communication and thinking. Trends in Cognitive Science, 3, 419–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hickmann, M., & Hendriks, H. (1999). Cohesion and anaphora in children’s narratives: A comparison of English, French, German, and mandarin Chinese. Journal of Child Language, 26, 419–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holle, H., Gunter, T. C., Rüschemeyer, S. A., Hennenlotter, A., & Iacoboni, I. (2008). Neural correlates of the processing of co-speech gestures. NeuroImage, 39(4), 2010–2024.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Holler, J., & Wilkin, K. (2011). Co-speech gesture mimicry in the process of collaborative referring during face-to-face dialogue. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 35, 133–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kendon, A. (2004). Gesture: Visible action as utterance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kövecses, Z. (2002). Metaphor: A practical introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Lai, H. L. (2017). Understanding ethnic visibility through language use: The case of Taiwan Hakka. Asian Ethnicity, 18, 406–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lakoff, G. (1993). The contemporary theory of metaphor. In A. Ortony (Ed.), Metaphor and thought (pp. 202–251). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lakoff, G. (2008). The neuroscience of metaphoric gestures: Why they exist. In A. Cienki & C. Müller (Eds.), Metaphor and gesture (pp. 283–289). Amsterdam, Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Langacker, R. W. (2008). Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Loveland, K., & Tunali, B. (1993). Narrative language in autism and the theory of mind hypothesis: A wider perspective. In S. Baron-Cohen, H. Tager-Flusberg, & D. J. Cohen (Eds.), Understanding other minds: Perspectives from autism (pp. 247–266). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  28. McNeill, D. (1992). Hand and mind: What gestures reveal about thought. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  29. McNeill, D. (Ed.). (2000). Language and gesture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Núñez, R., & Cooperrider, K. (2013). The tangle of space and time in human cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 17(5), 220–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Özyürek, A., Kita, S., Allen, S., Furman, R., & Brown, A. (2005). How does linguistic framing of events influence co-speech gestures? Insights from cross-linguistic variations and similarities. Gesture, 5, 215–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Özyürek, A., Willems, R. M., Kita, S., & Hagoort, P. (2007). On-line integration of semantic information from speech and gesture: Insights from event-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19(4), 605–616.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Porto, M. D., & Romano, M. (2013). Newspaper metaphors: Reusing metaphors across media genres. Metaphor and Symbol, 28, 60–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Radden, G., & Kövecses, Z. (1999). Towards a theory of metonymy. In K. U. Panther & G. Radden (Eds.), Metonymy in language and thought (pp. 17–59). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sah, W. H., & Torng, P. C. (2015). Narrative coherence of Mandarin-speaking children with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder: An investigation into causal relations. First Language, 35(3), 189–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Semino, E., Deignan, A., & Littlemore, J. (2013). Metaphor, genre, and recontextualization. Metaphor and Symbol, 28, 48–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Stirling, L., Douglas, S., Leekam, S., & Carey, L. (2014). The use of narrative in studying communication in autism Spectrum disorders: A review of methodologies and findings. In J. Arciuli & J. Brock (Eds.), Communication in autism (pp. 169–216). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  38. Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J., Brown, P., Englert, C., Hayashi, M., Heinemann, T., Hoymann, G., Rossano, F., Ruiter, A. P. D., Yoon, K. E., & Levinson, S. C. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 106(26), 10587–10592.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Straube, B., Green, A., Weis, S., & Kircher, T. (2012). A supramodal neural network for speech and gesture semantics: An fMRI study. PLoS One, 7(11), e51207.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tsou, C. Z., & Cheung, H. (2007). Narrative story telling of high-functioning children with autism spectrum disorders. Bulletin of Special Education, 32(3), 87–109.Google Scholar
  41. Yu, N. (2008). Metaphor from body and culture. In R. W. Gibbs Jr. (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of metaphor and thought (pp. 247–261). New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Huei-Ling Lai
    • 1
  • Kawai Chui
    • 1
  • Wen-Hui Sah
    • 1
  • Siaw-Fong Chung
    • 1
  • Chao-Lin Liu
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of EnglishNational Chengchi UniversityTaipeiTaiwan
  2. 2.Department of Computer ScienceNational Chengchi UniversityTaipeiTaiwan

Personalised recommendations