Advertisement

Cognitive Science and Semantic Representations

  • Jean-Francois Le Ny
Chapter
Part of the Philosophical Studies Series book series (PSSP, volume 52)

Abstract

Various, sometimes largely diverging, opinions exist about cognitive science: a major contrast is between supporters of “cognitive sciences” as a plural, i.e., denoting a set of related but distinct areas, which will still remain different in the future and those of “cognitive science” as a singular, denoting a single unified domain. The first view presently seems to be easier to advocate: no complete unified body of knowledge has yet emerged across artificial intelligence, cognitive psychology, linguistics, logics, cognitive neurosciences, philosophy of mind, etc. that could both meet the commonly agreed criteria of scientific thought and be considered as concerning a unique well-defined object.

Keywords

Cognitive Science Semantic Representation Symbolic Representation Rational Representation Language Comprehension 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, J. (1983). The architecture of cognition, Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Block, V., and S. Laroche (1986). Facts and hypotheses related to the search for the engram. In G. Lynch, J.L. McGaugh and N.M. Weinberger (eds). Neurobiology of Learning and Memory. New York: Guilford, pp. 249–260.Google Scholar
  3. Changeux, J. P. (1983). L’homme Neuronal. Paris: Fayard.Google Scholar
  4. Denis, M. and J.F. Le Ny (1986). Centering on figurative features during the comprehension of sentences describing scenes, Psychological Research, 48, pp. 145–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Le Ny, J. F. (1989a). Science cognitive et compréhension du language. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  6. Le Ny, J. F. (1989b). Automatic induction of concept contents from verbal characterizations. In G. Toberghien (ed.) Advances in cognitive science, vol. 2. Chichester, N.Y.: Harwood-Wiley, pp. 165–177.Google Scholar
  7. Le Ny, J. F. (1989c). The role of schemata in concept acquisition and diagnosis. In H. Maurer (ed) Computer assisted learning. Berlin: Springer Verlag, pp. 308–321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Le Ny, J. F. (1990a). Compréhension du language, representations sémantiques en mémoire de travail et processus du reconnaissance, Communicazioni scient fiche di psicologie generale,in press.Google Scholar
  9. Le Ny, J. F. (1990b). Coherence in semantic representations: text comprehension and acquisition of concepts. In G. Denhiè re & J. P. Rossi (eds) Text and text processing. Elsivier-North-Holland, in press.Google Scholar
  10. McClelland, J. I., D. F. Rumelhart and the PDP Research Group (1986). Parallel distributed processing explorations in the microstructure of cognition,vol. 2: psychological and biological models. Cambridge, Mass: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  11. McDermott, D. (1982). Non-monotonic logic II Non-monotonic modal theories, Journal of the ACM, 29, pp. 33–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. McDermott, D., v. Drew and J. Doyle (1980). Non monotonic logic 1, Artificial intelligence, 13, 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Maida, A. S. and S. C. Shapiro (1982). Intensional concepts in propositional semantic networks, Cognitive science, 6, 291–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Newell, A. (1982). The knowledge level, Artificial intelligence, 18, 87–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Paillard, J. (1987). L’ordinateur et le cerbeau: un contraste saisissant, AFCET/Interfaces, 57, pp. 4–9.Google Scholar
  16. Quine, W. V. (1961). From a logical point of view. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Rumelhart, D. E., J. L. McClelland and the PDP Research Group (1986). Parallel distributed processing explorations in the microstructure of cognition, vol. 1: Foundations. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  18. Yekovich, F. R. and C. H. Walker (1986). Retrieval of scripted concepts, Journal of memory and language, 25, pp. 627–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Yekovich, F. R. and C. H. Walker (1987). The activation and use of scripted knowledge in reading about routine activities, in B. K. Britton (ed), Executive control processes in reading. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean-Francois Le Ny
    • 1
  1. 1.Universite de ParisFrance

Personalised recommendations