Abstract
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 457–491 |
| Number of pages | 35 |
| Journal | Linguistic Typology |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2017 |
Keywords
- spatial language
- landscape
- Cognition
- Language and thought
Cite this
}
How does the environment shape spatial language? Evidence for sociotopography. / Palmer, Bill; Lum, Jonathon Thomas Stephen; Schlossberg, Jonathan; Gaby, Alice Rose.
In: Linguistic Typology, Vol. 21, No. 3, 2017, p. 457–491.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Research › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - How does the environment shape spatial language? Evidence for sociotopography
AU - Palmer, Bill
AU - Lum, Jonathon Thomas Stephen
AU - Schlossberg, Jonathan
AU - Gaby, Alice Rose
PY - 2017
Y1 - 2017
N2 - This paper investigates the extent to which the way individuals describe spatial relationships correlates with features of the local landscape. Drawing on empirical data from two unrelated languages, Dhivehi (Indo-Aryan) and Marshallese (Austronesian), across a range of topographic environments, we examine the linguistic resources available to speakers, and spatial referential strategy preferences across languages and environments. We find that spatial language shows sensitivity to features of the topography, but this is mediated by the way speakers interact with the landscape. This leads us to propose a Sociotopographic Model, modelling the complex interplay of language structure, local environment, cultural practices, and language use, at odds with competing claims about the primacy of language or of environment in shaping spatial cognition.
AB - This paper investigates the extent to which the way individuals describe spatial relationships correlates with features of the local landscape. Drawing on empirical data from two unrelated languages, Dhivehi (Indo-Aryan) and Marshallese (Austronesian), across a range of topographic environments, we examine the linguistic resources available to speakers, and spatial referential strategy preferences across languages and environments. We find that spatial language shows sensitivity to features of the topography, but this is mediated by the way speakers interact with the landscape. This leads us to propose a Sociotopographic Model, modelling the complex interplay of language structure, local environment, cultural practices, and language use, at odds with competing claims about the primacy of language or of environment in shaping spatial cognition.
KW - spatial language
KW - landscape
KW - Cognition
KW - Language and thought
U2 - 10.1515/lingty-2017-0011
DO - 10.1515/lingty-2017-0011
M3 - Article
VL - 21
SP - 457
EP - 491
JO - Linguistic Typology
JF - Linguistic Typology
SN - 1430-0532
IS - 3
ER -