LING 306 Language, Thought and Mind, Spring 2026

Instructor: Prof. Suzanne Kemmer

Course Meetings: Tuesday/Thursdays 2:30-3:45pm, Herring Hall 125

Instructor appointments: Meetings are by appointment in person or via Zoom. In person appointments can be in my office, Herring Hall 209; Brochstein Pavilion; or other agreed-on location. When emailing for a meeting please put “Ling 306” in the subject line.

Instructor Email Contact: kemmer@rice.edu and via Canvas

COURSE OVERVIEW

This course is about the relation of language to human cognition. How does human language in general, and any specific language in particular, interact with cognition, including human cognitive processing and human neural processing?

Several kinds of answers have been offered from the various Cognitive Sciences, for this question and its more specific variants: How does language relate to thought? Do we think in language? If so, what is such a “language of thought” like, given that we cannot hear it or observe it directly? Are there modes of thought that are not linguistic?

How does language relate to specific, well-studied aspects of human cognition like perception, attention, and memory? Are there similarities between any of these and language? Are there ways in which language is different?

How do particular domains and subdomains of cognition such space, color, auditory, tactile, and olfactory perception, emotion, social cognition, causation, and number and other mathematical concepts, relate to language? Can we observe language to find out more about how the human mind works in these areas?

Broader questions: can we use the study of language to find out about the nature of the human mind? Conversely, how can we use the study of the mind and/or brain, and all the knowledge we have about it, to shed light on the nature, structure, or origin of human language? Why do only humans, as far as we can tell, have a fully symbolic language system?  These questions are of interest not only to linguists, but also to cognitive psychologists, philosophers, evolutionary biologists, and anthropologists.

How should we think about the relation of the mind and the brain? The “computational metaphor” adopted by many cognitive scientists starting in the 1950s-1960s says that mind and brain form a single computational processing system in which mind is like software and the brain like hardware. On this view, mind and brain happen to be linked in the human body for evolutionary reasons, but the two are in principle independent, just as in computers the same software can be run on different hardware platforms. Can or should we study the mind without reference to the brain? Does the Cognitive Linguistic approach to the mind suggest alternatives to the traditional computational metaphor?

How does the human mind relate to artificial intelligence, in particular the generative AI systems that have emerged in recent years? Is there any sense in which AI systems THINK?  Are there alternatives to the traditional computational metaphor that will help us to better understand the relation of AI to human thought?

A crucial aspect of language is meaning - how does linguistic meaning relate to the way the mind works, and the way the brain works? Many approaches to language have focused almost entirely on linguistic form--the phonological, morphological and syntactic forms that can be deduced from the physical aspects of language such as sound or visual perception (in the case of signed languages). In recent years the focus has shifted back to linguistic meaning, after a generation or more of form-based theories.

In this class we will explore these and other questions and issues, starting from the assumption that any hope of understanding the relation of language and mind has to place meaning in the center of investigation.

COURSE OBJECTIVES (“Outcomes”)

• Understand the basic questions and issues of the Cognitive Linguistic approach to the study of the relation of language and mind
• Become aware of and learn to use some of the methodologies used by researchers to find out about how the mind works in relation to language
• Be able to integrate ideas from relevant areas of Cognitive Science so that they shed light on the study of the human mind through language
• Develop a basic understanding of the similarities and differences between human cognition and other potential systems of learning and knowledge such as animal cognition and artificial 'cognitions', including Generative AI
• Learn about some theoretical tools and frameworks in Cognitive Linguistics and how to apply them to analyze symbolic phenomena, specifically the frameworks of Conceptual Blending Theory, Conceptual Metaphor theory, and Neo-Whorfian analysis
• Be able to think creatively in applying the frameworks studied to topics of interest to you
• Practice presenting ideas in this area of cognitive science orally, as preparation for delivering conference presentations
• Practice writing clearly and concisely about the abstract ideas under study, with the aim of improving your writing and thinking

REQUIREMENTS

Reading Responses. 10 short essays posted to Canvas in which you think about the reading and pick out some aspect(s) of it to react to and write about. In these reflections on the readings, you can raise questions about particular ideas, and make connections with other ideas outside the reading that you know about (other readings or other knowledge from classes or elsewhere - use references). Aim for about 750 words for each response; an essay can be up to 1000 words. These are graded on a 10-point scale, taking into account understanding of concepts in the reading, making original connections between ideas in and outside the course, and clarity of ideas expressed in writing. Conciseness is also a virtue. Students are expected to read my comments on their essays and try to incorporate suggestions into subsequent Reading Responses. (40%)

Presentations. Each student will have two presentations. If there are enough students to present in groups, the second presentation will be a group presentation (groups of 2).

The first presentation will be a short discussion (ca. 5-7 minutes) by the presenter of a particular idea, either from the readings, class discussion, or from other classes that relate to the topics of LING 306. You can use the presentation to raise questions that are so far unanswered by our authors or in the field; or suggest the beginnings of an analysis of a problem or a phenomenon.

The second presentation will consist of an analysis of a particular phenomenon using the theoretical and analytical tools introduced in the class and readings: Conceptual Blending Theory, Conceptual Metaphor Theory, or Neo-Whorfian analysis. Objects of analysis may be a book, story, film, political cartoon(s), advertisements (use video clips or pictures for illustrations), a set of texts, or systematic data from a language or languages (the latter for Neo-Whorfian analyses). The second presentation will be 15 minutes plus 5 minutes for questions and discussion. It will be treated as a practice conference presentation at a Cognitive Science conference. (10% for first presentation; 25% for second presentation; total 40%)

For the second presentation, a short abstract is required, individually written; this is basically a one to two paragraph description of what will be presented, like a conference abstract. The abstract will count for 5% of the presentation score. Uploading of slides for the presentations is also required.

The second presentations are intended as interesting and ideally fun explorations into products of human creativity and how meaning is created. They are also exercises in analyzing meaning using the theoretical tools provided in the course for understanding meaning and cognition more generally. The analyses students present are themselves creative productions that give unexpected takes on a wide range of human phenomena, from cartoons to movies to data visualizations.

Course reflection paper. A short paper (4-5 pages double-spaced) reflecting on the student's learning this semester for this class. The paper should draw on the presentations and what the student has learned from them in relation to the main topics and ideas in the course. (10%)

Participation. This includes presence in class; responding to questions or small analytical problems given in class (including those for overnight thought); uploading Reading Responses to the posted Discussion threads; uploading presentation topics and abstracts to the posted Discussion threads; comments on others’ posts to the Discussion threads. Students will start with a self-assessment on specific skills. As another important aspect of participation, they will assess the development of these skills as the course progresses. (10%)

POLICIES FOR ATTENDANCE, ASSIGNMENTS AND GRADING

In general, students who do all the work earn grades of B- to A+. The quality of work submitted by students tends to skew high so most grades are in the range of B+ to A+.  It takes very poor work or non-original work to earn less than a B in the course for those who do all assignments and come to class regularly. However, it is possible to fail the course by not turning in work. All assignments must be completed for a passing grade with a minimum of 65% required for a passing grade. The workload is probably not greater than the average Rice class. Regular attendance is expected. Attendance as well as the other aspects of participation described above will be part of the participation score.

Doing the readings by the date on the course schedule (to be published in the first weeks) will make discussion possible and hopefully enjoyable, and you will be able to ask the questions you are most interested in.

The course is small enough to be treated like a discussion seminar, so students will have a chance to affect the progress and depth of coverage of ideas in the course.

HONOR CODE

All work submitted for the course is expected to be original with the student and written in the student’s own words. Students are free to talk with one another about the individual assignments up until they begin to write the assignment. This is so that assignments don’t come to resemble each other too much. The essays are expected to be personalized intellectual responses and as such may differ from one another a great deal. Students should not seek out/use earlier student work on the particular readings. Also AI is not to be used to produce writing for the course. The course takes a specific point of view and AI gives a mélange of points of view, often inconsistent. It is easier and safer to simply write your own response. Student Reading Responses can be read by all students after the deadline. They are to be uploaded to the Discussion thread posted for each assignment. Students can comment on and “Like” others’ Reading Responses within these Discussion threads.

SEQUENCE OF TOPICS

1. What is Meaning? Traditional answers: Referential Theory of Meaning; “Mentalese” or the Language of Thought. Do AI systems use meaning? Do they think? Relation of mind and brain: the computational metaphor. Categorization. Is meaning inside or outside the mind? The cognitive linguistics answer to “What is meaning?”: Meaning is Conceptualization. It is an internal, mental phenomenon, rather than external/in the world. Kinds of meaningful phenomena; “Representations” in language and thought. Symbol systems. Fauconnier and Turner Preface and Chapter 1.
2. The Embodied Simulation theory of meaning (also called Embodied Cognition). The importance of the perceptual faculties in cognitive processing. The grounding of conceptualization in bodily experience. Relation of mind and brain; alternative to the computational model of the mind. Bergen Chapters 1-5. Bergen's answer to the question of the relation of linguistic meaning to cognition: Language is not separate from the rest of cognition. It is fundamentally connected to perception (through all senses), emotion, memory, social interaction, and in fact all bodily and social experience. MEANING of linguistic items, and meaning of language during online processing of language, consists of conceptualizations that incorporate and integrate many aspects of experience simultaneously.
3. Conceptual integration, also called conceptual blending. Fauconnier and Turner Chapters 2-6. The cognitive mechanisms behind blending. Correspondence, Completion, Integration. As with Bergen: Meaning is more general than language. Linguistic meaning is one mode of conceptualization that integrates information of all kinds, some of it related to sensory experience but by no means limited to it. Neural co-activation as a mechanism of cognitive integration.
4. Metaphor and thought. Abstract thought as embodied via metaphor. Is metaphor just a matter of language? How do we understand metaphor in the light of blending? (Bergen Ch. 9, connecting with Lakoff video in next unit.) Metaphor and meaning.
5. Image schemas: Container schema, Source-Path-Goal, other spatial and functional schemas. Frames and the mind and brain. Relation of image schemas and metaphor (and blending). Categories: prototypes and basic level categories. The nature of color and linguistic categories of color, showing the constructional nature of perception; how languages are alike and how they are different with respect to categories. Learning and neural binding. Lakoff video. (1.5 hr)
6. Mathematical ideas and conceptual integration. Ways that basic ideas of quantity (e.g. subitization) and simple arithmetic relate to human cognitive make-up and human experience in the physical world. The 4 grounding metaphors for basic arithmetic, which are metaphorical blends. Ways that more complex mathematical ideas such as zero, commutative and associative properties of arithmetic, multiplication and division originate via particular metaphorical mappings. Lakoff and Nuñez, Chapters 1-4.
7. The relation of individual languages to thought. Neo-Whorfian linguistics. Number, Space, Gender, Color, Time. Last 3 chapters from Guy Deutscher's book; Chapters from 2 books by Caleb Everett, Everett 2017 and 2023.

Extra topics: If time in class, or as relevant readings for presentations/papers:

1. Implications of blending for the evolution of the human species and of language. How old is human language? Fauconnier and Turner Chapter 9.
2. Implications of generative AI (GAI) for the study of human cognition (reading TBA).

CORE READINGS AND VIDEO

The full references for the core course materials are as follows. The specific selected chapters that will be part of the course are given in the Sequence of Topics above. Chapters will be available on Canvas, but I recommend purchase of the Bergen textbook (via Amazon or ebook) for CogSci majors, because all the chapters are very relevant to other courses and the field generally.

Bergen, Ben. 2012. Louder than Words. The New Science of How the Mind Makes Meaning. New York: Basic Books.

Deutscher, Guy. 2010. Through the Language Glass. Why the World Looks Different in Other Languages. New York: Metropolitan Books/Henry Holt.

Everett, Caleb. 2017. Numbers and the Making of Us. Counting and the Course of Human Cultures. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Everett, Caleb. 2023. A Myriad of Tongues: How Languages Reveal Differences in How We Think. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Fauconnier, Gilles, and Mark Turner. 2002. The Way We Think. Conceptual Blending and the Mind's Hidden Complexities. New York: Basic Books.

Lakoff, George. 2010. Video on Embodied Cognition https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XWYaoAoijdQ

Lakoff, George, and Rafael Nuñez. 2001. Where Mathematics Comes From. How the Embodied Mind Brings Mathematics into Being. New York: Basic Books.

Turner, Mark. 2014. The Origin of Ideas. Blending, Creativity, and the Human Spark. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press. 

ADDITIONAL READINGS and Materials posted on Canvas for class discussion include:

Instructor's notes (largely in the first part of the course); articles or analyses of blending phenomena in real life; material on infant cognition and language; papers on spatial orientation systems; Life is a Journey and related metaphors; examples of blends, such as Close Moon, data visualizations, political cartoons, etc., some with analyses original with instructor. See Modules and Pages in Canvas.

Students with Disabilities: If you have a documented disability or other condition that may affect academic performance: 1) Make sure documentation is on file with Disability Support Services (adarice@rice.edu / x5841) to determine the accommodations you need; and 2) talk with me to discuss your accommodation needs.

Title IX Responsible Employee Notification: Rice University cares about your well-being and safety. Rice encourages any student who has experienced an incident of harassment, pregnancy discrimination or gender discrimination or relationship, sexual, or other forms of interpersonal violence to seek support through The SAFE Office at http://safe.rice.edu/. Be aware when seeking support on campus that most employees, including myself, as the instructor, are required by Title IX to disclose all incidents of non-consensual interpersonal behaviors to Rice Title IX professionals who can act to support students and meet their needs.