Naming and cognitive processes

GENERAL STRATEGIES

How certain can we be that naming is actually the consequence of categorization, as claimed in the introduction, instead of its cause? If there is freedom (within limits) to categorize and recategorize, could the semantic structure of a natural language restrict the biological freedom? Is our cognitive structure influenced by the reference relationships of certain words? What would cognition be like in the absence of language?

Questions of this sort may be partially answered by following either of two strategies. We may use various features of natural languages as the independent variable and study how these affect certain features of cognitive processes; or we may use the relative presence or absence of primary language as the independent variable and see to what extent the development of cognition is dependent on language acquisition. Congenitally deaf children are the most interesting subjects if the latter approach is used.

The former approach harbors a problem that must be dealt with explicitly. It is necessary that the relationship between individual words and natural phenomena can be studied empirically so that we have an objective measure of how well or how poorly the language actually deals with one or the other phenomenon. We have discussed this matter in detail and have given reasons why the best types of words to be used in this kind of study are those that refer to sensation, in short the language of experience.

Colors have been the favorite stimulus material because their physical nature can be described relatively easily, standard stimulus material is readily available, the relative frequency of occurrence in the environment is not too likely to affect subjects’ reactions in an experiment, and perceptual qualities may also be controlled relatively easily.