image schemas and linguistic relativity

[Monica Gonzalez-Marquez]

Hello Everyone,

I think a clarification of my position in this discussion is in
order. I fear that the workshop announcement is being attributed be
me as a position statement when in fact it is not. As the workshop
announcement intimates, I do, in fact, believe that the strong
versions of Image Schema Theory (with its highlighting of primitives)
and of Linguistic Relativity (with its downplaying of primitives) are
fundamentally at odds with one another. I feel that, much the same as
the old nature/nurture debate, the evidence will show that the shape
language takes for each individual speaker will result from how
several different forces interact, and not from the isolated workings
of one or the other. In terms of Image Schemas, for example, it is
highly likely that some form of innate image-schematic primitives for
representing events exist, but it is also highly likely that they
should be substantially molded by linguistic and cultural experience
during development. This thinking is consistent with a view of
embodiment in which no aspect of cognitive development occurs in
isolation. If we believe this to be true of linguistic utterances,
i.e. the end product of the language process, I don't see how it can
be less true of the processes that are involved in the production of
said utterances.

That said, to my knowledge, nowhere near enough cross-linguistic,
cross-cultural, or neurological empirical evidence has been collected
to understand conclusively how image schemas and linguistic
relativity impact language development. Cognitive Linguistics theory,
as a theory, has shown its mettle. And like all good theories, it
shows signs of holding up nicely to the scrutiny of the scientific
method. Our workshop is intended to draw attention to a potential
inconsistency so as to correct it with one of the soundest methods we
know of.

Monica