Abstract
Sentences such as The road runs through the valley and The mountain range goes from Canada to Mexico include a motion verb but express no explicit motion or state change. It is argued that these sentences involve fictive motion, an implicit type of motion. But do people trying to understand these sentences mentally simulate motion? This question was addressed in four experiments. In each, participants read a story about travel—for instance, fast versus slow, short versus long distance, and easy versus difficult terrain—and then made a timed decision about a fictive motion sentence. Overall, latencies were shorter after they had read about fast travel, short distances, and easy terrains. Critically, the effect did not arise with nonfictive motion target sentences (e.g., The road is in the valley), as was demonstrated in three control studies. The results suggest that the processing of fictive motion includes mental simulation.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Barbey, A. K., Simmons, W. K., Ruppert, J. A., & Barsalou, L.W. (2002, November).Action and conceptual processing. Paper presented at the 43rd Annual Meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Kansas City, MO.
Barsalou, L.W. (1999a). Language comprehension: Archival memory or preparation for situated action?Discourse Processes,28, 61–80.
Barsalou, L. W. (1999b). Perceptual symbol systems.Behavioral & Brain Sciences,22, 577–660.
Barsalou, L. W. (2003). Situated simulation in the human conceptual system.Language & Cognitive Processes,18, 513–562.
Black, J. B., Turner, T. J., &Bower, G. H. (1979). Point of view in narrative comprehension, memory, and production.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,18, 187–198.
Boroditsky, L. (2000). Metaphoric structuring: Understanding time through spatial metaphors.Cognition,75, 1–28.
Boroditsky, L., &Ramscar, M. (2002). The roles of body and mind in abstract thought.Psychological Science,13, 185–189.
Bower, G. H., &Morrow, D. G. (1990). Mental models in narrative comprehension.Science,247, 44–48.
Clark, H. H. (1973). Space, time, semantics, and the child. In T. E. Moore (Ed.),Cognitive development and the acquisition of language (pp. 27–63). San Diego: Academic Press.
Denis, M., &Cocude, M. (1989). Scanning visual images generated from verbal descriptions.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,1, 293–307.
Freyd, J. J. (1983). The mental representation of movement when static stimuli are viewed.Perception & Psychophysics,33, 575–581.
Gibbs, R.W. (1994).The poetics of mind: Figurative thought, language, and understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Gibbs, R. W. (2004).Embodiment and cognitive science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Glenberg, A. M. (1999). Why mental models must be embodied. In G. Rickheit & C. Habel (Eds.),Mental models in discourse processing and reasoning (pp. 77–90). New York: Elsevier.
Glenberg, A. M., &Kaschak, M. P. (2002). Grounding language in action.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,9, 558–565.
Glenberg, A. M., Meyer, M., &Lindem, K. (1987). Mental models contribute to foregrounding during text comprehension.Journal of Memory & Language,26, 69–83.
Jackendoff, R. (2002).Foundations of language: Brain, meaning, grammar, evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kosslyn, S. M., Ball, T. M, &Reiser, B. J. (1978). Visual images preserve metric spatial information: Evidence from studies of image scanning.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,4, 47–60.
Kourtzi, Z., &Kanwisher, N. (2000). Activation in human MT/MST by static images with implied motion.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,12, 48–55.
Lakoff, G. (1987).Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Lakoff, G., &Johnson, M. (1999).Philosophy in the flesh: The embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. New York: Basic Books.
Langacker, R.W. (1986). Abstract motion. In V. Nikiforidou, M. VanClay, M. Niepokuj, & D. Feder (Eds.),Proceedings of the Twelfth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (pp. 455–471). Berkeley: University of California, Berkeley Linguistics Society.
Langacker, R. W. (1987).Foundations of cognitive grammar: Vol. 1. Theoretical prerequisites. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Langacker, R.W. (2000). Virtual reality.Studies in the Linguistic Sciences,29, 77–103.
Langacker, R. W. (2005). Dynamicity, fictivity, and scanning: The imaginative basis of logic and linguistic meaning. In R. A. Zwaan & D. Pecher (Eds.),Grounding cognition: The role of perception and action in memory, language, and thinking (pp. 164–197). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Matlock, T. (2001).Fictive motion is real motion. Paper presented at the Seventh Annual International Cognitive Linguistics Conference, University of California, Santa Barbara.
Matlock, T. (2004). The conceptual motivation of fictive motion. In G. Radden & R. Dirven (Eds.),Studies in linguistic motivation (pp. 221–248). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Matlock, T. (in press). Depicting fictive motion in drawings. In J. Luchenbroers (Ed.),Cognitive linguistics: Investigations across languages, fields, and philosophical boundaries. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Matlock, T., Ramscar, M., &Boroditsky, L. (2003). The experiential basis of meaning. InProceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 792–797). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Matsumoto, Y. (1996). Subjective motion and English and Japanese verbs.Cognitive Linguistics,7, 183–226.
Morrow, D. G., Bower, G. H., &Greenspan, S. L. (1989). Updating situation models during narrative comprehension.Journal of Memory & Language,28, 292–312.
Morrow, D. G., &Clark, H. H. (1988). Interpreting words in spatial descriptions.Language & Cognitive Processes,3, 275–291.
Schwartz, D. L. (1999). Physical imagery: Kinematic versus dynamic models.Cognitive Psychology,38, 433–464.
Schwartz, D. L., &Black, T. (1999). Inferences through imagined actions: Knowing by simulated doing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,25, 116–136.
Spivey, M. J., &Geng, J. J. (2001). Oculomotor mechanisms activated by imagery and memory: Eye movements to absent objects.Psychological Research/Psychologische Forschung,65, 235–241.
Spivey, M. J., Tyler, M., Richardson, D. C., &Young, E. (2000). Eye movements during comprehension of spoken scene descriptions. InProceedings of the Twenty-Second Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 487–492). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Stanfield, R. A., &Zwaan, R. A. (2001). The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition.Psychological Science,121, 153–156.
Talmy, L. (1983). How language structures space. In H. L. Pick, Jr. & L. P. Acredolo (Eds.),Spatial orientation: Theory, research, and application (pp. 225–282). New York: Plenum.
Talmy, L. (1996). Fictive motion in language and “ception”. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.),Language and space (pp. 211–276). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Talmy, L. (2000).Toward a cognitive semantics: Vol. I. Conceptual structuring systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tversky, B. (1996). Spatial perspective in descriptions. In P. Bloom, M. A. Peterson, L. Nadel, & M. F. Garrett (Eds.),Language and space (pp. 463–491). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Tversky, B. (2000). Remembering spaces. In E. Tulving & F. I. M. Craik (Eds.),The Oxford handbook of memory (pp. 363–378). New York: Oxford University Press.
Zwaan, R. A., Madden, C. J., Yaxley, R. H., &Aveyard, M. E. (2004). Moving words: Dynamic mental representations in language comprehension.Cognitive Science,28, 611–619.
Zwaan, R. A., &Radvansky, G. A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory.Psychological Bulletin,123, 162–185.
Zwaan, R. A., &van Oostendorp, H. (1993). Do readers construct spatial representations in naturalistic story comprehension?Discourse Processes,16, 125–144.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Matlock, T. Fictive motion as cognitive simulation. Memory & Cognition 32, 1389–1400 (2004). https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206329
Received:
Accepted:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03206329