Mental Spaces

1
Mental Spaces

• By Gilles Fauconnier

2
Gilles Fauconnier as a person

• Again, his name is pronounced ?il fo.k?.nje.
• He is a french linguist currently working in the
• US. He is a professor at UC San Diego in the
  department of Cognitive Science.
• His work with Mark Turner founded the theory of
  conceptual blending.
• His works include
• The Way We Think Conceptual Blending and the
  Mind's Hidden Complexities (with Mark Turner)
• Amalgama Concettuale (with Mark Turner)
• Mappings in Thought and Language
• And our current favorite
• Mental spaces Aspects of meaning construction in
  natural language

3
Lakoff and Sweetser on Mental Spaces

• The more traditional theories assume that
  natural language semantics can be adequately
  studied with the tools of formal logic.
  Fauconnier has, however, recognized that the
  tools of formal logic fail when confronted with
  the full range of natural language phenomena. He
  has realized that what is needed instead is a
  cognitive theory

4
Examples of mental spaces vs formal logic

• The following are examples of english language
  which can be explained by mental spaces but not
  by formal logic
• (Split Self)
• If I were you, Id hate me.
• and
• If I were you, Id hate myself.
• Both Me and Myself are first person and
  should refer to the speaker, but they do not.
  In addition, the self in these two sentences is
  split one into a part that refers to me and one
  which refers to you. There is no way in formal
  logic to explain how this can make sense with two
  different meanings.

5
Examples continued.

• 2) (Split Coreference)
• If Woody Allen had been born twins, they
  would have been sorry for each other, but he
  wasnt and so hes only sorry for himself.
• In this example Woody Allen serves as the
  antecedent of both they and he. Formal logic
  also has no way to deal with this.

6
On to mental spaces

• There is no easy way to explain Fauconniers
  theory, save to refer to many examples.
• Take the sentence
• In this painting, the girl with the brown eyes
  has green eyes.
• In the theory of mental spaces, In the painting
  is a space builder.

7
Space Builders

• Space builders set up a mental space in the mind
  of the reader that is different from the mental
  space of the real world.
• In the case of this example, In the painting
  sets up the space of the painting. Lets call
  this space P, and lets call reality R.
• Having these two mental spaces means that it is
  possible to have in P a girl who has green eyes,
  and have in R a counterpart of that girl who
  herself has brown eyes.

8
An example of mental spacesand presupposition

• 3) Johns children are blond.
• This presupposes that John has children.
• But in the sentence
• 4) If John has children, Johns children are
  blond.
• It is not presupposed that John has children.
• In mental space theory the If sets up a mental
  space that is conditional Call it C that is
  separate from reality Call it R. In C, John
  has Children, but the same in not necessarily
  true in R. Therefore, in C the second clause
  Johns children are blond is true in C but nor
  necessarily in R.
• Two separate spaces of possibility are created.
  The space that is conditional allows us to
  consider a possibility other than reality, and
  therefore to consider the sentence with two
  distinct possibilities. In example 3), only R
  can be considered. As a result, the sentence is
  presupposed to be true in R.

9
An elaboration

• Now that we have some basis for imagining mental
  spaces, we can delve more deeply into what mental
  spaces are made up of.
• The spaces themselves are domains. Domains are
  created as we speak or listen, and are not part
  of grammar. Nevertheless, they are essential to
  language.
• Domains are structured by elements, roles,
  strategies, and relations.

10
Connectors, Triggers, and Targets

• All three of these are elements of pragmatic
  function.
• Nunberg shows that we establish links between
  objects of a different nature for psychological,
  cultural, or locally pragmatic reasons and that
  the links thus established allow reference to one
  object in terms of another appropriately linked
  to it.

11
Pragmatic Function inDiagram Form

• In this diagram, author is the trigger and
  is used to identify the target by means of the
  connector.

12
Authors/Books Continued.

• So, in this diagram, lets assume that the author
  is Plato and the books are any of his works.
• This system of triggers, target, and connectors
  allows example 5) to mean the same as example 6).
• 5) Plato is on the top shelf.
• 6) The books by Plato are on the top shelf.

13
Plato/Works Continued.

• Now, the successful connection that has occurred
  allows the target to become an antecedent for
  pronouns and other anaphors, such as in this
  example
• 7) Plato is on the top shelf. It is bound in
  leather.
• However, the trigger is also a potential
  antecedent such as in
• 8) Plato is on the top shelf. Youll find that
  he is a very interesting author.
• More interesting, both are possible at the same
  time.
• 9) Plato is on the top shelf. It is bound in
  leather. Youll find that he is a very
  interesting author.

14
To Elaborate into the Realm of Image

• Now, imagine that the trigger is a person Call
  her Lisa and the target is the realm in which
  she is seen. This could be represented with the
  following diagram

15
Lisa, continued.

• Let us pretend that Lisa has blue eyes, and in
  the image she has green eyes. There is a
  pragmatic relation between the model and the
  image The image is a representation of Lisa by
  means of some mental connection.

16
Lisa and Reality, continued.

• Now we see the entrance of mental spaces in
  addition to the targets, triggers, and
  connectors.
• Take this example
• 10) Len believes that the girl with blue eyes has
  green eyes.
• That is accompanied by a diagram that includes
  the mental spaces of Lens belief call it B -
  and reality Call it R. Inside of the mental
  space R exists a girl (Lisa, presumably) with
  blue eyes. Inside of mental space B exists the
  target, a girl with green eyes.

17
Diagram of R to B

• Now our diagram appears like this

18
A Reversal.

• Now, lets say the example is spoken while
  standing in an artists studio and staring at a
  painting
• 11) In reality, the girl with green eyes has blue
  eyes.
• The scheme is thus reversed. Instead of going
  from reality to the picture, we are going from
  the picture to reality. The trigger is now the
  image and the target is now the real Lisa.

19
Diagram of B to R

• Our diagram now appears like this

20
Further

• Lets formalize this some amount.
• 12) Max believes that in Lens picture, the girl
  has brown eyes.
• SB will here mean Space Builder, and M will be a
  mental space. So, the new diagram will look like
  this

21
Continued

• This new diagram may look confusing, but it
  isnt.
• Maxs belief is the parent space in which the
  entire statement is made it is therefore M.
• Lens picture is a separate mental space the
  image as opposed to Maxs belief but it still
  falls within the space of Maxs belief. It is
  therefore M.
• Max believes and in Lens picture are just
  the phrases that create the spaces. They are
  therefore space builders, or SB M and SB M,
  respectively.
• It is important to note that SB M will always
  create M within the parent space M.

22
Fun Questions and Their Answers

• Q1 Lets say that Max believes that he has
  inherited a castle and a park. A speaker says
• In reality, the castle is a run-down shack and
  the park is a junkyard.
• What does the pragmatic function diagram
  look like?

23
Answer to Q1
24
Q2

• Q2 Can you figure out the two most likely
  interpretations of the follow example and define
  the mental spaces?
• 2) In that movie, Clint Eastwood is a villian.
• But he thinks hes a hero.

25
Answer to Q2

• Interpretation 1 The character in the movie is
  a villain but thinks he is a hero.
• Diagram

26
Answer to Q2, continued

• Interpretation 2 The character in the movie is a
  villain, but Clint Eastwood misunderstands the
  role and thinks the character is a hero.
• The diagram to this interpretation is the same as
  the preceding diagram however, a few things are
  understood differently.
• This diagram begins relative to R Reality.
  That is to say, the parent space is R, with M
  following within R and M following within M.
  Also, the first he in the second sentence
  points to Clint Eastwood, not the character in
  movie. The second he still refers to the
  character in the movie.

27
Q3 An Extension of Q2

• Q3 What is the third, less likely,
  interpretation of 2)?

28
Answer to Q3

• Interpretation to 3 While Clint Eastwood may
  play a villain in that movie, in reality the real
  Clint Eastwood considers himself a hero.
• Diagram (To the Best of my Ability)

29
Answer to Q3 Continued

• The third interpretation also functions within a
  parent space of Reality. M falls within R, but
  R1 does not fall within M. Therefore, R exists
  as a parent space with R1 and M within it.