Mike,

Lakoff's reply to you is not about "image schema" but rather about "process 
schema" , specifically naranyan's x-schema

naranyan's x-schema are "a graph-based, token-passing formalism based on 
stochastic Petri nets"


http://www1.icsi.berkeley.edu/~snarayan/CFN-NCPW04.pdf

These x-schema are an abstract mathematical formalism, and not intrinsically 
"imagistic"

Naranyan uses x-schema as a bridge btw language, action, perception and 
reasoning -- much as opencog uses its atomspace model in this role 

Ben G

--
Ben Goertzel 
http://goertzel.org
### Sent from my mobile; plz forgive any typos or excessive concision ...

On 24 Jul, 2012, at 5:17 AM, "Mike Tintner" <[email protected]> wrote:

>  
>  
> From: George Lakoff
> Sent: Monday, July 23, 2012 10:11 PM
> To: Mike Tintner
> Subject: Re: [Cogling-L] The scope of image schemas
>  
> Narayanan's X-schemas (or process schemas) characterize all events and 
> actions and actually control physical actions. So you're right about that. We 
> are now working on entity schemas, but we're not there yet.
>  
> George
> 
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2012 at 11:34 AM, Mike Tintner <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> Lakoff:The idea behind image metaphors is simple. Images are structured by 
> image
> schemas. A given image has multiple image schemas linked via neural binding
> to form a composite image schema ? or more than one. Metaphors map one
> image to another by mapping the source image schemas to the identical image
> schemas in the target
> 
> George,
> 
> Your exposition was v. useful. Can you/should you not extend the scope of 
> image schemas? They structure presumably under
> 
> *Images* : both
> 
> *Verbal Images* &
> *Graphic/Photographic/Sensory Images*.
> 
> and not just word images but :
> 
> *Words/Language/Concepts" - period; *all words* are structured by image 
> schemas, no?
> 
> And from that one can one go on to argue - no? -  that they structure
> 
> *Moves/Movement* - period - that, for example, our reaching for a cup is 
> structured by a schema.
> 
> After all, language is used principally to structure actions: "Hand me that 
> cup" - "Go to the other room". It makes sense that image schemas should 
> structure not just verbally-mediated action, but all action, however 
> mediated. The same mirror neurons that respond to (image-schema-structured) 
> verbal accounts of action, also respond when just watching direct sensory 
> images of agents executing those actions.
> 
> Concepts/schemas arguably structure all the actions of living creatures.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> P.S. Personally, I think it's helpful to think of image schemas as "[loose] 
> outlines" - esp. in connection with actions. Comments?
>  
> AGI | Archives  | Modify Your Subscription     



-------------------------------------------
AGI
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/21088071-c97d2393
Modify Your Subscription: 
https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=21088071&id_secret=21088071-2484a968
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com

Reply via email to