Alain,
Like Alan (Penn) I am most intrigued by the research on cognitive relativism
I have come across from Norway and Finland, and now have dug out some more
references. Actually my 'primary source' is an unpublished paper presented
in Oslo last summer, "Drawing in Finnish? Rethinking conceptual relativism"
by a G. Griffiths, a Welsh (?!) architect-researcher assistant to Jorma
Manty in Helsinki. His non-Norwegian/ Finnish references are mainly articles
by Frode Stromnes from the (English-language) Scandinavian Journal of
Psychology from the 1970s and 1980s, a book "A new physics of inner worlds"
(Tromso, 1976) and further articles in Finnish journals of architecture;
e.g. 'On the Architecture of Thought' ( Abacus, Helsinki, 1980) and 'The
relevance of research on cognition for the arts' (Focus, Helsinki, 1993).
One of the interesting features of such research should be the diachronic
aspect. How conceptions and representations of the environment have changed,
and how the world seems to be moving towards a single model - the argument
being that this "universal" model is simply one dominant cultural construct
pushing away others. The point of departure seems to be the question of
whether speakers of different languages experience different cognitive
worlds and how their behaviour may differ accordingly. Of course there is
much documentation on how people from different cultures move in space and
congregate differently (perhaps the most famous being Edward T. Hall's
theory of cultural proxemics, in regard to cultural allowances for distances
between people): but all such arguments might easily be accounted for in
terms of lebenswelt rather than cognition or perception. Ie. they would be a
matter of value. Thus one could argue that despite differences in the value
placed upon objects or perception (as shown in the classic studies of
'primitive' people's perceptions by Hudson, Pirenne, Herskovitz, etc.) the
universal embodied perception of space, objects and temporal flow is still
at the root of all language. And thus even a failure to perceive certain
geometrical shapes or colour tones which people in certain cultures can
perceive might be understood as matters of value (which can block, guide or
enhance perception).
Thus, I well accept your point, Alain, that Japanese film-makers would have
had knowledge of American and European film-making and that films the world
over are becoming more congruent (but there is also the argument that the
very nature of filming, and its 'natural emergence' is Western - the point
of view of the technological subject). The Norwegian/Finnish experiments
with film seem to want to show, however, that "something" remains different,
albeit that older films show it more easily than more recent ones. Thus to
enable comparisons of some kind they measured the construction of space and
time in Finnish versus Norwegian/English film/tv productions of the same
classic play (e.g. a Shakespeare, Moliere, Ibsen). Again, straight away, one
might explain the quite obvious differences in the "look" of these
productions in terms of value and cultural practices.
However, what Stromnes argues, along with various other experiments, is that
if spatial imagery ('imagery' here, by the way, does not refer exclusively
to sight but rather is an analogue or isomorph) is to be considered a
necessary psychological requisite for logical activity then the differences
are more than one of value (Locke, for one, believed that 'imagery' might be
the vehicle of thinking). The isomorphic structures are said to exist in
space, and will have relations between their parts: when a system of
arbitrary signs (the words of a language) is used for transmitting an
isomorphic structure from a sender to a receiver, it means that the receiver
must rebuild the isomorphic structure in a space defined geometrically in
the same way. Thus, it is argued, one should be able to show that the rules
of a system of signs constitute a geometry, but that different languages, or
rather more likely different language groups, have to be described using
different geometries, as was the case, Stromnes claimed, between Swedish (an
Indo-European language) and Finnish (3-dimensional vectors for the former
and 2-dimensional gestalts [defining space by defining the edges rather than
the movement through space]). Interestingly, then, in the study of
film-making he refers to a Finnish attempt to make a film such that it
"looked French", but in terms of the geometries it corresponded with the
Finnish structure not with the Indo-European one. This would hint at some
form of cultural-linguistic-perceptual determinism. Nevertheless, all his
research seems to be aimed at ways of representation rather than behaviour
per se.
Tony
>From: [log in to unmask] (Alain Chiaradia)
>To: "Anthony Reagan" <[log in to unmask]>, [log in to unmask]
>CC: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: cognitive studies...
>Date: Sun, 14 Nov 1999 23:45:05 +0000
>
>Anthony
> >Indo-European languages were more or less
> >3-dimensional and vectoral, whilst non-Indo European languages such as
> >Finnish and Japanese were 2-dimensional with the added dimension of time,
>or
> >what he terms "bordered gestalts".
>
>I do not quite understand what is cover by this difference. do you have
>references?
>
>
>A phd student in japan set up to study the notion of Ma space in japanese
>early cinema (started with the same relativism hypothesis), after few
>screenings and research on director writtings, he realised that they were
>very aware of american and european cinema and techniques and that it would
>be quite impossible to desantangle what is what. Moreover the import of de
>facto foreign techniques and examples altered radically both concept and
>their spatial "mise en scene".
>
>Questions raised are not only a matter of representation or concept and
>their "origin" whether imagery or not, it seems to me that the relationship
>between concept and behaviour is to be addressed if we want to keep bodies
>involved in this discussion of the city ( it might be pedestrian and it is
>about pedestrian environment)
>In "Eye and the brain" Richard L. Gregory (p150) mention cultural
>differences as enabling different spatial conceptualising. Mentionning
>experiment with visual illusion and asking "do visual 'distorsions' [we
>could speculate with replacing it by 'cultural difference'] correspond
>with behavioural 'errors' ? [difference]
>is answered by recent experiment showing that they can be separate.
>Here we touch again the point raised by correspondance theory this time
>between representation or concept and behaviour. On correspondance theory
>see J. Hanson & B. Hillier The architecture of community. Arch. Behav.
>Vol. 3, No. 3 p 251-257 (1987) .
>Gregory in a very short paragraph about perception and behaviour
>relationship, states that there is very little known about it, then quoting
>"The visual brain in action", David Milner & Melvyn Goodale, 1995 "the
>primary purpose of perception is to identify objects and places, to
>classify them, and to attach meaning and significance to them. This
>enabling later responses to them to be selected approprietely. As a
>consequences perception is concerned with the enduring characteristics of
>object so that they can be recognised when they are encountered again in
>different contexts"
>Gregory concludes "So vision of the object world is not necessarily tied to
>the observers body. But to be useful the neural processes for behaviour
>must be geared very clodely to the body and to the there and now [we could
>add the how and then]. So perception and behaviour do not occupy quite the
>same world."
>
>Further in the book Gregory quotes a letter send by William Molyneux to
>John Locke about a thought experiment: a born blind that learn, know how to
>distinguish a cube from a sphere (same material) from touch experiences.
>What would happen if the blind was then to see, Would he know which is what
>without touching them? Molyneux say no, and Locke agreed. The conceptual
>has to be reconnected to the new perceptual situation. I guess there is
>something similar at work between the perceptual-conceptual, and the
>operational-behavioural. How, where, when do they connect?.
>Research on memory show that memory work better when a transformation is
>involved (an action) i.e. if a list of word is given to remember the same
>list will be remembered better if the subject is involved in a
>transformation of it, a process, in the case described finding sentence
>that could be made with the word from the list. I wonder how much this
>japan/finland/indoeuropean difference is made of world view attitude
>difference toward possible/potential of the world transformation? And how
>this is changing as techniques desenfranchise tight relationship between
>environment and its possible transformation and gain while langage change
>slowly.
>
>alain
>
>At 7:26 11/11/99, Anthony Reagan wrote:
> >Dear Alan and Alain,
> >
> >At first glance the research being done in the school of architecture in
> >Finland (which I first heard about last summer while in Norway) does
>indeed
> >sound like yet another attempt to test linguistic-relativism, that is,
>the
> >Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, according to which the structure of any language
> >will influence in a profound way how the speakers of that language
>structure
> >their environment and world conceptions. From the initial outright
>disproval
> >of the theory (often by those who initially set out with a desire in
>their
> >hearts to find more proof for the theory, eg. Berlin and Kay, Rosche,
>etc.
> >stemming from some belief in cultural and ethical relativism), there has
> >been a gradual acceptance of a rather weak form of linguistic relativism
>(as
> >studied with much vigour by the linguistics department of the Max Planc
> >Institute in Holland headed by Stephen Levinson), according to which
>things
> >such as the existence of masculine/feminine/neuter forms aid word memory.
> >
> >However, the research on conceptual relativism I mentioned happening in
> >Finland, if I understand correctly, distances itself from linguistic
> >relativism, because it goes for something more basic, claiming as you say
> >Alan that language is a filter, and thus derivative of something more
> >deeper. But instead of taking on Chomskian universal grammar, the
>research
> >begins by arguing that the basis for communication and language is
> >"imagery". The main protagonists in the research are Stephen Kosslyn
>(from
> >Harvard), a Norwegian professor emeritus of psychology called Frode
>Stromnes
> >and a Finnish Professsor of architecture called Jorma Manty (who has a
> >British assistant, whose name escapes me). But this is no attempt to
>defend
> >the Cartesian Theatre - images literally in the head! Stromnes has been
> >involved in research with this for some 15 years, and has shown that
> >speakers from different language groups conceptualise space in different
> >ways, or rather the ways they conceptualise the world can be described in
> >terms of different geometries. Indo-European languages were more or less
> >3-dimensional and vectoral, whilst non-Indo European languages such as
> >Finnish and Japanese were 2-dimensional with the added dimension of time,
>or
> >what he terms "bordered gestalts". Manty has been getting his younger
> >students, as well as un-suspecting visiting foreign students to make
>videos
> >of the same building (the control) and has attempted to show how the
> >geometries operate.
> >
> >Tony Reagan
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>From: [log in to unmask] (Alain Chiaradia)
> >>To: alan penn <[log in to unmask]>, Anthony Reagan <[log in to unmask]>
> >>CC: [log in to unmask]
> >>Subject: Re: cognitive studies...
> >>Date: Tue, 9 Nov 1999 01:21:32 +0000
> >>
> >>You probably know all this not so old contreversy: from linguistic
> >>relativity, linguistic determinism state as consequence that speaker
>from
> >>different language must see the world differently. It spring from the
>work
> >>of Sapir-Whorf (comparing Hopi en English), and the Sapir-Whorf
>hypothesis
> >>claimed that structural differences encoded radically different world
> >>views. Chomsky was taking a different view with the linguistic
>universals
> >>sampling unrelated language and seek common properties. This is not to
> >>forget the difference/similarity between action and representation and
> >>their observation.
> >>
> >>At 12:21 08/11/99, alan penn wrote:
> >> >Tony,
> >> >
> >> >Ive passed this email on to Young Kim - you are right that UK
> >>universities
> >> >only print a couple of copies for the library, but the meat of the
>thesis
> >> >will be being published as journal articles in the near (hopefully)
> >>future.
> >> >
> >> >With regard Ruth's work I think it is probably a bit distant from the
> >> >relativist stance. Perhaps she would care to comment. However the
> >>research
> >> >you speak of intrigues me - is the suggestion that people from
>different
> >> >linguistic groups process spatial information differently? I must say
> >>this
> >> >sounds highly dubious to me - I would suspect that people from the
> >> >different groups might process/respond to the researcher's questions
> >> >differently even if they processed spatial information in exactly the
> >>same
> >> >way. Can you give me a reference to the work as I would really like to
> >>see
> >> >what methods and data they used and how they got around the language
> >>filter
> >> >problem in their work.
> >> >
> >> >Alan
> >> >
> >> >>A couple of questions and points regarding Alan Penn's comments.
> >> >>
> >> >>First, I would be most interested to read Yoiung Kim's thesis - as
>well
> >>as
> >> >>to pass a copy on to a friend in Finland who is interested in such
> >>things. I
> >> >>beleive that British universities do not follow the European
>practiuce
> >>of
> >> >>making 100 copies of PhD theses, available for distribution, etc. Is
> >> >>inter-library loan (or a trip to London), UMI dissertations (if
> >>available),
> >> >>or an appeal to the candidate himself the only way to get hold of the
> >> >>thesis?
> >> >>
> >> >>Ruth Conway's research is interesting for a friend of mine in
>Finland,
> >>who
> >> >>has taken up similar sounding notions within that most
>un--fashionable
> >>of
> >> >>empirical domains, namely cognitive relativism; the twist in the
> >>theoretical
> >> >>story, however, is not to beg the question of linguistic relativism
> >>(John
> >> >>Lucy, eg.) but to posit imagery as the domain of thought: his
> >>cross-cultural
> >> >>studies show, in my very general description of his conclusions, that
> >> >>Indo-European speakers prioritize vectoral movements and
>3-dimensional
> >>while
> >> >>non-Indo-Es gestalt boundariness. But I may have misseed th epoint of
> >>both
> >> >>these theses. Any other cross-cultural research within the field?
> >> >>
> >> >>Tony Reagan
> >> >>Dublin/Boston
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>From: alan penn <[log in to unmask]>
> >> >>>Reply-To: alan penn <[log in to unmask]>
> >> >>>To: [log in to unmask]
> >> >>>Subject: Re: cognitive studies...
> >> >>>Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 12:44:02 +0100
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Mohamed Salheen wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> >I am Mohamed Salheen PhD candidate in architecture at Edinburgh
> >>College
> >> >>>of
> >> >>> >Art. I am using Space Syntax in the analysis of my case study,
>which
> >>is
> >> >>> >Cairo-Egypt- and its city centre. I am using it together with
>other
> >> >>>research
> >> >>> >techniques in order an integrated understanding of the pedestrian
> >> >>> >environment in the case study.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >I would like first to ask if any one is interested in discussing
>the
> >> >>>details
> >> >>> >of that topic. Second I was looking for any information on
>previous
> >>and
> >> >>> >current studies linking both techniques space syntax and cognitive
> >> >>>mapping.
> >> >>> >I will appreciate very much any information you could give me.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Some pointers. There are two recent PhD's at UCL that touch on this:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Dongkuk Chang - 'Integrated multi level circulation systems in dense
> >>urban
> >> >>>areas: the effect of complex spatial designs on multi-level
>pedestrian
> >> >>>movement.' PhD Thesis, University of London, 1998
> >> >>>
> >> >>>This looks in particular at highly unintelligible (using the syntax
> >> >>>definition of the term) developments and uses these to try and
> >>disentangle
> >> >>>which factors other than simple configuration can be held to affect
> >> >>>pedestrian movement patterns. This does not make use of cognitive
> >>mapping,
> >> >>>but does shed light on spatial cognition. Parts of the study are
> >>published
> >> >>>in Chang & Penn, 'Integrated multi level circulation systems in
>dense
> >>urban
> >> >>>areas:the effect of mutiple interacting constraints on the use of
> >>complex
> >> >>>urban areas', Env & Planning B, 25, 507-538, Pion 1998.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Young Kim - 'Spatial configuration, spatial cognition and spatial
> >> >>>behaviour: the role of architectual intelligibilty in shaping
>spatial
> >> >>>experience.' PhD Thesis, University of London, 1999
> >> >>>
> >> >>>This has put together analysis of spatial configuration,
>observations
> >>of
> >> >>>the way people vote with their feet throgh movement observations,
>and a
> >> >>>cognitive mapping exercise using free recall mapping and boundary
> >> >>>delimitation. By doing all three on an urban area with intelligible
>and
> >> >>>unintelligible halves (again using the syntax definition), Kim was
>able
> >>to
> >> >>>unpack the relationship between intelligibility as a property of the
> >> >>>environment, effects of configuration on movement patterns and so
> >>learning
> >> >>>opportunity, and people's cognition - so far as that can be
>estimated
> >>by
> >> >>>sketch mapping exercises. One innovation was to use axial mapping of
> >>the
> >> >>>sketch maps themselves as a means of analysing these as
>configurations
> >>with
> >> >>>a topology rather than just as lists of features. This thesis is
> >>probably
> >> >>>the most relevant to your concerns.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>The third current PhD in the syntax/cognition field is Ruth Conroy
>who
> >>is
> >> >>>using experiments on people using an immersive VR headset to track
>and
> >> >>>follow gaze direction as they move through virtual environments. The
> >> >>>environments include models of real and experimental environments,
>with
> >>the
> >> >>>experimental ones designed to test various configurational
>properties.
> >>The
> >> >>>benefit of immersion is that the record of precise bahaviour, pause
> >>points,
> >> >>>gaze direction etc. can be automatically captured, and it is
>possible
> >>to
> >> >>>control the environments to maintain equal levels of surface detail
> >>etc.
> >> >>>This work is in the final stages of write-up.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>There is also some work going on in this area at Atlanta, in
> >>particular:
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Abdulgader Amir - The spatial logic of pedestrian movement and
> >>exploration
> >> >>>in the central area of Jeddah: the effect of spatial configuration
>on
> >> >>>shopping behaviour, PhD, Georgia Institute of Technology, 1998.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>This looked at individual wayfinding, but did not really look at
> >>cognition
> >> >>>- it should still be relevant to your case.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>There is a second current doctoral student at GIT who I met in
>Brasil -
> >>but
> >> >>>whose name escapes me - sorry (help pelase John!) who is working in
> >>this
> >> >>>area and may be worth contacting.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Apologies to anyone Ive forgotton but shouldn't have, and I'd be
> >>interested
> >> >>>in knowing of anyone else doing work in this area
> >> >>>(syntax/cognition/cognitive mapping).
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Alan
> >> >>>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >________________________________________________________
> >> >Alan Penn, Reader in Architectural and Urban Computing
> >> >Director, VR Centre for the Built Environment
> >> >The Bartlett School of Architecture and Planning
> >> >1-19 Torrington Place (Room 335)
> >> >University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT
> >> >tel. (+44) 020 7504 5919 fax. (+44) 020 7916 1887
> >> >mobile. (+44) 0411 696875
> >> >email. [log in to unmask]
> >> >www. http://www.vr.ucl.ac.uk/
> >> >________________________________________________________
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >______________________________________________________
> >Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
>
>
>
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|
