Corso di Laurea Magistrale
in Scienze del Linguaggio
ordinamento ex D.M. 270/2004
Tesi di Laurea
Creativity and Movement
as Facilitators in
Language Learning
An operational proposal through the use of
Creative Dance
Relatore
Ch. Prof. Fabio Caon Correlatore
Dott.ssa Sveva Battaglia Laureando
Valentina Giordano Matricola 865543 Anno Accademico 2017 / 2018
Alla nonna Lisena, Maestra prima di me.
La creatività è multiforme, ora assume una forma, ora un’altra. É come uno spirito abbagliante che appare a tutti noi, ma è difficile a descriversi perché le voci non concordano su quel che si è visto nel lampo brillante.”
Indice
Abstract ... 11
Introduzione ... 13
1. Neuroscientific Principles in Support of Experience Based Learning ... 15
1.1 Language Education and Neurosciences ... 16
1.1.1 Human Sciences and Natural Sciences: Moving Closer Is Possible ... 18
1.1.2 Learning through Experience ... 22
1.2 Neurons with Visuo-Motor Properties: Mirror Neurons... 23
1.2.1 Mirror Neurons in Humans ... 24
1.2.2 Mirror Neurons and Language ... 25
1.2.3 Implications for Language Education ... 27
1.3 The Embodiment Theory, the Embodied Language ... 28
1.3.1 What is the Embodiment theory? ... 29
1.3.2 Embodied and Disembodied Cognition ... 30
1.4 Multisensoriality: How Many Senses Do We Have? ... 32
1.4.1 Modularity or Non-Modularity of the Senses ... 33
1.4.2 Methods for Studying and Researching Categories of Multisensory Perception ... 36
1.4.3 Multisensoriality and Body Movement ... 39
1.4.4 Sense of Self, Shared Bodily Experiences and Social Cognition ... 44
1.5 Psychomotricity ... 46
1.5.1 Moving Language ... 47
1.5.2 Psychomotor Education ... 48
1.6 Different Kinds of Intelligence ... 51
1.6.1 Musical Intelligence ... 52
1.6.2 Corporeal-Kinesthetic Intelligence ... 52
1.7 Conclusions... 53
2.1 Emotions and Learning ... 55
2.1.1 Emotions and Motivation ... 57
2.1.2 The Student and Input Appraisal... 59
2.2 The Role of the Teacher ... 61
2.3 The Role of Emotions in Teaching ... 63
2.3.1 The Emotional Wellbeing of the Teacher ... 65
2.3.2 Emotions and Professional Identity ... 68
2.3.3 The Language Teacher and the Input Appraisal ... 70
3. Creatività e Movimento Creativo ... 75
3.1 L’atto creativo ... 75
3.2 La creatività e i suoi falsi miti ... 78
3.3 Creatività e apprendimento ... 79
3.3.1 Il caso della Finlandia ... 82
3.3.2 Insegnare con creatività ... 82
3.4 Il movimento creativo ... 84
3.4.1 Il gioco nel Movimento Creativo ... 86
3.4.2 Analogie con la didattica ludica... 87
3.4.3 Corporeità nei processi di conoscenza ... 88
4. La Danza Creativa come sostegno all’apprendimento linguistico ... 91
4.1 Cos’è la Danza Creativa ... 91
4.1.1 Obiettivi della Danza Creativa ... 92
4.1.1 La struttura del setting ... 93
4.1.2 Struttura di un incontro di Danza Creativa ... 94
4.1.3 Utilizzo degli oggetti ... 94
4.2 Proposta operativa: imparare una lingua danzando ... 95
4.2.1 Danziamo l’alfabeto ... 96
4.2.2 Le parti del corpo: il burattino ... 97
4.2.4 Gli animali e le azioni motorie: la Giungla ... 99
4.2.6 Il mare e i suoi elementi ... 100
4.2.6 I colori: I Pittori ... 101 4.2.7 Le emozioni ... 102 4.2.8 Le forme geometriche ... 102 Conclusioni ... 105 Bibliografia ... 107 Ringraziamenti ... 117
11
Abstract
This dissertation focuses on highlighting the potential of both the creative process and the physical aspect when teaching and learning one or more foreign languages. Creativity and learning both have a shared matrix: they can be fully realized in the presence of curiosity, dedication, experimentation and absence of judgment. During my artistic education as a Dance Movement Therapist, which took place alongside my academic education, I happened to notice many potential matching concepts between Language Education and Creative Dance. I determined that the latter was the perfect union between creativity and physicality, as, in my humble opinion, they undoubtedly merge with the learning process. What sets apart Creative Dance from any other kind of physical or artistic activity is the presence of an organized setting, where the user can be free to express oneself in a safe environment without the fear of judgment. I believe that a Creative Dance course finalized on language learning could be uniquely suited for guiding student both emotionally and didactically, by igniting their motivation and encouraging their curiosity through a creative and physical approach. Although frontal lessons happen to still be the most widespread method of education in schools, in recent years various studies have started suggesting alternative approaches to the conventional educational methods, in order to facilitate and improve the quality of language learning. Notably, various theories that have been developed (in the field of neurology, psychology, education, etc.) highlight how linking an activity that requires physical movement form the student, as they are the protagonists of the learning process, to language learning enhances and facilitates the process itself. The goal for the first part of this study is to support learning through experience, perception and physicality, examining different theoretical contributions that focus on how all cognitive processes are deeply rooted within the individual’s physicality, as well as pinpointing the prerequisites for the conceptual representation and abstraction mechanisms. The second part of this dissertation is focused on the crucial role that creativity, motivation and emotions play during the learning process. The third part will be centered around Creative Dance; the setting structure and its characteristics will be explained, together with its role in education. Lastly a possible language learning working course through this activity will be put forward.
13
Introduzione
Creatività e apprendimento hanno una matrice comune: si realizzano pienamente in presenza di curiosità, impegno, sperimentazione e assenza di giudizio. Questa tesi si propone di evidenziare le potenzialità del processo creativo e della dimensione corporea all’interno di percorsi di insegnamento e apprendimento di una lingua straniera o seconda. Durante la mia formazione artistica come Danza Movimento Terapeuta, che si è svolta parallelamente a quella accademica, ho avuto modo di notare numerosi punti di incontro tra la Glottodidattica e la Danza Creativa e di individuare in quest’ultima la perfetta unione tra creatività e corporeità, ingredienti che, a mio avviso, si sposano indiscutibilmente con il processo di apprendimento. Quello che distingue la Danza creativa da qualsiasi altro tipo di attività fisica o artistica è la presenza di un setting strutturato, in grado di contenere l’utente e creare un ambiente protetto, in cui la persona si senta libera di esprimersi, senza paura del giudizio. Ritengo quindi che un percorso di Danza Creativa finalizzato all’apprendimento linguistico possa essere particolarmente adatto per accompagnare didatticamente ed emotivamente gli studenti, accendendo la loro motivazione e stimolando la loro curiosità attraverso un approccio creativo e motorio. Nonostante le lezioni frontali rappresentino ancora il metodo di insegnamento più comune nelle scuole, da diversi anni vengono portati avanti degli studi che propongono metodi alternativi a quelli tradizionali, in modo da facilitare e migliorare la qualità dell’apprendimento. In particolare, sono state sviluppate diverse teorie (in campo neurologico, psicologico, didattico, ecc.) secondo le quali l’apprendimento linguistico è facilitato e più efficace se associato a delle attività che comprendano il movimento del corpo degli studenti, protagonisti del processo di apprendimento linguistico.
Questo elaborato si presenta suddiviso in quattro capitoli.
Il primo capitolo si pone l’obiettivo di presentare i principi neuroscientifici che supportano l’apprendimento attraverso l’esperienza, i sensi e la corporeità. Verrà quindi presentata la complicata, ma possibile, relazione tra Glottodidattica e Neuroscienze, illustrando in seguito la funzionalità dei neuroni specchio e le possibili connessioni con il linguaggio. Si passerà successivamente alla Teoria del Linguaggio Incarnato, dove l’esperienza sensori-motoria è la protagonista per poi, senza allontanarsi dalla sfera dell’esperienza, evidenziare la multisensorialità della nostra vita quotidiana. Verso la fine del capitolo si parlerà di psicomotricità e dei contributi che essa può portare alla didattica,
14
aumentando le connessioni tra i neuroni a livello cerebrale, permettendo uno sviluppo della rete neuronale e, di conseguenza, dell’intelligenza. Per concludere verranno analizzati i diversi tipi di intelligenza individuati da Gardner (1996) focalizzandosi principalmente sui due più attinenti a questa tesi: l’intelligenza corporeo-cinestetica e l’intelligenza musicale.
Il secondo capitolo tratterà brevemente il ruolo della dimensione emozionale nel processo di apprendimento di una lingua, riportando l'applicazione della teoria cognitiva delle emozioni alla Glottodidattica. Si illustrerà, inoltre, l’importanza del contesto motivazionale per favorire un buon apprendimento, passando successivamente all'analisi del ruolo dell'insegnante e della sua sfera emotiva all'interno della classe di lingue. Il terzo capitolo parlerà del fondamentale ruolo della creatività all’interno del processo di apprendimento, sottolineando l’importanza di un ambiente sereno e non giudicante all’interno del gruppo classe. Si tenterà di dare una definizione del concetto di creatività, concentrandosi sui processi coinvolti nell’atto creativo e smentendo i falsi miti al riguardo. Verrà inoltre immaginata una scuola al cui interno venga dato valore all’umanità di ogni singolo studente, allontanandosi dal concetto di conformità e avvicinandosi, invece, a quello di personalizzazione.
Il quarto e ultimo capitolo presenterà la Danza Creativa, spiegandone caratteristiche e struttura del setting, il suo ruolo in ambito educativo ed illustrando le peculiarità della creatività motoria. Verrà sottolineato quanto questa disciplina sia in grado di far incontrare tra loro le caratteristiche precedentemente illustrate: corporeità, emozioni, creatività, personalizzazione e non giudizio. L’ultima parte del capitolo sarà dedicata alla presentazione di un possibile percorso di apprendimento linguistico attraverso questa attività, tenendo sempre a mente che, essendo una disciplina creativa, è per sua natura flessibile ed adattabile a qualsiasi tipo di idea e proposta.
15
1. Neuroscientific Principles in Support of Experience Based Learning
This chapter will examine the numerous studies and theories that support learning through experience and movement. Ekwall and Shaker (in Ginnis, 2002: 24) argue that “people remember 10% of what they read, 20% of what they hear, 30% of what they see, 50% of what they both see and hear, 70% of what they say and 90% of what they both say and do”. Neuroscientific contributions have always been essential, as they allow development of new educational methods and techniques. For this reason, this chapter begins by examining the complex link between language education and neuroscience, as well as the adjustment path, feasible but intricate, between them. The micro languages used by these two scientific fields vary significantly, as their analytical scale is different (more varied in the context of language education in class, while neuroscience, as it focuses on the study of specific areas of the brain, has a smaller one). Furthermore, the speed at which neuroscience develops is much higher than the development speed of teaching methods and techniques. From this, I will explore the importance of experience in the learning process and, by extension, it becomes necessary to talk about mirror neurons, which have now been proven to be the main reason why a subject is able to implicitly perceive the meaning of someone else’s actions.
Afterwards, I will examine the embodiment theory, namely the theory of embodied language. In this theory, both when understanding and when actively using a language, the sensorimotor experience is the protagonist. While not straying from the area of experience, it is interesting to point out that almost every real world experience is multisensory: even when going out for a coffee, the inputs that are detected by the receptors in the body are not solely visual inputs, or auditory or tactile. They are at the same time varied and different, which is why we talk about multisensoriality. The latter is analyzed in various aspects of everyday life, precisely because every action and every perception is made up by various sensory inputs, that give us the ability to understand what happens in the world, what others mean to convey in their conversations, and much more. Even the sense of self, the perception of one’s own self and one’s own body, and communicating with others belong to multisensoriality: when we communicate and interact with others, we receive multisensory information on them, and it is important to understand and interpret correctly the signals we receive. This allow us to adapt to the environment and to have a stake in the development of the human cognition, thanks to
16
the surfacing of a shared reality during social interactions, which arises from the sharing of perceptual experiences in cooperative communication.
Towards the end of the chapter, I will introduce psychomotricity and what elements it could bring to education. Traditionally education is based on the transfer of knowledge from teacher to student, while psychomotricity suggests a different approach, one that calls for physical actions from the students. This could facilitate and enhance not only their learning, but could also expand the connections between neurons in the brain, and as a result, increase the individual’s intelligence. To conclude, I will include a short analysis on the various kinds of intelligence identified by Gardner (1996), focused primarily on the two most relevant kinds for this dissertation: corporeal-kinesthetic intelligence and musical intelligence.
1.1 Language Education and Neurosciences
When talking about language education, we are talking about the
Science of language education, a discipline that focuses on the theoretical and operational problems linked to language education, may it be a mother language, foreign language, ethnic language or classic language. The main objective of language education is to elaborate educational approaches, methodologies and techniques that best create optimal conditions for learning. (Daloiso, 2009: 1).1
An essential relationship to keep in mind, before listing the neuroscientific principles that support learning through experience, is the one between language education and neuroscience. This is a necessary step as the aim of this dissertation is to implement these studies in Language Education, in order to allow to learn a foreign language (in this case, English) through experience. The adjustment path taken into account has the goal to integrate the information from the two fields in a gradual manner, since they could come across as completely different; to merge them successfully some hurdles must be taken into account: the first one, for example, consists in the different speeds at which they develop. Mezzadri (2015: 148) highlights the “Frenetic development of the
1 “Scienza dell’educazione linguistica, una disciplina cioè che si interessa di tutte le questioni teoriche ed
operative legate all’insegnamento della lingua, sia essa lingua madre, lingua straniera, lingua etnica o lingua classica. L’obiettivo primario della glottodidattica consiste nell’elaborazione di approcci, metodologie e tecniche didattiche che creino le condizioni migliori per l’apprendimento.”
17
neuroscientific research, tied to the speed at which data is collected and the subsequent process of interpretation that allows knowledge to evolve, change and sometimes disprove previously thought valid theories.”2 The same could not be said for the
educational sciences, and there is also an element that distances them from neurosciences: while in language education the focus is on the reality of the classroom, for those that study the brain it is imperative to create a manmade environment, free from distractions, that allows them to achieve results. These results must of course follow scientific principles, and they are produced using equipment like the Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Scanners (fMRI), and they “do not allow for the explanation, except a small part, of what characterizes the human behavior, including language”3 (Mezzadri
2015: 149). The different contexts have consequences and therefore another critical juncture: “the analytical scale” (Ivi: 150). Indeed, through the creation of manmade environments, neurosciences focus on the specific study of certain areas of the brain and so we could say that they limit their own analytical scale. When focusing instead on other contexts, like the classroom, the scale becomes wider because it “focuses on the interpretation and management of complex behaviors.”4 (Ibidem.), and the scale then
takes the whole brain into consideration.
Another problem is the linguistic differences as, when taking into account the two different micro languages, it is not easy to find common ground between them: the micro languages of language education can be traced back to the field of human sciences, while neuroscience uses terminology from biology, physics, medicine or chemistry and this causes problems when these two disciplines try to communicate. On this topic, as early as 1899, William James argued in his Talks to Teachers on Psychology (p.23) that:
you make a great, very great mistake, if you think that psychology, being the science of the mind’s laws, is something from which you can deduce definite programs and schemes and methods of instruction for immediate schoolroom use. Psychology is a science, and teaching is an art; and sciences never generate arts directly out of themselves.
2 “sviluppo frenetico della ricerca neuroscientifica, legata alla velocità con cui i dati vengono acquisiti e al
conseguente processo di interpretazione che permette alla conoscenza di evolversi, modificare e a volte confutare quanto prima ritenuto valido.”
3 “non permettono di spiegare se non una parte di ciò che caratterizza i comportamenti umani, tra i quali il
linguaggio.”
18
Therefore, being competent in both disciplines is necessary for those who want to sponsor the “results of the inter and trans- disciplinary neuroscientific and educational sciences to the varied and vast public of workers in the education sector.”5 (Mezzadri 2015:151), so
that communicating information in an understandable and rigorous fashion is possible. 1.1.1 Human Sciences and Natural Sciences: Moving Closer Is Possible
Ferrari and McBride state that, while the development of this new education, that takes into account both mind and body, is only at the beginning of its journey, they recognize the potential of neuroscience when implemented in education. Educators are becoming more and more interested in neuroscience, and are trying to incorporate it in their teaching methods. Paloma and Fragnito (2013) as well approve the idea that the creation of a new field, with the name of ‘Neuro-Didactic’, is possible, where education promotes the human evolution, thanks to the union of neuroscientific and didactic studies, stating that:
[…] the body assumes a meaning and an educational determinant value. On the bases of these presuppositions envisaging an interdisciplinary relationship between Neurosciences and Didactic, there seems to be the new epistemic horizon through which to explore this circular reaction of body and mind. Neurosciences offer a new prospective to the study of brain activities separated from emotions such as traditional philosophy has supported, but they open up to a new set of analysis creating a fruitful subject, Neuro-Didactic, where education becomes the promotion of human evolution. (Gomez Paloma, Fragnito, 2013: 107)
Language Education has always been linked to those sciences that study the brain, and it did not limit itself only to human sciences. Its focus is learning, and as such it is forced to reference hard data based science models. In order to do so, during the years it became more and more interdisciplinary “while remaining faithful to its theoretical and practical roots” 6 (Mezzadri 2015:153). This became both a pro and a con of the discipline, as it
finds itself forced to find a meeting point, as well as creating homogeneous standards and parameters taking into account the various sources that it uses. It is of the utmost importance, then, that the experts in language education are specialized and competent. They should be aware of the fields they could come in contact with, in order to create
5 “risultati della ricerca inter- e transdisciplinare neuroscientifica ed educativa al vasto e variegato
pubblico di operatoti del settore dell’educazione.”
19
bridges between the various disciplines: Daloiso (2009: 101) highlights that language education:
has taken a interdisciplinary flavor as an answer to the gradual “complexification” of the language learning circumstances, which have multiplied and diversified with time (school\outside school environments\ education of children\teenagers\adults \second\foreign\ethnic \classic\ mother language \ lingua franca).7
It is important to highlight that we are talking about interdisciplinarity, hence language education does not try to export its main principles to other disciplines, but what happens is knowledge sharing, from the others it takes the knowledge it needs and at the same time language education shares its own. In the twentieth century, more ‘scientific’ methods and research were adopted. These innovations gave way to the creation of the, for example, linguistic testing, in order to face the problems during the learning, teaching and assessment processes. At the same time, these processes are in danger of misleading the strict data analyzing procedure of language education, as they could become based on “theories viable only in some cases, but not unanimously recognized as such by the scientific community.”8 (Mezzadri 2015: 155).
One of the main risks is letting go and accepting the so called ‘neuro-myths’, namely neuroscientific theories used incorrectly in the education field that, as a result, influence negatively the credibility and the scientificity of the resulting assertions, as they do not have scientific value. Taking into account the enormous potential of neuroscience in regards to the possible contributions to education, it’s important that those who aim at merging these subjects are competent. Ferrari and McBride (2011) agree in pointing out the dangers of excessive simplification of the results obtained from researchers or of neuro-myths, like for example the generalization of the hemispheric specialization or the effects of stress on the brain. In the article we read that many school curricula unfortunately are based on
oversimplifications of research findings in neuroscience while others are based on myths about the brain. For example, the myth of left- and right-brained learners – an overgeneralization of hemispheric specialization, the myth of the brain-based classroom – an
7 “ha assunto una connotazione interdisciplinare anche in risposta alla progressiva “complessificazione”
delle situazioni glottodidattiche, che si sono moltiplicate e differenziate nel tempo (contesto scolastico/extrascolastico, educazione di bambini/adolescenti/adulti, lingua
materna/seconda/straniera/etnica/classica/franca ecc).”
20
overgeneralization of research on the effect of stress on brain functioning […] (Ferrari, McBride, 2011: 93-94).
and they add an explanation of this ‘phenomenon’. One of the main reasons is that, according to them, the discoveries made in various fields have implications for the education practices, stating that “these myths have developed, in part, because research findings from so many disciplines (among them neuroscience, genetics, physiology, and cognitive psychology) have implications for educational practice” (Ibidem).
The challenge (Purdy & Morrison, 2009) is to succeed in making these studies viable in the education field, without losing the scientific integrity of the research, but at the same time making them comprehensible and accessible to teachers. This process begun in late 1800 with the Natural Approach and the Direct Method, created to put distance from the grammar and translation based tradition of the subject, laying more emphasis on the psychological aspect of the learners, and at the same time giving more importance on the meaning instead of the forms of the language itself. They tried to make the connection with the language more natural and orally based, in order to make language acquisition more spontaneous.
On the same subject we find the ‘Gestalt Theory’, very significant for language learning and its adjustment path towards neuroscience. The Gestalt Theory “encourages the development of a methodological framework based on the perception and elaboration of external inputs which lead to a didactic approach.”9 (Mezzadri, 2015: 157). All of this
happens following a sequence that applies to every minimum unit in the process that leads to the acquisition of a language, and it is composed by a first phase of ‘globality’, followed by an ‘analysis’ phase, concluding with a ‘synthesis’ phase. The minimum unit of the acquisition process today matches the acquisition unit, and the success of this theory is based on the key role that the text is given, as it happens in language learning, as it is considered “creator and enhancer of meaningful cultural and linguistic experiences.”10 (Ibidem).
It is also possible to create didactic practices that, following the aforementioned framework, succeed in respecting the learning differences and styles of the individual student. At the beginning of the 1960’s, psychology entered the field as well, bringing its
9 “incoraggia lo sviluppo di una cornice metodologica determinata dalla percezione e dall’elaborazione
dell’input esterno che porta a un approccio didattico.”
21
theories regarding language learning, putting the learner and the language learning process as the protagonists, shifting focus from the form of language to the meaning expressed by language instead. During the following decade, psycholinguistics gave language education the possibility to interpret what happens during language comprehension process. As a result in order to understand which process is the de facto ‘leading’ one, the process of communication between individual was reinterpreted alongside investigating how communication works in the brain itself. Goodman (1967), Oller (1979) and Minsky (1977) put forward similar psychological approaches, respectively known as the psycholinguistic guessing game (referencing his ideas on the reading process), the expectancy grammar and the Frame System Theory. These Theories influenced language learning, putting focus on pre-reading and pre-listening, the processes that happen before being exposed to a new text, namely the foreknowledge that the learner possesses: “the learner, then, gradually builds his own knowledge of a new language actively and personally using what he already knows (the student always knows at least one language) and personally restructuring it.”11 (Caon 2010: IX). This is why
experience plays a fundamental role when teaching and learning, and it is a meeting point between language education and embodiment. Other theories that have helped to bring language education and neuroscience together are, for example, Chomsky’s ‘Language Acquisition Device’, LAD, (1965) and the ‘Critical period’ that his followers and collaborators formulated. In the following decades (1980’s and 1990’s) the two theories that have influenced the most the learning and teaching processes are the Second Language Acquisition Theory (1981) by Krashen, which distinguishes learning and acquisition and the ‘Bimodality Theory’ by Marco Danesi (Danesi, 1988a,1988b e 1998). Another meeting point between these two sciences is represented by the task-based language learning approaches, which have been discussed extensively in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages, published in 2001 by the European Council. This document lays emphasis on the didactic homework, and this led to the creation of the Task-based Learning Approach in the Nineties. In this document, the definition for ‘Task accomplishment’:
[…] involves the strategic activation of specific competences in order to carry out a set of purposeful actions in a particular domain with a
11 “l’apprendente, dunque, costruisce gradualmente la propria conoscenza della nuova lingua impiegando
in modo attivo e personale ciò che già sa (sa sempre almeno una lingua) e ristrutturandolo in modo personale.”
22
clearly defined goal and a specific outcome. Tasks can be extremely varied in nature, and may involve language activities to a greater or lesser extent, for example: creative (painting, story writing), skills based (repairing or assembling something), problem solving (jigsaw, crossword), routine transactions, interpreting a role in a play, taking part in a discussion, giving a presentation, planning a course of action, reading and replying to (an e-mail) message, etc. (Council of Europe, 2002: 191).
To summarize, the main idea we can discern from this quote is that using one’s own experience is essential when performing a task, whatever it might be, and at the same time the task itself allows the individual to acquire new experiences.
1.1.2 Learning through Experience
Various authors consider experience as the cornerstone and main aid for the learning process, including John Dewey, according to whom authentic learning of any kind is achieved through experience; Jean Piaget confers to the experiential dimension in the cognitive development a key role, as does Kurt Lewin with his learning cycle, which also focuses on an experience based approach, but this time trough groups. According to Lewin, in learning process practical experience is not only the impetus, but also the goal. David Kolb (1974) takes this concept as a starting point and “introduces the concept of experiential learning meant as a deliberation on the actions through observation and transformation of experience.”12 (Caon, 2010: XXI).
Kolb’s theory (Experiential Learning) is divided in four stages where: “the subject 1. Performs a practical experience, 2. Observes and ponders the performed experience, 3. Abstractly conceptualizes what was observed and pondered, 4. Actively experiments what they have learned.”13 (Ibidem). Furthermore, different students favor one or more of
these different stages and this outlines different student ‘profiles’, like respectively: a. the practical student who need examples and prefers activities like problem solving; b. the abstract student, who needs systematic exercises, grammatical analysis, etc. ;
12 “introduce il concetto di apprendimento esperienziale inteso come riflessione sulle azioni compiute
attraverso l’osservazione e la trasformazione dell’esperienza.”
13 “il soggetto: 1. compie un’esperienza concreta, 2. osserva e riflette sull’esperienza compiuta, 3.
concettualizza in modo astratto quanto osservato ed elaborato, 4. sperimenta attivamente ciò che ha appreso.”
23
c. the insightful student who prefers thoughtful activities, without social interactions; and lastly,
d. the active student who prefers cooperative and shared activities like simulations, role-plays, etc.
These four personalities can be combined to form the four learning styles: the convergent style that combines the abstract and active style, the divergent style that combines the practical and insightful one, the assimilator style which is a combination of abstract and insightful’ style and the fourth one is the accommodating style that combines concrete and active characteristics.
1.2 Neurons with Visuo-Motor Properties: Mirror Neurons
At the beginning of the Nineties, a group of Italian neuroscientists led by Giacomo Rizzolatti discovered and outlined a specific kind of neurons in the premotor area F5 (according to the Cytoarchitecture maps by Brodmann) inside primates’ brains. These neurons “activate not only when the monkey took aimed action with a hand (for example, grasping an object), but also when it observed the same aimed action made by another individual (may it be man or monkey).“14 (Gallese et al, 2006: 549). What characterizes
these special kind of neurons lies inside their visual properties: The information acquired by the optical nerve influences these special neurons, the image acts as a mirror (concept from which these neurons are named) and activates these neurons, which “is linked to the observation from the monkey of certain actions made by the researcher (or another monkey) that imply an interaction effector (hand, mouth) object.”15 (Rizzolati, Sinigaglia,
2006: 80), in other words the physical reproduction of a seen action. It has been proven that mirror neurons are the main reason why a subject is able to implicitly perceive the meaning of other people’s actions. To prove this, many studies have been made (Kohler et al., 2002; Gallese et al., 2006; Ferrari, 2005) that have explored various aspects of the mirror-system, deemed as a core mechanism that transforms the sensory representations in a physical format. In a publication from 2005, Ferrari and his colleagues have explained,
14“[…] si attivavano non solo quando la scimmia eseguiva azioni finalizzate
con la mano (ad esempio afferrare un oggetto), ma anche quando osservava le stesse azioni eseguite da un altro individuo (uomo o scimmia che fosse).”
15 “[…] è legata all’osservazione da parte della scimmia di determinati atti compiuti dallo
sperimentatore (o da un’altra scimmia) che comportano un’interazione effettore (mano o bocca) – oggetto.”
24
for example, a specific kind of mirror neurons, which activate “when the monkey observes actions performed by an experimenter with a tool (a stick or a pair of pliers)” (Ferrari et al., 2002: 212). The “tool- responding mirror neurons” serve as proof that neural mechanisms that are able to understand, reproduce and transmit to others the knowledge learned with used tools exist. The transmission may happen thanks to the observational learning process, like imitation. Kohler and colleagues (Kohler et al., 2002), on the other hand, have proven that a part of the cells in the F5 area is made up of audio-visual mirror neurons, which do not activate only during the execution or the observation of a certain action, but also when one hears a certain action (Kohler et al., 2002), and it proves that mirror neurons “embody an abstract level of representation of finalistic actions.”16 (Gallese et al., 2006: 550), also through the partial perception of the
performed act. One of the most interesting aspects that emerged from this study is that the audio-visual neurons are traced back “[…] in an area that appears to be the homolog of human Broca’s area” (Kohler et al., 2002: 848), statement that stimulated the neuroscientific interest towards delving deeper in the linguistic dimension.
1.2.1 Mirror Neurons in Humans
The first evidence of the possible existence of a mirror mechanism in humans were given by some studies, made in the Fifties, thanks to Electroencephalography (EEG), Magnetoencephalography (MEG) and Trans-Cranial Magnetic Stimulation (TMS), non‑invasive techniques that highlighted a connection between the motor system and the mirror properties studied in primates. These procedures, even if they are able to highlight the activation induced by the observation of physical acts made by other individuals, “are not able to localize the complete structure of the mirror neuron system of the human being”17 (Rizzolatti, Sinigaglia, 2006: 116) and they did not allow for the visualization
of the anatomical-functional circuits of such system. Thanks to the rise of new advanced techniques for neuroimaging it became possible to address the problem and explore more accurately the mirror mechanisms of the human mind. The first example of this appeared on a study made by Fadiga and his colleagues (Fadiga et al., 1995), who tried to verify the similarities between the primate mirror system and the human one in relation to the
16 “incarnano un livello astratto di rappresentazione delle azioni finalistiche.” 17 “non erano in grado di localizzare la struttura complessiva del sistema dei
25
activation of the premotor cortex when observing a physical act. Through stimulating the left motor cortex and analyzing the potential muscles involved (MEP), the researchers concluded that the motor system is not only apt to execute the movement, but is also involved when discerning them. As evidence, as the researchers state, “the results of the present experiment demonstrate that the excitability of the motor system increases when a subject observes an action performed by another individual” (Fadiga et al., 1995: 2609) Studies based on the fMRI and the PET made it possible to detect a rise in cerebral blood flow in the left hemisphere during the observation and execution of determined actions (Cochin et al., 1998), precisely pinpointing the mirror neurons in the insula, in the anterior cingulate cortex and in the prefrontal cortex, which includes the ventral premotor area where Broca’area is. This matches to the 44th area of Brodmann and is delegated to coordinating the buccale movements for the verbal production. In the human being, however, the mirror system is not limited to simple hand movements, but is activated by a variety of physical actions. Even if the observation and execution of the movement are localized in different parts of the cortex, the “observation and execution of movement share the same cortical network” (Cochin et al., 1998: 1841). The most recent experimental studies highlight that the human being’s mirror mechanism has an impact on many different areas of the neuro-psychological activity, and is not limited to determined physical acts; as Giovanni Buccino and Marco Mezzadri state: “there is growing experimental evidence that the mirror neuron system is implicated also in various cognitive functions like observation based learning, imitation, the codifying of others actions and lastly language”18 (Buccino, Mezzadri, 2013: 7).
1.2.2 Mirror Neurons and Language
Finding these mirror neurons in Broca’s area, traditionally delegated to verbal production, has sparked some interest in the neuroscientific community, and as a result they asked themselves whether a possible link between the origin of language and mirror neurons existed. According to the researchers, Broca’s area in the human being could be divided in 2 regions, following Brodmann’s sanctioned standard: Area 44 and area 45. Area 44, is activated by “[…] nonlinguistic motor functions including complex hand movements
18 “vi sono crescenti evidenze sperimentali che il sistema dei neuroni specchio sia coinvolto […] anche in
diverse funzioni cognitive come l’apprendimento basato sull’osservazione, l’imitazione, la codifica delle intenzioni delle azioni degli altri ed infine il linguaggio.”
26
and sensorimotor learning and integration” (Corballis, 2010: 26), for tasks not only strictly language oriented, but also physical and cognitive tasks. Similarly to area F5, Broca’s area could be implicated in the evolution of movement that involve, apart from the hands, the face and the arms. As Rizzolatti and Arbib state, “both F5 and Broca’s areas have the neural structures for controlling orolaryngeal, oro‑facial and brachio‑manual movements” (Rizzolatti, Arbib, 1998:192). When considering that Broca’s area and the ventral premotor cortex (area F5) of the primate present similarities, also in relation to mirror neurons it “seems to suggest that the origins of language should be sought, before the most primitive forms of communication, in the evolution of a system of gestural communication of the lateral cortex areas. “19 (Rizzolatti, Sinigaglia, 2006:
152). This hypothesis, often debated and contested, outlines the language formation process basing it on steps that could have marked the gradual progress from an entirely gestural communication system to an intentional communication system based on the spoken word. The alternation between opening and closing the jaw, characteristic to the primate communication method, which happens through rhythmic lip movement, is traceable also in humans and could coincide with syllabic articulation. As Rizzolatti and Arbib mention on this topic, “the openclose alternation of the mandible that is typical of oro‑facial communication of monkeys […] appears to persist in humans where it forms the syllabic ‘frame’ in speech production” (Rizzolatti, Arbib, 1998: 193). Also by using manual-branchial movement, the hominid, in their primordial phase, should have communicated with other members of their species through a physical code, linked mostly on pantomime representations. In such a frame,
it’s fair to assume that our common ancestor with primates (who dates back to more than 20 million years) possessed a mirror neuron system that allowed him to perform and recognize physical acts like grasping with a hand, holding, etc.; and that our common ancestor the chimpanzee (more or less 5 or 6 million years ago) had a mirror neuronsystem that allowed him crude forms of imitation.20 (Rizzolatti,
Sinigaglia, 2006: 155.)
19 “[…] sembra suggerire che le origini del linguaggio andrebbero ricercate, prima ancora che nelle
primitive forme di comunicazione verbale, nell’evoluzione di
un sistema di comunicazione gestuale controllato dalle aree corticali laterali.”
20 “è lecito assumere che il nostro antenato comune con la scimmia (risalente a più di
20 milioni di anni fa) possedesse un sistema di neuroni specchio che gli permetteva di eseguire e di riconoscere atti motori quali l’afferrare con la mano, il tenere, ecc; e che il nostro antenato comune con lo
27
The vocal production, which should have had an extremely marginal role in the beginning and should have been unrelated to the communicative dimension, could have evolved with time together with manual-branchial gestures and thanks to the physiological changes that occurred over time. According to MacNeilage: ”human speech differs from vocal communication of other mammals in that we alone superimpose a continual rhythmic alternation between an open and closed mouth[…] on the sound production process” (MacNeilage, 1998: 499). The language of the homo sapiens could be considered as the evolutionary product of rhythmic ingestive (like chewing) movements, which require the closing and opening of the jaw, and vocalization could have been eventually added. On this topic, it is relevant what Rizzolatti and Sinigaglia state in regards to an experimental study: the two researchers highlight that “the majority (about 85%) of mirror neurons respond to the sight of acts like grabbing food with the mouth, chewing or sucking. From here the term ingestive neurons . "21 (Rizzolatti,
Sinigaglia, 2006: 85). In other words, ingestive neurons activate at the sight of acts defined as transitive, which require an interaction with an object. Although a conclusive proof on this subject currently does not exist, the theory brought forward by American researcher Mac Neilag could be substantiated by various findings on the human evolution, that while slow and gradual, has also modified greatly our encephalon and its functions. Vocalization might have prospered thanks to the gestural system that allowed them to express their need in a more efficient and accurate manner. In this evolutionary framework, the mirror system could have cemented in order to favor a kind of interpersonal communication that could be referenced in a shared common heritage of phonetic gestures. This could have made the species able to understand non-transitive acts (not aimed at an object), that carried a more profound meaning.
1.2.3 Implications for Language Education
The discovery of mirror neurons and their numerous properties has stimulated research in various scopes, including language education. According to what has been stated, it is possible to conclude what benefits foreign language education and learning could enjoy by taking into consideration the mirror system. As previously stated, the mirror system
scimpanzé (circa 5 o 6 milioni di anni fa) disponesse di un sistema di neuroni specchio che gli consentiva forme grossolane di imitazione.”
21 la maggior parte (85% circa) dei neuroni specchio rispondeva alla vista di atti come l’afferrare il cibo
28
activates in a well-defined manner: thanks to the ability to perceptively recognize other’s actions, to internally depict them and subsequently reproduce them by imitation, it allows individuals to create and maintain interpersonal relations. Considering communication as a negotiation of meanings based on languages not always verbal, it could be hypothesized that the mirror mechanism is activated also when the various components exceed the linguistic confines. As Balboni and Caon state, “we do not exchange only words: the interlocutors exchange messages, namely complex sets of verbal language and non-verbal languages”22 (Balboni, Caon, 2015: 16). Such an affirmation allows us to perceive the
importance that the extra-linguistic elements have and how they work together to make communication easier. Modern language education states that learning a foreign language must not be limited to the passive study of grammatical structures in a manual or text book, but it requires an observing and reflective attitude from the student: only an active and conscious attitude towards the various facets of the language, and its mental representation, allows the mirror system of the student to decode new situations and enhance one’s own gestural and phonetic baggage, in order to achieve a specific result. The sensorimotor experience gains a critical value, both for comprehension and language production. The embodiment theory, according to which “there is no mental faculty that is not embodied, as in rooted in the physical experience”23 (Mezzadri, 2015: 16), relies
on studies on the mirror system, basing itself on the fact that the human linguistic comprehension activates the same neural mechanisms that rule physical movements. Specifically, Gallese and his colleagues state that “the same nervous structures that preside the organization of the physical execution of the act perform a role also in the semantic comprehension of the linguistic expressions that describe them.”24 (Gallese et
al., 2006: 554). Such a theory corroborates the idea that the linguistic elements that must be learned cannot transcend the sensorimotor experience of the individual.
1.3 The Embodiment Theory, the Embodied Language
When discussing experience, the concept of embodiment, or embodied language, cannot be overlooked as sensorial experiences have a key role in both linguistic production and
22 “non ci si scambia solo parole: gli interlocutori scambiano messaggi, cioè insiemi complessi di lingua
verbale e di linguaggi non verbali […]”
23 “non esiste facoltà mentale che non sia incarnata, cioè radicata nell’esperienza corporea.” 24 “[…] le stesse strutture nervose che presiedono all’organizzazione dell’esecuzione motoria delle
azioni svolgono un ruolo anche nella comprensione semantica delle espressioni linguistiche che le descrivono.”
29
comprehension. “Although there are different versions of embodiment theory, for the most part, they take as a starting point that psychological processes are influenced by the body, including body morphology, sensory systems, and motor systems […] brains are for guiding interaction with the world, and that interaction is mediated by the body” (Glenberg, 2010: 586). With this statement Glenberg endorses the idea that between the outside (experience based) world and the mind, the body is what influences all psychological processes and all physical and sensorial systems.
1.3.1 What is the Embodiment theory?
The Embodiment Theory is not a single streamlined theory, but a multitude of theories spread through different fields, like neuroscience, psychology, philosophy, cognitive linguistics as well as anthropology and robotics. All of these theories share a common idea, which is that “body and mind are not separate or distinct, but our body, and the brain as part of said body, contribute in determining our mental and cognitive processes”25
(Borghi, 2015: 31). According to the embodied theories it is necessary to “study and understand the bodily processes and the neural roots of the cognitive processes in order to understand the workings of the mind.”26 (Borghi, 2015: 32), because according to these
theories the perceptual, emotional and physical systems are strictly related to the cognitive processes, as opposed to the cognitivist theories that consider them separately. Traditional cognitive theories consider that language and thought (assumed to be high cognitive processes) are not related to perception and action (low cognitive processes, less important) and so are completely distinct to one another; embodied theory, on the other hand, state that a close connection between cognition, perception and action exists (defined as a circular relation), refusing the cognitivist theories. As a result, the relation between perception-action and cognition, as well as the one between cognition and perception, can be re-examined. The embodied theories endorse the idea that what we perceive relies on the actions that we want to perform, so “sometimes we selectively perceive those objects or those object’s characteristics that are functional for the actions we intend to perform”27, as well as, “the embodied theories show how our perception may
25 “mente e corpo non siano separati e distinti, […], ma che il nostro corpo, e il cervello come parte del
corpo, concorra a determinare i nostri processi mentali e cognitivi.”
26 “studiare e comprendere i processi corporei e le basi neurali dei processi cognitivi [..] per capire il
funzionamento della mente.”
27 “talvolta percepiamo selettivamente quegli oggetti o quelle caratteristiche degli oggetti che sono
30
vary according to the kind of expected physical response: for example, we will perceive differently a cup if we wish to simply observe it (oculomotor response) or if we need to drink, and so we need to grasp its handle (grasping response)”28 (Ibidem). However, even
though there are numerous embodied theories, and each one focuses either on action or perception and their significance when in relation to cognition, it is important to remember that in every theory cognition is rooted in the emotional and sensorimotor processes.
1.3.2 Embodied and Disembodied Cognition
As the title shows, the embodied language theory is not the only one to keep in mind when studying the language learning processes. While the embodied theories (EC, Embodied Cognition) rely on the idea that the workings of the mind start from corporeal experiences (body-word interactions) of the learner that are later transformed in concepts (mental representations), the disembodied theories (DC, Disembodied Cognition) rely on the opposite idea, that the mind is the beginning of the process as the “result of performed operations on amodal and abstract symbols”29 and only later is the body involved.
The Disembodied Cognition and Language
Among Disembodied theories, Fodor’s one (2008) Representational Theory of Mind (RTM) is the best known and most representative one. According to this theory, mental has an impact on our perception of ‘things’, like on the body’s muscles in order to produce a movement. The advantage of this theory is the possibility to explain how ‘new’ thoughts are born: according to Fodor, the latter stems from the combination of thoughts already present in our minds, and it could be described as ‘thought composition’ as the idea assumes they can be combined. This idea requires a second prerequisite, namely “that the representations have a format that allows them to be combinable, and the most apt one is the amodal and symbolic format”30 (Cimatti, 2015: 15). The problem that arises from this
is that mental representations, in order to be combinable, must belong to the same
28 “le teorie embodied mostrano come la percezione possa variare a seconda del tipo di risposta motoria
prevista: ad esempio, percepiremo in modo diverso una tazza se intendiamo semplicemente osservarla (risposta oculomotoria) o se invece dobbiamo bere, e quindi ne dobbiamo afferrare il manico (risposta di afferramento).”
29 “risultato di operazioni effettuate su simboli amodali e astratti.”
30 “che le rappresentazioni abbiano un formato tale che le renda componibili. [..] il formato più adatto è
31
perceptive-sensorial pattern: the RTM solves this question stating that cognitive calculations are all made in the language of the thought, therefore a simple mean that is both abstract and symbolic. When talking about thought it is necessary to take into account its communicability, idea that the embodied theory overlooks. In order for a thought to be communicable it is necessary that in the mind of the two actors the same exact thought is born, not a simply similar one, and this is possible if thoughts are generated through the same means, namely the language of thought. However, according to the Embodied Cognition theory, if thought generation depends on how a thought is formed in the body of one of the actors, its communication will fail because, as each body is different (men and women, as well as adults and children, have different bodies), the thought generation process will change according to the body.
The Embodied Cognition and Language
As stated before, in the Embodied Cognition theory the body comes before the mind. This means that every concept that we hold comes from the actions of the body when interacting with every aspect of the world, and Prinz agrees saying “all (human) concepts are copies or combinations of copies of perceptual representations”31 (2002:108, in
Cimatti, 2015:18). “An embodied concept is a neural structure that is actually part of, or makes use of, the sensorimotor system of our brains. Much of conceptual inference is, therefore, sensorimotor inference” (Lakoff, Johnson, 1999: 20). Also Lakoff and Johnson concur in the idea that concepts are embodied, neutral structures that are part or use the sensorimotor system of our brains; the majority of conceptual interferences are then sensorimotor deductions. A problem this theory cannot solve is the communicability of the concepts. In order for communication to happen, it is necessary that the actors keep in mind the same concept, however, if everyone has different world experiences, from the embodied point of view communication becomes impossible, because the actors should not understand each other. For example, a speaker raised in the city and one raised in the country would have a different experience of, for example, frogs: the city raised speaker may have seen one or two during his lifetime, while the farmer will probably have seen dozens of them. Their experiences of frogs are completely different from the other and this implies that, since concepts of corporeal entities are formed by the body’s experiences with the tangible world, the two concepts that these individuals assimilated would be so
32
different that communication should be impossible. If communication is already so difficult when talking about a single concept, the challenge of communicating different concepts to another human being becomes herculean. Concepts are, according to this theory, cognitive constructs which roots are physical (as stated by Lakoff and Johnson), and furthermore the human bodies have varieties of differences so, theoretically, the communication of concepts should not be possible. Prinz, however, offers a solution by saying that it is enough when the concepts are more or less similar and by postulating, when necessary, the existence of a new category of mental entities, namely the «proxytypes». The latter are representations derived from perception and could also be recalled from work memory in order to represent a category, in the words of Cimatti: “the proxytypes is the entity –concurrently perceptual and conceptual- that allows the mind to think about dogs when there is not one in sight”32 (p. 20). The postulation of these
representations is born from necessity, is forced, because the former problem remains: each body is different from the other and as such the proxytypes will be different, for this reason Prinz has to postulate a specific kind of proxytype, the ‘default proxytype’, in case considering a specific category is necessary, but without locating it in a specific context. Unfortunately not even the proxytypes, like their mother theory, are able to explain how concepts are able to form and how it is possible to share them with others. Another problem, similar to the ones taken into account regarding the Disembodied Cognition theory, is the one of new concepts (that do not derive directly from the physical experience). Once again, how combining together more than one default proxytype or how two mental images are combined is impossible to explain. To conclude then, the fact that the Embodied Cognition theory puts the body in the limelight of cognitive sciences is admirable, but that is not enough to explain the human behavior, since it should be necessary to keep into account what role language plays inside the human cognition.
1.4 Multisensoriality: How Many Senses Do We Have?
We have always been used to think that our senses are 5 and that out perceptions of the world are based on them, however we cannot limit ourselves and accept this truth without widening the research. Aristotele already spoke of an additional sense, the sixth which
32 “il proxytype è l’entità – allo stesso tempo percettiva e concettuale – che permetterebbe alla mente di
33
should be ‘common sense’; other books discuss nine senses (in The Book of General Ignorance by Lloyd and Mitchinson, 2006) considering the vestibular sense, body awareness, thermoception and nociception. Using the physiology textbooks as a base, what we understand is that the concept of ‘sensory channel’ is founded on the concept of ‘receptor’ (namely the nervous cells that convert the energy that originates from external stimuli in nerve signals). If we had to rely on the number of receptors in our body, the senses would become more than thirty, on the other hand if we fall back on the kinds of stimuli that reach the receptors, they are three: variation in electromagnetic energy (light), variation in mechanic stimulation (sound, pressure, vibrations and movement we feel on our skin), and lastly the variations in chemical stimulation. Following this thought process, the senses should be three, optical, mechanical and physical, as these receptors are meant to perceive one of the aforementioned energies. Furthermore, we could say that the senses are limited to two if we consider that some receptors are specialized in perceiving information that come from outside, while others focus on those from inside the body, and that is why we talk about external and internal senses. In fact, the number of senses is not definite, but we can surely say there is no certain criteria through which we can assert that there are only five. Moving on from the question of how many senses there are, what is interesting to highlight is that, even when we go to the bar to have a coffee, we realize how much the world around us is multisensory. That means that beyond the number of senses, even when we do mundane or simple activities, we do not receive information from one or another sense, but we can receive information from a number of them at the same time.
1.4.1 Modularity or Non-Modularity of the Senses
Traditionally senses are studied separately, as independent input systems, and this is justified by three reasons: First, in the initial information elaboration phases, the so called ‘transduction’, (namely the transformation of physical stimuli to neural impulses) begins in the receptors located in spatially distinct sensory epithelia ( skin when talking about tact, the cochlea for hearing or the retina for sight); this is justified when a researcher is interested in analyzing only the first phases of information elaboration and codification. Secondly, these information, once transducted from the various receptors, reach specific cerebral structures, like the primary somatosensorial cortex (namely area 1,2,3 and Brodman’s) and the primary visual cortex (Brodman’s area 17). This as well justifies
34
studying the senses separately, because “it suggests the existence of specialized cerebral areas for elaborating information derived from a specific sensory channel, the so called primary sensory areas”33 (Bruno, Pavani, Zampini, 2010: 15). The third and final
justification is that “the cortical regions apparently devoted to the analysis of signals derived from the receptors exhibit a characteristic and specific architecture for a form of the sense”34 (Ibidem). We are also aware, thanks to the work of Wilder Penfield, that the
tactile stimuli are mapped in a specific way in the somatosensory cortex, and this gives way to representations of the physical surface that, although shows some characteristically distinct distortions, can maintain the original special relations. These representations use
a special codification based on somatotopic coordinates (namely a reference scheme based on the body). An analogous situation holds for the mapping of the visual stimuli from the retina to the primary visual cortex (we talk here of retinotopic coordinates), or for the auditory stimuli of which the mapping is based on their frequency (which is why we talk about retinotopic) (Ivi: 16).35
This justification can also be considered valid, because it suggests that there is a strong specialization of the cortical regions that are devoted to the analysis of different senses. Although today that these processes are much more complicated than we thought and already in the first phases we can find a convergence among the various sensory channels, many perception researchers tend to isolate the single sensory modes from the others in order to study them. Underlying to these researches, we find the concept of the modular mind by Fodor (1983), who proposed a division between faculties in horizontal faculties (like memory, reasoning and attention) and vertical faculties (the senses) and output systems (the motor system). According to the philosopher, the vertical faculties should be the ones that transform the information we perceive in representations, which then are given to the central part of the cognitive system. Fodor, additionally, outlines modularity
33 “suggerisce l’esistenza di aree cerebrali specializzate per l’elaborazione di informazioni provenienti da
uno specifico canale sensoriale, le cosiddette aree sensoriali primarie.”
34 “le regioni corticali apparentemente deputate all’analisi dei segnali provenienti dai recettori esibiscono
un’architettura caratteristica e specifica per una modalità di senso.”
35 “una codifica dello spazio basata su coordinate somatotopiche (cioè su uno schema di riferimento
basato sul corpo). Un discorso analogo può essere fatto per la mappatura degli stimoli visivi dalla retina alla corteccia visiva primaria (qui si parla di coordinate retinotopiche), o di quelli acustici in cui la mappatura è basata sulla loro frequenza (e infatti si parla di coordinate tonotopiche).”
35
as a fundamental characteristic of this kind of faculty that he describes as formed from independent systems with specific characteristics:
1. Specificity for a dominion: these are highly specialized structures, that can analyze only categories of specific stimuli specialized for that module;
2. Forced function: when in the presence of a specific kinds of stimuli that they are delegated to analyze they are unable to remain idle; 3. Limited central access: intermediate levels of analysis are inaccessible to the central control systems;
4. Function speed;
5. Information encapsulation: when functioning they cannot access neither the representations of knowledge of the individual nor the information stemming from other parts of the individual’s cognitive system. (Bruno, Pavani, Zampini, 2010: 18). 36
The success of Fodor’s theory stems from the fact that there are different perceptive mechanisms that follow these terms, like in the case of optical-geometric illusions: in the Müller-Lyer illusion, for example, we see two segments of the same length that appear to be different when adding arrows that point toward the center or outside. A situation of this kind is especially resistant to our knowledge and expectations because we cannot do anything but see two segments as having two different lengths; the visual system then acts as if there is a specific mechanism at play, which is fast and unbothered by influences from other cognitive processes, like the horizontal processes. In this situation the problem is not linked to a possible result of memory (horizontal faculty), but from the influence exerted from the other modalities of sense. Furthermore, according to more recent studies it is not so certain whether primary sensorial areas specialized for each modality of sense exist, and which only function is elaborating information from one of the ‘senses’: some studies of human neuroimaging have demonstrated that multisensory integration happens also in already previously thought of as unisensory. The moment we see even only someone else’s lips moving while talking, without hearing the sound of the words that the person is making, there could be an activation of the motor cortex. The existence of
36 “1. specificità per un dominio: si tratta di strutture altamente specializzate, che possono analizzare solo
tipologie di stimoli particolari e specifici per quel modulo; 2. funzionamento obbligato: quando sono in presenza del tipo specifico di input che sono deputati ad analizzare, non possono fare a meno di entrare in azione; 3. accesso centrale limitato: livelli intermedi di analisi dell’input sono per lo più inaccessibili ai sistemi di controllo centrali; 4. velocità di funzionamento; 5. incapsulamento dell’informazione: durante il loro funzionamento non hanno accesso né alle rappresentazioni delle conoscenze dell’individuo, né a informazioni comunque provenienti da altre parti del sistema cognitivo dell’individuo.”
