The Multiple Semantics Hypothesis: Multiple Confusions?

Alfonso Caramazza, Brenda C. Rapp, Cristina Romani

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

In this paper we discuss the issue of multiple versus unitary semantics. We argue that the notion of multiple semantics (as currently articulated) does not, in fact, represent a theory of semantic organisation but is, instead, an arbitrary conjunction of a set of independent assumptions which are either unmotivated or, if motivated, equally compatible with a unitary semantics hypothesis. Furthermore, the empirical evidence that has been cited as support for this hypothesis is equally compatible with variants of the unitary semantics hypothesis. A model of semantic processing—the Organised Unitary Content Hypothesis (O.U.C.H.)—that is able to account for reported patterns of dissociation of performance is discussed briefly.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)161-189
Number of pages29
JournalCognitive neuropsychology
Volume7
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - May 1 1990

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Developmental and Educational Psychology
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Cognitive Neuroscience

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The Multiple Semantics Hypothesis: Multiple Confusions?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this