{"id":4142,"date":"2017-03-15T16:12:31","date_gmt":"2017-03-15T15:12:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/cognitionandculture.local\/?p=4142"},"modified":"2023-08-07T17:13:19","modified_gmt":"2023-08-07T15:13:19","slug":"iconicity-as-structure-mapping","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/cognitionandculture.local\/blogs\/the-mint\/iconicity-as-structure-mapping\/","title":{"rendered":"Iconicity as structure mapping"},"content":{"rendered":"
In March we revisit the subject of iconicity, this time the question of structured mappings between the form and the meaning of the signs in sign language. In her article, Iconicity as structure mapping<\/em><\/a>, Karen Emmorey defines iconicity as a “structured mapping between two mental representations, rather than as a link between linguistic form and experience”.<\/p>\n