We reject the notion that the assertion “language is embodied” has a yes/no answer and instead introduce an account of a gradient of embodiment that ranges from “strict embodiment” restricted to elements of language describing humans engaged in practical bodily interaction to fully abstract concepts. We show how concepts may blend strict embodiment and abstraction, and demonstrate that strictly embodied knowledge may ground linguistic meaning phylogenetically and ontogenetically. Much adult language use resides “high” in a tower of abstraction. However, movement away from strict embodiment need not imply movement only up the tower of abstraction. Embodied simulation combined with metaphor provides one mechanism for linking abstraction to embodiment. An account of biocultural evolution shows how changes primarily in brain structure ( embrainment ) made possible the linkage of practical action to pantomime in grounding protolanguages and how cultural evolution built on this to create a symbolic and physical environment that depends on the availability of grammar to create metaphors and new abstractions. Critiquing the claim that large language models mirror the human brain’s language system we show how human embrainment links disembodied processing to processes that are strictly embodied.
Arbib et al. (Fri,) studied this question.