Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Cristofaro (2010) voices a growing trend within cognitive-functional linguistics to explain language universals in terms of productive processes in language use rather than in terms of universal conceptual representations. Such mechanisms include metonymy and generalization. Even though I fully agree with this general approach, the proposed mechanisms remain too fuzzy and incomplete to shed new light on the matter of mental representations. This is not so much a criticism directed at Cristofaro as it is a plea for coupling empirical observations to computational models: formal modeling is the only way to demonstrate the validity and completeness of any linguistic theory, and hence forms a crucial part of empirical science.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Remi van Trijp (2010) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: