Abstract
AbstractDiscourse understanding is hampered when missing or conflicting context information is given. In four experiments, we investigated what happens (a) when the definite determiner “the,” which presupposes existence and uniqueness, does not find a unique referent in the context or (b) when the appropriate use of the indefinite determiner is violated by the presence of a unique referent (Experiment 1 and Experiment 2). To focus on the time-course of processing the uniqueness presupposition of the definite determiner, we embedded the determiner in different sentence structures and varied the context (Experiment 3 and Experiment 4). Reading time served as an index of processing difficulty in a word-by-word self-paced reading task and acceptability judgments provided hints for a possible repair of a presupposition violation. Our results showed that conflicting and missing context information lowered acceptability ratings and was associated with prolonged reading times. The pattern of results differed depending on the nature of the presupposition (Experiments 1 and 2) and whether supplementing missing context information was possible (Experiment 3 and Experiment 4). Our findings suggest that different cognitive processes come into play when interpreting presuppositions in order to get a meaningful interpretation of a discourse.
Funder
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Artificial Intelligence,Cognitive Neuroscience,Experimental and Cognitive Psychology,General Medicine
Reference53 articles.
1. Alonso-Ovalle L, Menéndez-Benito P, Schwarz F (2009) Maximize presupposition and two types of definite competitors. In: Lima S, Mullin K, Smith B (eds) Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society, vol 39, pp 29–40
2. Altmann GT (1998) The ascent of babel: an exploration of language, mind, and understanding. Oxford University Press, Oxford
3. Altmann G, Steedman M (1988) Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition 30:191–238. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(88)90020-0
4. Anderson JE, Holcomb PJ (2005) An electrophysiological investigation of the effects of coreference on word repetition and synonymy. Brain Lang 94:200–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.01.001
5. Barr DJ, Levy R, Scheepers C, Tily HJ (2013) Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. J Mem Lang 68:255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献