Abstract
Noises, similarities between words, slips of the tongue, ambiguities, wrong or false beliefs, lexical deficits, inappropriate inferences, cognitive overload, non-shared knowledge, topic organisation or focusing problems, among others, may cause misunderstanding. While some of these are structural factors, others pertain to the speaker or to both the speaker and the hearer. In addition to stable factors connected with the interlocutors’ communicative abilities, cultural knowledge or patterns of thinking, other less stable factors, such as their personal relationships, psychological states or actions motivated by physiological functions, may also result in communicative problems. This paper considers a series of further factors that may eventually lead to misunderstanding, and which solely pertain to the hearer: processing strategy, confirmation bias and weak vigilance.
Publisher
Uniwersytet Lodzki (University of Lodz)
Subject
Linguistics and Language,Language and Linguistics
Reference104 articles.
1. Allport, Gordon W. 1937. Personality: A Psychological Interpretation. New York: Holt & Co.
2. Ardissono, Liliana, Boella, Guido and Rossana Damiano. 1998. A plan-based model of misunderstandings in cooperative dialogue. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 48. 649-679.
3. Bachman, Lyle F. 1990. Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
4. Banks, Stephen P., Ge, Gao and Joyce Baker. 1991. Intercultural Encounters and Miscommunication. In Nikolas Coupland, Howard Giles and John M. Weimann (eds.), “Miscommunication” and Problematic Talk, 103-120. London: Sage.
5. Bardovi-Harlig, Kathleen. 2002. A New Starting Point? Investigating Formulaic Use and Input. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24(2). 189-198. doi: 10.1017/S0272263102002036
Cited by
6 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
1. Why not focus on combating the virus?;Pragmatics. Quarterly Publication of the International Pragmatics Association (IPrA);2024-04-30
2. Deliberate misinterpretation from the perspective of socio-cognitive pragmatics;Humanities and Social Sciences Communications;2023-06-20
3. Ad hoc concepts, affective attitude and epistemic stance;Pragmatics and Cognition;2022-12-31
4. Miscommunicated referent tracking in L2 English: a case-by-case analysis;International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching;2022-04-29
5. On the interpretation of utterances with expressive expletives;Pragmatics and Cognition;2021-12-31