Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study
Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/s0093-934x(03)00053-1
复制
发表时间：
2003-05-01
影响因子：
2.5
通讯作者：
Posada, A
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Noveck, IA;Posada, A
这项工作采用诱发电位技术，19名参与者面对有可能产生标量含义的句子，如一些大象有鼻子。这种信息不足的话语引起了实用主义者的兴趣，因为它可以被认为具有两种不同的真值。从表面上看，它可以被认为是正确的，但如果一个人用隐含的意思来对待“有些”，它就会被认为是错误的。对含意产生的两种说法进行了比较。新格里斯方法（例如，Levinson, 2000）假设隐含会自动侵入像Some这样的术语的语义。关联理论（Sperber & Wilson, 1985/1996）假设暗示是努力的，而不是自动的。在这个实验中，参与者会看到25个信息不足的句子，以及25个明显正确的句子（例如，有些房子有砖）和25个明显错误的句子（例如，有些乌鸦有收音机）。正如早前的一项研究（Noveck, 2001）所报道的那样，信息不足的句子会引起强烈的个体差异。7名参与者对所有（或几乎所有）信息不足的句子都做出了正确的回答，其余12名参与者对所有（或几乎所有）信息不足的句子都做出了错误的回答。目前的研究表明，那些对信息不足的句子做出错误反应的人比那些做出正确反应的人花费的时间要长得多。ERP数据表明：(a)“明显是真的”和“明显是假的”句子比“信息不足”句子提示的N400值更陡，这表明语义整合程度更高；(b)不管一个人对“信息不足”句子的最终反应如何，N400值都非常平坦，表明对这些句子没有特别的反应。总的来说，这些数据表明，影响是迟来的、需要付出努力的决策过程的一部分。(C) 2003年Elsevier Science（美国）出版。
This work employs Evoked Potential techniques as 19 participants are confronted with sentences that have the potential to produce scalar implicatures, like in Some elephants have trunks. Such an Underinformative utterance is of interest to pragmatists because it can be considered to have two different truth values. It can be considered true when taken at face value but false if one were to treat Some with the implicature Not All. Two accounts of implicature production are compared. The neo-Gricean approach (e.g., Levinson, 2000) assumes that implicatures intrude automatically on the semantics of a term like Some. Relevance Theory (Sperber & Wilson, 1985/1996) assumes that implicatures are effortful and not automatic. In this experiment, the participants are presented with 25 Underinformative sentences along with 25 sentences that are Patently True (e.g. Some houses have bricks) and 25 that are Patently False (e.g. Some crows have radios). As reported in an earlier study (Noveck, 2001), Underinformative sentences prompt strong individual differences. Seven participants here responded true to all (or nearly all) of the Underinformative sentences and the remaining 12 responded false to all (or nearly all) of them. The present study showed that those who responded false to the Underinformative sentences took significantly longer to do so that those who responded true. The ERP data indicate that: (a) the Patently True and Patently False sentences prompt steeper N400's-indicating greater semantic integration-than the Underinformative sentences and that (b) regardless of one's ultimate response to the Underinformative sentences, the N400's were remarkably flat, indicating no particular reaction to these sentences. Collectively, the data are taken to show that implicatures are part of a late-arriving, effort-demanding decision process. (C) 2003 Published by Elsevier Science (USA).