Lingering misinterpretations in garden-path sentences: evidence from a paraphrasing task.
Lingering misinterpretations in garden-path sentences: evidence from a paraphrasing task.
复制标题
花园小径句子中挥之不去的误解：来自释义任务的证据。
DOI：
10.1037/a0014276
复制
发表时间：
2009
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Ferreira,Fernanda
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Patson,NikoleD;Darowski,EmilyS;Moon,Nicole;Ferreira,Fernanda
采用强迫选择问题回答范式，K。Christianson，A. Hollingworth、JF Halliwell和F.费雷拉（Ferreira，2001）指出，在分析花园小径句子时建立的最初误解甚至在重新分析之后仍然存在。然而，他们的方法受到了质疑（RPG货车Gompel，MJ Pickering，J. Pearson，& G。Jacob，2006）。在这项研究中，作者报告的证据挥之不去的误解使用释义方法，这是比以前的方法偏见较少。通过释义，他们发现花园路径句子是根据部分重新分析的解释进行释义的。这一发现表明Christianson等人提出的论点是正确的：理解者对句子的最终解释通常是不正确的，与最初的输入不一致。这些发现支持了理解可以以“足够好”的方式发生的理论（F。Ferreira，V. Ferraro，& KGD Bailey，2002; F. Ferreira & N. Patson，2007）。
Using a forced-choice question-answering paradigm, K. Christianson, A. Hollingworth, JF Halliwell, and F. Ferreira (2001) showed that the original misinterpretation built during the analysis of a garden-path sentence lingers even after reanalysis has occurred. However, their methodology has been questioned (RPG van Gompel, MJ Pickering, J. Pearson, & G. Jacob, 2006). In this study, the authors report evidence for lingering misinterpretations using a paraphrasing methodology, which is less biased than previous methodologies. Using paraphrasing, they found that garden-path sentences are paraphrased according to a partially reanalyzed interpretation. This finding suggests that the arguments put forward by Christianson et al. are correct: Comprehenders' final interpretations of sentences are often incorrect and do not correspond to the initial input. These findings support the theory that comprehension can occur in a “good-enough” manner (F. Ferreira, V. Ferraro, & KGD Bailey, 2002; F. Ferreira & N. Patson, 2007).