Testing Theories of Irony Processing Using Eye-Tracking and ERPs
Testing Theories of Irony Processing Using Eye-Tracking and ERPs
复制标题
DOI：
10.1037/a0035658
复制
发表时间：
2014-05-01
影响因子：
2.6
通讯作者：
Page, Jemma
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Filik, Ruth;Leuthold, Hartmut;Page, Jemma
人们对反讽话语的理解知之甚少，到目前为止，大多数研究只是比较了反讽语句和非反讽语句的加工过程。等级突显假说区别于其他解释(如标准语用观和直接通达观)的一个关键方面是，它预测了熟悉的反讽和不熟悉的反讽加工之间的差异。具体地说，如果反讽是熟悉的，那么反讽的解释应该是可用的，而不需要额外的推理过程，而对于不熟悉的反讽，将首先计算字面解释，如果与上下文不匹配，将导致将该陈述重新解释为反讽。我们记录了参与者在阅读时的眼球运动(实验1)，以及他们在听的时候的脑电活动(实验2)，与非讽刺控制相比，熟悉和不熟悉的讽刺。结果显示，只有在不熟悉的讽刺中，眼球运动和类似N400的效应才会中断，这支持了分级显著假说的预测。此外，在实验2中，与非讽刺对照相比，熟悉的和陌生的讽刺材料都被发现了迟发的正向效应。我们把这种积极理解为反映了话语的字面解释和讽刺解释之间的持续冲突。
Not much is known about how people comprehend ironic utterances, and to date, most studies have simply compared processing of ironic versus non-ironic statements. A key aspect of the graded salience hypothesis, distinguishing it from other accounts (such as the standard pragmatic view and direct access view), is that it predicts differences between processing of familiar and unfamiliar ironies. Specifically, if an ironic utterance is familiar, then the ironic interpretation should be available without the need for extra inferential processes, whereas for unfamiliar ironies, the literal interpretation would be computed first, and a mismatch with context would lead to a re-interpretation of the statement as being ironic. We recorded participants' eye movements while they were reading (Experiment 1), and electrical brain activity while they were listening to (Experiment 2), familiar and unfamiliar ironies compared to non-ironic controls. Results show disruption to eye movements and an N400-like effect for unfamiliar ironies only, supporting the predictions of the graded salience hypothesis. In addition, in Experiment 2, a late positivity was found for both familiar and unfamiliar ironic materials, compared to non-ironic controls. We interpret this positivity as reflecting ongoing conflict between the literal and ironic interpretations of the utterance.