It is not what you say but how you say it: Evidence from Russian shows robust effects of the structural prior on noisy channel inferences.
It is not what you say but how you say it: Evidence from Russian shows robust effects of the structural prior on noisy channel inferences.
复制标题
重要的不是你说什么，而是你怎么说：来自俄语的证据表明，结构先验对噪声通道推论具有强大的影响。
DOI：
10.1037/xlm0001244
复制
发表时间：
2023
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Gibson, Edward
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Poliak, Moshe;Ryskin, Rachel;Braginsky, Mika;Gibson, Edward
在语言理解的噪声通道框架下，理解者通过将感知到的话语与他们对语言、世界以及交流中可能发生的错误类型的了解相结合来推断说话者的意图。先前的研究表明，当句子在先验意义下不太可能（难以置信的句子）时，参与者通常会按照非字面意思来解释它们。当将预期话语转化为感知话语的错误可能性更大时，非字面解释的比率就更高。然而，之前关于噪声通道处理的实验大多依赖于难以置信的句子，并且尚不清楚参与者的非字面解释是噪声通道处理的证据，还是在无意义句子的实验中试图符合实验者期望的结果。在当前的研究中，我们利用俄语（心理语言学文献中一种尚未研究的语言）的独特属性，仅使用简单的看似合理的句子来测试噪声通道的理解。句子先前的合理性仅与它们的词序相关。主语-动词-宾语 (SVO) 句子在结构先验下比宾语-动词-主语 (OVS) 句子更有可能出现。在两个实验中，我们表明参与者经常非字面地解释 OVS 句子，并且非字面解释的概率取决于感知到的句子和该句子的（可能有意的）SVO 版本之间的编辑距离。结果表明，结构先验指导人们的最终解释，与语义不可信性的存在无关。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2024 APA，保留所有权利）
Under the noisy-channel framework of language comprehension, comprehenders infer the speaker’s intended meaning by integrating the perceived utterance with their knowledge of the language, the world, and the kinds of errors that can occur in communication. Previous research has shown that, when sentences are improbable under the meaning prior (implausible sentences), participants often interpret them nonliterally. The rate of nonliteral interpretation is higher when the errors that could have transformed the intended utterance into the perceived utterance are more likely. However, previous experiments on noisy channel processing mostly relied on implausible sentences, and it is unclear whether participants’ nonliteral interpretations were evidence of noisy channel processing or the result of trying to conform to the experimenter’s expectations in an experiment with nonsensical sentences. In the current study, we used the unique properties of Russian, an understudied language in the psycholinguistics literature, to test noisy-channel comprehension using only simple plausible sentences. The prior plausibility of sentences was tied only to their word order; subject-verb-object (SVO) sentences were more probable under the structural prior than object-verb-subject (OVS) sentences. In two experiments, we show that participants often interpret OVS sentences nonliterally, and the probability of nonliteral interpretations depended on the Levenshtein distance between the perceived sentence and the (potentially intended) SVO version of the sentence. The results show that the structural prior guides people’s final interpretation, independent of the presence of semantic implausibility.(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved)