Subjectivity in language processing: Linguistic and psychological aspects of perspective-taking

人们的观点、品味和态度因人而异，而且具有很强的主观性。有许多词反映了主观态度，包括形容词，如“有趣”、“可怕”和“不健康”。“一个重要的问题是，这些主观的词语是以谁的观点或意见为基础的--谁的意见是，某件事是可怕的，有趣的，还是不健康的。确定这些主观词汇反映的是谁的观点是很重要的。例如，考虑一个医生认为某个人是不健康的，而一个没有受过医学训练的朋友传达了同样的观点。然而，确定主观形容词所锚定的观点并不总是那么简单。这个词出现的句子类型会影响它的含义。如果有人说“当时的情况很可怕”，那么说话的人通常会被解释为“可怕”的仲裁者，但是如果有人问朋友“当时的情况可怕吗？”然后，观点发生了变化，朋友对什么是可怕的看法也很重要。目前的项目旨在提高对人们如何理解主观词汇的理解，包括从一个人的角度到另一个人的角度的转变，以及基于语言和基于社交互动的因素如何影响这一点。这项研究可以为语言使用理论提供信息，以及设计干预措施，以改善健康，法律的和教育环境等环境中的沟通。 理解语言和人们的个人意见/态度之间的关系，也可能是相关的处理社会紧张局势，由于态度分歧，以及调查的主观观点采择在非典型population.This研究将有助于我们理解主观观点采择及其接口与语言。本研究采用在线和离线实验方法，考察了主观语言表达的解释机制和表征。研究人员将调查不同类型的主观表达是否以及在多大程度上触发语言处理过程中的视角转换，以及这是否受到自上而下的语境因素的调节。该项目还将衡量透视敏感元素的解释在多大程度上受到它们出现的语言背景的指导，以及透视持有者在实时处理过程中如何被激活。目前心理语言学关于观点采择的争论主要集中在客观情况下，个体在他们所知道的或可以直接观察到的方面存在差异，而理论语言学最近关于观点的争论主要集中在个体观点和态度之间的主观差异。 该项目的研究将拓宽视角处理工作的经验基础，并将进一步加深我们对人类如何处理视角敏感语言材料的理解。该奖项反映了NSF的法定使命，并通过使用基金会的智力价值和更广泛的影响审查标准进行评估，被认为值得支持。

People's opinions, tastes and attitudes differ from person to person, and are highly subjective. There are many words that reflect subjective attitudes, including adjectives such as 'fun,' 'frightening' and 'unhealthy.' An important question is whose perspective or opinion these subjective words are anchored to--whose opinion it is that something is frightening, or fun, or unhealthy. Identifying whose opinion these kinds of subjective words reflect is important. For example, consider a physician deeming a certain individual to be unhealthy compared to a friend with no medical training conveying the same sentiment. However, identifying whose opinion a subjective adjective is anchored to is not always straightforward. The type of sentence in which the word occurs influences its meaning. If someone states 'The situation was frightening,' that speaker is often interpreted as the arbiter of what counts as 'frightening,' but if someone asks a friend 'Was the situation frightening?' then the perspective shifts and the friend's opinion of what counts as frightening also matters. The current project aims to improve understanding of how people understand subjective words, including shifts from one person's perspective to another's perspective, and how language-based and social-interaction-based factors influence this. This research may inform theories of language use, as well as the design of interventions to improve communication in contexts such as health, legal and educational settings. An understanding of the relation between language and people's personal opinions/attitudes may also be relevant when dealing with social tensions due to attitude divergence, as well as investigations of subjective perspective-taking in nontypical populations.This research will contribute to our understanding of subjective perspective-taking and its interfaces with language. The research uses both online and offline experimental methods to examine the mechanisms and representations involved in the interpretation of subjective linguistic expressions. The researchers will investigate whether and to what extent subjective expressions of different types trigger perspective-shifts during language processing, and whether this is modulated by top-down contextual factors. The project will also gauge the extent to which interpretation of perspective-sensitive elements is guided by the linguistic context in which they occur and how the perspective-holder is activated during real-time processing. Current debate in psycholinguistics regarding perspective-taking primarily focuses on objective situations where individuals differ in what they know or can observe directly, whereas much of the recent debate on perspective in theoretical linguistics has centered on subjective differences between individuals' opinions and attitudes. The studies in this project will broaden the empirical basis of work on perspectival processing and will further our understanding of how humans process perspective-sensitive linguistic material.This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.