Psycholinguistics

Author	Title	Year	Journal/Proceedings	Reftype	DOI/URL
Liu, M.	Processing Non-at-Issue Meanings of Conditional Connectives: The wenn/falls Contrast in German [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2021	Frontiers in Psychology Vol. 12, pp. 2958	article	DOI URL
Abstract: Logical connectives in natural language pose challenges to truth-conditional semantics due to pragmatics and gradience in their meaning. This paper reports on a case study of the conditional connectives (CCs) wenn/falls ‘if/when, if/in case’ in German. Using distributional evidence, I argue that wenn and falls differ in lexical pragmatics: They express different degrees of speaker commitment (i.e., credence) toward the modified antecedent proposition at the non-at-issue dimension. This contrast can be modeled using the speaker commitment scale (Giannakidou and Mari, 2016), i.e., _{More committed}_{Less committed}. Four experiments are reported which tested the wenn/falls contrast, as well as the summary of an additional one from Liu (2019). Experiment 1 tested the naturalness of sentences containing the CCs (wenn or falls) and conditional antecedents with varying degrees of likelihood (very likely/likely/unlikely). The starting prediction was that falls might be degraded in combination with very likely and likely events in comparison to the other conditions, which was not borne out. Experiment 2 used the forced lexical choice paradigm, testing the choice between wenn and falls in the doxastic agent’s conditional thought, depending on their belief or disbelief in the antecedent. The finding was that subjects chose falls significantly more often than wenn in the disbelief-context, and vice versa in the belief-context. Experiment 3 tested the naturalness of sentences with CCs and an additional relative clause conveying the speaker’s belief or disbelief in the antecedent. An interaction was found: While in the belief-context, wenn was rated more natural than falls, the reverse pattern was found in the disbelief-context. While the results are mixed, the combination of the findings in Experiment 2, Experiment 3 and that of Experiment 4a from Liu (2019) that falls led to lower speaker commitment ratings than wenn, provide evidence for the CC scale. Experiment 4b tested the interaction between two speaker commitment scales, namely, one of connectives (including weil ‘because’ and wenn/falls) and the other of adverbs (factive vs. non-factive, Liu, 2012). While factive and non-factive adverbs were rated equally natural for the factive causal connective, non-factive adverbs were preferred over factive ones by both CCs, with no difference between wenn and falls. This is discussed together with the result in Liu (2019), where the wenn/falls difference occurred in the absence of negative polarity items (NPIs), but disappeared in the presence of NPIs. This raises further questions on how different speaker commitment scales interact and why.
BibTeX: @article{10.3389/fpsyg.2021.629177, author = {Liu, Mingya}, title = {Processing Non-at-Issue Meanings of Conditional Connectives: The wenn/falls Contrast in German}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, year = {2021}, volume = {12}, pages = {2958}, url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.629177}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.629177} }
Airenti, G. and Plebe, A.	Editorial Context in Communication: a Cognitive view [Comment] [BibTeX]	2017	Frontiers in Psychology Vol. 8, pp. 115	article	DOI URL
Comment: Provides an editorial and overview of the Research Topic Context in Communication: A Cognitve View, from Frontiers in Psychology.
BibTeX: @article{Airenti2017, author = {Airenti, Gabriella and Plebe, Alessio}, title = {Editorial Context in Communication: a Cognitive view}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, year = {2017}, volume = {8}, pages = {115}, url = {https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00115}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00115} }
Alatawi, H.	Empirical evidence on scalar implicature processing at the behavioural and neural levels: A review [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	International Review of Pragmatics Vol. 11(1), pp. 1 - 21	article	DOI URL
Abstract: The Default hypothesis on implicature processing suggests that a rapid, automatic mechanism is used to process utterances such as “some of his family are attending the wedding” to infer that “not all of them are attending”, an inference subject to cancellation if additional contextual information is provided (e.g. “actually, they are all attending”). In contrast, the Relevance hypothesis suggests that only context-dependent inferences are computed and this process is cognitively effortful. This article reviews findings on behavioural and neural processing of scalar implicatures to clarify the cognitive effort involved.
BibTeX: @article{Alatawi2019, author = {Haifa Alatawi}, title = {Empirical evidence on scalar implicature processing at the behavioural and neural levels: A review}, journal = {International Review of Pragmatics}, publisher = {Brill}, year = {2019}, volume = {11}, number = {1}, pages = {1 - 21}, url = {https://brill.com/view/journals/irp/11/1/article-p1_1.xml}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-201810011} }
Amaral, P., Cummins, C. and Katsos, N.	Experimental Evidence on the Distinction Between Foregrounded and Backgrounded Meaning [BibTeX]	2011	Talk	misc	URL
BibTeX: @misc{Amaral2011, author = {Patricia Amaral and Chris Cummins and Napoleon Katsos}, title = {Experimental Evidence on the Distinction Between Foregrounded and Backgrounded Meaning}, year = {2011}, note = {Presented at ESSLLI 2011}, url = {https://crcummins.com/Amaral_Cummins_Katsos_ESSLLI.pdf} }
Anand, P. and Martell, C.	Annotating the Focus of Negation in terms of Questions Under Discussion [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2012	School: Defense Technical Information Center	techreport	URL
Abstract: Blanco & Moldovan (Blanco and Moldovan 2011) have empirically demonstrated that negated sentences often convey implicit positive inferences, or focus, and that these inferences are both human annotatable and machine learnable. Concentrating on their annotation process, this paper argues that the focus based implicit positivity should be separated from concepts of scalar implicature and negraising as well as the placement of stress. We show that a model making these distinctions clear and which incorporates the pragmatic notion of question under discussion yields κ rates above .80, but that it substantially deflates the rates of focus of negation in text.
BibTeX: @techreport{Anand2012, author = {Pranav Anand and Craig Martell}, title = {Annotating the Focus of Negation in terms of Questions Under Discussion}, school = {Defense Technical Information Center}, year = {2012}, url = {https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA590555.pdf} }
Aravind, A., Hackl, M. and Wexler, K.	Syntactic and Pragmatic Factors in Children's Comprehension of Cleft Constructions [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2018	Language Acquisition Vol. 25(3), pp. 284-314	article	DOI
Abstract: We present a series of experiments investigating English-speaking children’s comprehension of it-clefts and wh-pseudoclefts. Previous developmental work has found children to have asymmetric difficulties interpreting object clefts. We show that these difficulties disappear when clefts are presented in felicitous contexts, where children behave adultlike both in their evaluation of the truth of cleft sentences and in their response-time patterns. When the pragmatic requirements on cleft use were not satisfied, children succeeded only on some types of clefts. However, they did not uniformly show difficulties with infelicitous object clefts; rather, success correlated with the amenability of the structure to a word-order-based parsing strategy. We argue that children fail to build an adultlike representation for infelicitous clefts across the board, but pressures to carry out the task lead them to adopt interpretive means outside of what is licensed in adult grammar.
BibTeX: @article{Aravind2018, author = {Athulya Aravind and Martin Hackl and Ken Wexler}, title = {Syntactic and Pragmatic Factors in Children's Comprehension of Cleft Constructions}, journal = {Language Acquisition}, publisher = {Informa UK Limited}, year = {2018}, volume = {25}, number = {3}, pages = {284--314}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2017.1316725} }
Augurzky, P., Schlotterbeck, F. and Ulrich, R.	Most (but not all) quantifiers are interpreted immediately in visual context [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	Language, Cognition and Neuroscience Vol. 35(9), pp. 1203-1222	article	DOI
Abstract: The present ERP study used picture-sentence verification to investigate the neurolinguistic correlates of online semantic processing. We examined the effects of positive and negative polarity on the N400 in sentences containing the quantifiers more than half and fewer than half. Contrary to previous studies, we examined logical-semantic processes independently of lexical associations and world knowledge, and we used materials that were balanced with respect to the formal-semantic properties of polar quantifiers. Using picture-sentence verification, we examined the N400 at different sentence positions and thus controlled for contextual properties and predictability across the sentence. Our findings replicate delayed effects associated with negative quantifiers: For positive quantifiers, the truth-evaluation process had an immediate effect on the N400 across the sentence, while no incremental effects were found for negative quantifiers. Our results are compatible with predictive approaches suggesting that the increased semantic complexity of negative quantifiers affects the processing of later sentence regions.
BibTeX: @article{Augurzky2020, author = {Petra Augurzky and Fabian Schlotterbeck and Rolf Ulrich}, title = {Most (but not all) quantifiers are interpreted immediately in visual context}, journal = {Language, Cognition and Neuroscience}, publisher = {Informa UK Limited}, year = {2020}, volume = {35}, number = {9}, pages = {1203--1222}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2020.1722846} }
Barbet, C. and Thierry, G.	When some triggers a scalar inference out of the blue. An electrophysiological study of a Stroop-like conflict elicited by single words [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2018	Cognition Vol. 177, pp. 58-68	article	DOI
Abstract: Some studies in experimental pragmatics have concluded that scalar inferences (e.g., ‘some X are Y’ implicates ‘not all X are Y’) are context-dependent pragmatic computations delayed relative to semantic computations. However, it remains unclear whether strong contextual support is necessary to trigger such inferences. Here we tested if the scalar inference ‘not all’ triggered by some can be evoked in a maximally neutral context. We investigated event-related potential (ERP) amplitude modulations elicited by Stroop-like conflicts in participants instructed to indicate whether strings of letters were printed with all their letters in upper case or otherwise. In a randomized stream of non-words and distractor words, the words all, some and case were either presented in capitals or they featured at least one lower case letter. As expected, we found a significant conflict-related N450 modulation when comparing e.g., ‘aLl’ with ‘ALL’. Surprisingly, despite the fact that most responses from the same participants in a sentence-picture verification task were literal, we also found a similar modulation when comparing ‘SOME’ with e.g., ‘SoMe’, even though SOME could only elicit such a Stroop conflict when construed pragmatically. No such modulation was found for e.g., ‘CasE’ vs. ‘CASE’ (neutral contrast). These results suggest that some can appear incongruent with the concept of ‘all’ even when contextual support is minimal. Furthermore, there was no significant correlation between N450 effect magnitude (‘SOME’ minus e.g., ‘sOMe’) and pragmatic response rate recorded in the sentence-picture verification task. Overall, this study shows for the first time that the pragmatic meaning of some can be accessed in a maximally neutral context, and thus, that the scalar inference ‘not all’ triggered by some should be construed as context-sensitive rather than context-dependent, that is, more or less salient and relevant depending on the context rather than entirely contingent upon it.
BibTeX: @article{Barbet2018, author = {Cécile Barbet and Guillaume Thierry}, title = {When some triggers a scalar inference out of the blue. An electrophysiological study of a Stroop-like conflict elicited by single words}, journal = {Cognition}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, year = {2018}, volume = {177}, pages = {58--68}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2018.03.013} }
Benz, A. and Jasinskaja, K.	Questions Under Discussion: From Sentence to Discourse [Comment] [BibTeX]	2017	Discourse Processes Vol. 54(3), pp. 177-186	article	DOI URL
Comment: Introduction to the 2017 Special Issue of Discourse Processes on the QUD.
BibTeX: @article{Benz2017, author = {Anton Benz and Katja Jasinskaja}, title = {Questions Under Discussion: From Sentence to Discourse}, journal = {Discourse Processes}, publisher = {Routledge}, year = {2017}, volume = {54}, number = {3}, pages = {177-186}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1316038}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2017.1316038} }
Beyssade, C., Hemforth, B., Marandin, J.-M. and Portes, C.	Prosodic Realizations of Information Focus in French [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2015	Vol. 46Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, pp. 39-61	incollection	DOI
Abstract: In this chapter, we provide empirical evidence on the prosodic marking of information focus (IF) in French. We report results from an elicitation experiment and two perception experiments. Based on these experiments, we propose that phrases that resolve a question are set off by two types of intonational markers in French: they host the nuclear pitch accent (NPA) on their right edge and/or they are intonationally highlighted by an initial rise (IR). These intonational markers are very often realized conjointly but can also be applied separately thus leading to considerable variation in our elicitation data. We will propose that some of the variation can be explained by differences in the function of NPA and IR: NPA placement is sensitive to the informational/illocutionary partitioning of the content of utterances, while IRs are sensitive to different types of semantic or pragmatic salience. We also suggest that “question/answer” pairs provide a criterion to identify the IF only if the answer is congruent. Answers may, however, contribute to implicit questions resulting in different prosodic realizations.
BibTeX: @incollection{Beyssade2015, author = {Claire Beyssade and Barbara Hemforth and Jean-Marie Marandin and Cristel Portes}, title = {Prosodic Realizations of Information Focus in French}, booktitle = {Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics}, publisher = {Springer International Publishing}, year = {2015}, volume = {46}, pages = {39--61}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12961-7_3} }
Bill, C., Romoli, J., Schwarz, F. and Crain, S.	Scalar Implicatures Versus Presuppositions: The View from Acquisition [BibTeX]	2016	Topoi Vol. 35(1), pp. 57-71	article	DOI
BibTeX: @article{Bill2016, author = {Cory Bill and Jacopo Romoli and Florian Schwarz and Stephen Crain}, title = {Scalar Implicatures Versus Presuppositions: The View from Acquisition}, journal = {Topoi}, publisher = {Springer}, year = {2016}, volume = {35}, number = {1}, pages = {57--71}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-014-9276-1} }
Bledin, J. and Rawlins, K.	Resistance and Resolution: Attentional Dynamics in Discourse [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	Journal Of Semantics Vol. 37(1), pp. 43-82	article	DOI
Abstract: This paper centers on discourses where instead of accepting or rejecting an assertion, a hearer uses an epistemic possibility claim to bring a new subject matter to the original speaker’s attention and consequently leads this speaker to change her mind and retract the initial claim. To analyze such resistance moves, we develop a new theory of attention-shift-induced belief change in which attention is modeled using granularity-levels or resolutions of logical space and refining a speaker’s attention can allow her to combine more of her resolution-sensitive information and potentially change her beliefs. We integrate this theory into pre-existing machinery from the literature on formal models of discourse to account for both the informational and attentional dynamics in epistemic resistance discourses, and to lay out some of the formal prerequisites for a more comprehensive theory of resistance moves in general. Along the way, we introduce the new concept of a subject matter under public attention (SUP) and compare this with the more familiar concept of a question under discussion (QUD).
BibTeX: @article{Bledin2020, author = {Justin Bledin and Kyle Rawlins}, title = {Resistance and Resolution: Attentional Dynamics in Discourse}, journal = {Journal Of Semantics}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, year = {2020}, volume = {37}, number = {1}, pages = {43-82}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffz015} }
Borthen, K. and Karagjosova, E.	Pronominal right-dislocation in Norwegian [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2021	Glossa: a journal of general linguistics	article	DOI
Abstract: The goal of the paper is to propose a holistic analysis of the discourse properties and the interpretational effects of pronominal right-dislocation in Norwegian. Previous research has suggested that this is a topic construction, and it has been shown that the right-dislocated pronoun may affect reference assignment, is sometimes used in cases of discourse breaks, is associated with contrastiveness, and may lead to interpretational effects such as “emphasis” and “mitigation”. Based on Norwegian authentic corpus material, Givón’s (1983a) notion of marked constructions, and Sperber and Wilson’s (1986/1995) relevance theory, we present a novel analysis that connects the various properties of the construction together. A central aspect of our analysis is the assumption that marked constructions increase the accessibility of contrastive interpretations, which in turn may trigger the derivation of certain types of implicatures. Since the analysis is mainly based on assumptions about human cognition, the study makes cross-linguistic predictions despite its focus on one language.
BibTeX: @article{Borthen2021, author = {Kaja Borthen and Elena Karagjosova}, title = {Pronominal right-dislocation in Norwegian}, journal = {Glossa: a journal of general linguistics}, year = {2021}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1025} }
Breheny, R., Ferguson, H.J. and Katsos, N.	Investigating the timecourse of accessing conversational implicatures during incremental sentence interpretation [BibTeX]	2013	Language and Cognitive Processes Vol. 28(4), pp. 443-467	article	DOI
BibTeX: @article{Breheny2013, author = {Richard Breheny and Heather J. Ferguson and Napoleon Katsos}, title = {Investigating the timecourse of accessing conversational implicatures during incremental sentence interpretation}, journal = {Language and Cognitive Processes}, publisher = {Informa}, year = {2013}, volume = {28}, number = {4}, pages = {443--467}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2011.649040} }
Breheny, R.	Scalar Implicatures [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics	incollection	DOI
Abstract: This chapter reviews recent experimental research into questions about how language and other functions of the mind are integrated when humans communicate. It posits a Gricean system that serves this purpose and discusses how recent developmental and ethological research provides evidence for such a system’s existence. Subsequently it focuses on the much-studied phenomenon of scalar implicature. It first considers the phenomenon of scalar implicature in the broader context of pragmatic effects. A short review of theoretical debates as to the status of various sub-types of scalar phenomenon is followed by sections that discuss experimental research relevant to different interfaces in the Gricean system when it comes to scalars.
BibTeX: @incollection{Breheny2019, author = {Richard Breheny}, title = {Scalar Implicatures}, booktitle = {The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, year = {2019}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.013.4} }
Buitrago, N.	Types Of Focus In Spanish: Exploring The Connection Between Function And Realization [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2013	School: Cornell University	mastersthesis	URL
Abstract: This thesis revisits the divide between information focus and contrastive focus in Spanish. This divide is said to manifest itself not only in meaning differences, but in surface structure as well, resulting in different syntactic and phonological realizations depending on the intended pragmatic function of a focused sentence. According to previous accounts, an utterance in which focus is expressed by dislocating the relevant element to the end of the sentence is assumed to signify information focus, while a strategy utilizing a specific prosody change on the focused element is said to express contrast. This work argues, in opposition to previous assumptions from the literature, that there is not a strict divide between the realization of one kind of focus or another, and in fact, that these preconceived meaning divides are not themselves straightforward to characterize. Further, this work argues for the possibility that the choice of focus construction is highly influenced by speakers' communicative intentions and constraints. The conclusions reached in this thesis are the product of a combination of empirical and theoretical work. Empirical evidence is drawn from two sources: 1) data from an original elicitation experiment involving native speakers of Spanish producing focused constructions under different pragmatic situations; and 2) findings from the literature on on-line sentence processing studying focused constructions specifically. The first source of data points at the conclusion that the strict information-as-syntactic vs. contrast-as-phonological divide has no base in Spanish. The second source argues for the need for a more functionally-informed approach to focus constructions. A formal analysis of the data using the QUD framework also demonstrates that different kinds of focus can be represented under a single unified semantic approach.
BibTeX: @mastersthesis{Buitrago2013, author = {Natalia Buitrago}, title = {Types Of Focus In Spanish: Exploring The Connection Between Function And Realization}, school = {Cornell University}, year = {2013}, url = {https://hdl.handle.net/1813/34118} }
Clifton, C. and Frazier, L.	Discourse integration guided by the `Question under Discussion' [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2012	Cognitive Psychology Vol. 65(2), pp. 352-379	article	DOI
Abstract: What makes a discourse coherent? One potential factor has been discussed in the linguistic literature in terms of a Question under Discussion (QUD). This approach claims that discourse proceeds by continually raising explicit or implicit questions, viewed as sets of alternatives, or competing descriptions of the world. If the interlocutor accepts the question, it becomes the QUD, a narrowed set of alternatives to be addressed (Roberts, in press). Three eye movement recording studies are reported that investigated the effect of a preceding explicit QUD (Experiment 1) or implicit QUD (Experiments 2 and 3) on the processing of following text. Experiment 1 revealed an effect of whether the question queried alternative propositions or alternative entities. Reading times in the answer were faster when the answer it provided was of the same semantic type as was queried. Experiment 2 tested QUDs implied by the alternative description of reality introduced by a non-actuality implicature trigger such as should X or want to X. The results, when combined with the results of Experiment 3 (which ruled out a possible alternative interpretation) showed disrupted reading of a following verb phrase that failed to resolve the implicit QUD (Did the discourse participant actually X?), compared to reading the same material in the absence of a clear QUD. The findings support an online role for QUDs in guiding readers’ structuring and interpretation of discourse.
BibTeX: @article{Clifton2012, author = {Charles Clifton and Lyn Frazier}, title = {Discourse integration guided by the `Question under Discussion'}, journal = {Cognitive Psychology}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, year = {2012}, volume = {65}, number = {2}, pages = {352--379}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.04.001} }
Clifton, C. and Frazier, L.	Accommodation to an unlikely episodic state [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Journal of Memory and Language Vol. 86, pp. 20-34	article	DOI
Abstract: Mini-discourses like (ia) seem slightly odd compared to their counterparts containing a conjunction (ib). One possibility is that or in Speaker A’s utterance in (ia) raises the potential Question Under Discussion (QUD) whether it was John or Bill who left and Speaker B’s reply fails to address this QUD. A different possibility is that the epistemic state of the speaker of (ia) is somewhat unlikely or uneven: the speaker knows that someone left, and that it was John or Bill, but doesn’t know which one. The results of four acceptability judgment studies confirmed that (ia) is less good or coherent than (ib) (Experiment 1), but not due to failure to address the QUD implicitly introduced by the disjunction because the penalty for disjunction persisted even in the presence of a different overt QUD (Experiment 2) and even when there was no reply to Speaker A (Experiment 3). The hypothesis that accommodating an unusual epistemic state might underlie the lower acceptability of disjunction was supported by the fact that the disjunction penalty is larger in past tense discourses than in future discourses, where partial knowledge of events is the norm (Experiment 4). The results of an eye tracking study revealed a penalty for disjunction relative to conjunction that was significantly smaller when a lead in (I wonder if it was …) explicitly introduced the disjunction. This interaction (connective X lead in) appeared in early measures on the disjunctive phrase itself, suggesting that the input is related to an inferred epistemic state of the speaker in a rapid and ongoing fashion.
BibTeX: @article{Clifton2016, author = {Charles Clifton and Lyn Frazier}, title = {Accommodation to an unlikely episodic state}, journal = {Journal of Memory and Language}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, year = {2016}, volume = {86}, pages = {20--34}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.10.004} }
Clifton, C. and Frazier, L.	Focus in Corrective Exchanges: Effects of Pitch Accent and Syntactic Form [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Language and Speech	article	DOI
Abstract: A dialog consisting of an utterance by one speaker and another speaker’s correction of its content seems intuitively to be made more acceptable when the new information is pitch accented or otherwise focused, and when the utterance and correction have the same syntactic form. Three acceptability judgment studies, one written and two auditory, investigated the interaction of focus (manipulated by sentence position and, in Experiments 2 and 3, pitch accent) and syntactic parallelism. Experiment 1 indicated that syntactic parallelism interacted with position of the new (contrastive) term: nonparallel forms were relatively acceptable when the new term appeared in object position, a position that commonly contains new information (a ‘default focus’ position). Experiments 2 and 3 indicated that presence of a pitch accent and placement in a default focus position had additive effects on acceptability. Surprisingly, spoken dialogs in which the new term appeared in object position were acceptable even when given information carried the most prominent pitch accent. The present studies, and earlier work, suggest that corrected information can be focused either by prosody or position even in spoken English–a language often thought to express focus through pitch accent, not syntactic position.
BibTeX: @article{Clifton2016a, author = {Charles Clifton and Lyn Frazier}, title = {Focus in Corrective Exchanges: Effects of Pitch Accent and Syntactic Form}, journal = {Language and Speech}, year = {2016}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1177/0023830915623578} }
Clifton, C. and Frazier, L.	Context Effects in Discourse: The Question Under Discussion [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2018	Discourse Processes Vol. 55(2), pp. 105-112	article	DOI
Abstract: Linguistic analyses of the Question Under Discussion (QUD) provide an interesting extension to Tony Sanford’s work on discourse coherence (e.g., Sanford & Emmott, 2012). The QUD approach claims that discourse is organized by a series of overt and covert questions and answers to, or comments on, them. In a coherent discourse, material that addresses the current QUD receives focus, and its processing is facilitated. After a brief review of the existing literature showing that the QUD affects discourse processing, we describe several lines of our own published research on the QUD and briefly present two new experiments. We first review the effects of overt questions on sentence comprehension, arguing that sentences that are thematically and syntactically congruent with the bias of an overt preceding question are processed faster than ones that require a syntactic and thematic shift. We present new evidence suggesting that assertions that address the focused element of a preceding question are likely to receive an exhaustive interpretation. Turning to covert questions, we review evidence that modals and other indications of the uncertain possibility of some event introduce a QUD about the occurrence of that event, biasing and facilitating comprehension of sentences that address such a QUD. Finally, we present new evidence suggesting that although sentential assertions in a discourse are likely to be taken to address an implicit QUD introduced by the antecedent of a conditional, elliptical assertions still tend to find their antecedents in a phrase whose structure is readily available. Thus, although satisfying the requirements of the current QUD is one factor that affects discourse comprehension, it is actually just one of many.
BibTeX: @article{Clifton2018, author = {Charles Clifton and Lyn Frazier}, title = {Context Effects in Discourse: The Question Under Discussion}, journal = {Discourse Processes}, publisher = {Informa UK Limited}, year = {2018}, volume = {55}, number = {2}, pages = {105--112}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2017.1330029} }
Clifton, C., Dillon, B. and Staub, A.	Lyn Frazier's Contributions to Psycholinguistics: An Appreciation [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	Grammatical Approaches to Language Processing: Essays in Honor of Lyn Frazier, pp. 1-10	incollection	DOI URL
Abstract: The authors of this introductory chapter express their gratitude for the many contributions Lyn Frazier has made to the field of psycholinguistics and to her students, colleagues, and friends. Her introduction of garden-path theory gave new life to the study of sentence comprehension and shaped research on the topic for many years. Throughout her career, she has provided stimulating, often controversial, analyses of how ellipses are processed and of the roles semantics and prosody play in understanding language. Her lively curiosity has led her to explore many other topics in psycholinguistics, including effects of discourse structure and of not-at-issue content, among others. The chapter concludes with an appreciation of the impact she has had as a mentor, colleague, and collaborator, as well as a few remembrances of Lyn's particular style as a scientist.
BibTeX: @incollection{Clifton2019, author = {Clifton, Charles and Dillon, Brian and Staub, Adrian}, title = {Lyn Frazier's Contributions to Psycholinguistics: An Appreciation}, booktitle = {Grammatical Approaches to Language Processing: Essays in Honor of Lyn Frazier}, publisher = {Springer International Publishing}, year = {2019}, pages = {1--10}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01563-3_1}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01563-3_1} }
Clifton, C., Frazier, L. and Kaup, B.	Negative clauses imply affirmative topics and affirmative antecedents [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2021	Journal of Psycholinguistic Research	article	DOI
Abstract: We propose that negative clauses are generally interpreted as if the affirmative portion of the clause is under discussion, a likely topic. This predicts a preference for affirmative (topical) antecedents over negative antecedents of a following missing verb phrase (VP). Three experiments tested the predictions of this hypothesis in sentences containing negation in the first clause followed by an ambiguous as-clause as in Don’t cross on red as a stupid person would and its counterpart with smart replacing stupid. In Experiment 1 sentences containing an undesirable attribute adjective such as stupid were rated as more natural, and read faster, than their desirable attribute counterparts (smart), with or without a comma preceding as. The second experiment indicated that the interpretation of the missing VP reflected the attribute adjective’s desirability, with processing difficulty presumably reflecting reanalysis from the initial affirmative antecedent (cross on red) to include negation when the initial interpretation violated plausibility. A third experiment generalized the effect beyond sentences with an initial contracted don’t.
BibTeX: @article{Clifton2021, author = {Charles Clifton and Lyn Frazier and Barbara Kaup}, title = {Negative clauses imply affirmative topics and affirmative antecedents}, journal = {Journal of Psycholinguistic Research}, publisher = {Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, year = {2021}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-021-09792-1} }
Cummins, C., Amaral, P. and Katsos, N.	Backgrounding and accommodation of presuppositions: an experimental approach [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2013	Vol. 17Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung	inproceedings
Abstract: Recent research on presupposition has aimed to use techniques of experimental semantics and pragmatics to cast light on the processes that underlie projection and information packaging. Relatively little attention has so far been paid to the relation between the diversity of presuppositions with respect to information packaging and their projection behaviour. In this paper, we argue that information backgrounding and projection can be seen as closely related phenomena, and we present an experimental study investigating the behaviour of a variety of presupposition triggers. We interpret the results as evidence for the psychological reality of at least one of the theoretical distinctions between presupposition types posited in the literature (lexical versus resolution presuppositions), and consider their implications for the competing accounts of presupposition projection. Keywords. Presupposition; backgrounding; accommodation; experimental pragmatics. 1. Introduction Within the general field of experimental pragmatics, there has recently been an upsurge of interest in the investigation of presuppositions (Xue and Onea 2011, Amaral et al. 2011, Smith and Hall 2011, Chemla and Bott in press). At least two particular strands of research can be distinguished: one deals with presupposition projection and accommodation, and a second with the role of presuppositions in information packaging. Research dealing with presupposition projection aims to ascertain how the information conveyed by the use of presupposition triggers is integrated into the hearer’s situation model. It is classically diagnostic of presuppositions, versus other forms of content, that they project from under the scope of negation – that is, they continue to be conveyed even when their triggers are sententially negated (Levinson 1983, Chierchia and McConnell-Ginet 1990, among others). For example, both (1) and (2) are taken ordinarily to convey that John used to smoke, which is the presupposition associated with the trigger quit. (1) John quit smoking. (2) John didn’t quit smoking. However, it is also widely accepted that this form of projection need not take place. It is possible to continue (2) in a way that is judged felicitous by native speakers, but in which the presupposition is explicitly denied, as in (3). Crucially, such sentences are more coherent than explicitly self-contradictory sentences are, which suggests that the presupposition is not projecting to a global level
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Cummins2013, author = {Chris Cummins and Patrícia Amaral and Napoleon Katsos}, title = {Backgrounding and accommodation of presuppositions: an experimental approach}, booktitle = {Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung}, year = {2013}, volume = {17} }
Cummins, C. and Rohde, H.	Evoking Context with Contrastive Stress: Effects on Pragmatic Enrichment [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2015	Frontiers in Psychology Vol. 6	article	DOI
Abstract: Although it is widely acknowledged that context influences a variety of pragmatic phenomena, it is not clear how best to articulate this notion of context and thereby explain the nature of its influence. In this paper, we target contextual alternatives that are evoked via focus placement and test how the same contextual manipulation can influence three different phenomena that involve pragmatic enrichment: scalar implicature, presupposition, and coreference. We argue that focus placement influences these three phenomena indirectly by providing the listener with information about the likely question under discussion (QUD) that a particular utterance answers (Roberts, 1996/2012). In three listening experiments, we find that the predicted interpretations are indeed made more available when focus placement is added to the final element (to the scalar adjective, to an entity embedded under the negated presupposition trigger, and to the predicate of a pronoun). These findings bring together several distinct strands of work on the effect of focus placement on interpretation all in the domain of pragmatic enrichment. Together they advance our empirical understanding of the relation between focus placement and QUD and highlight commonalities between implicature, presupposition, and coreference.
BibTeX: @article{Cummins2015, author = {Chris Cummins and Hannah Rohde}, title = {Evoking Context with Contrastive Stress: Effects on Pragmatic Enrichment}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, year = {2015}, volume = {6}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01779} }
Cummins, C.	Contextual Causes of Implicature Failure [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2017	Discourse Processes Vol. 54(3), pp. 207-218	article	DOI URL
Abstract: Theoretical and empirical research on quantity implicature has concurred that pragmatically strengthened, richer readings are not available when they are not relevant to the discourse purpose. However, this claim relies on an appeal to a notion of “relevance” that has proved difficult to make precise. In this article I discuss and contrast two potential contributory factors to relevance: adherence to the Question Under Discussion, and form-based priming effects. The former can be considered to operate at a relatively high level of analysis, from the speaker's perspective, and influences the semantic content that the speaker should be attempting to convey, whereas the latter is assumed to reflect low-level psychological preferences and influences the form of words that the speaker should use. I argue that pragmatics, and specifically implicature, constitutes a useful testbed for distinguishing these effects—the availability of an implicature can be used as an indicator that a particular stronger alternative would also have been an acceptable utterance, whereas its unavailability suggests that the stronger alternative would not necessarily have been acceptable. I discuss recent experimental data from this perspective and argue that both Question Under Discussion and priming effects are customarily at play. I conclude by exploring the implications of this for our view of pragmatics and its interfaces.
BibTeX: @article{Cummins2017, author = {Chris Cummins}, title = {Contextual Causes of Implicature Failure}, journal = {Discourse Processes}, publisher = {Routledge}, year = {2017}, volume = {54}, number = {3}, pages = {207-218}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1142331}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1142331} }
Degen, J.	Alternatives in Pragmatic Reasoning [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2013	School: University of Rochester	phdthesis	URL
Abstract: In the face of underspecified utterances, listeners routinely and without much apparent effort make the right kinds of pragmatic inferences about a speaker's intended meaning. This dissertation investigates the processing of scalar implicatures as a way of addressing how listeners perform this remarkable feat. In particular, the role of context in the processing of scalar implicatures from "some" to "not all" is explored. Contrary to the widely held assumption that scalar implicatures are highly regularized, frequent, and relatively context-independent, this dissertation suggests that they are in fact relatively infrequent and highly context-dependent; both the robustness and the speed with which scalar implicatures from "some" to "not all" are computed are modulated by the probabilistic support that the implicature receives from multiple contextual cues. Scalar implicatures are found to be especially sensitive to the naturalness or expectedness of both scalar and non-scalar alternative utterances the speaker could have produced, but didn't. A novel contextualist account of scalar implicature processing that has roots in both constraint-based and information-theoretic accounts of language processing is proposed that provides a unifying explanation for a) the varying robustness of scalar implicatures across different contexts, b) the varying speed of scalar implicatures across different contexts, and c) the speed and efficiency of communication.
BibTeX: @phdthesis{Degen2013, author = {Judith Degen}, title = {Alternatives in Pragmatic Reasoning}, school = {University of Rochester}, year = {2013}, url = {https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/alternatives-pragmatic-reasoning/docview/1465060224/se-2?accountid=9783} }
Degen, J. and Tanenhaus, M.K.	Processing Scalar Implicature: A Constraint-Based Approach [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2015	Cognitive Science Vol. 39(4), pp. 667-710	article	DOI
Abstract: Three experiments investigated the processing of the implicature associated with some using a “gumball paradigm.” On each trial, participants saw an image of a gumball machine with an upper chamber with 13 gumballs and an empty lower chamber. Gumballs then dropped to the lower chamber and participants evaluated statements, such as “You got some of the gumballs.” Experiment 1 established that some is less natural for reference to small sets (1, 2, and 3 of the 13 gumballs) and unpartitioned sets (all 13 gumballs) compared to intermediate sets (6–8). Partitive some of was less natural than simple some when used with the unpartitioned set. In Experiment 2, including exact number descriptions lowered naturalness ratings for some with small sets but not for intermediate size sets and the unpartitioned set. In Experiment 3, the naturalness ratings from Experiment 2 predicted response times. The results are interpreted as evidence for a Constraint-Based account of scalar implicature processing and against both two-stage, Literal-First models and pragmatic Default models.
BibTeX: @article{Degen2015, author = {Judith Degen and Michael K. Tanenhaus}, title = {Processing Scalar Implicature: A Constraint-Based Approach}, journal = {Cognitive Science}, publisher = {Wiley}, year = {2015}, volume = {39}, number = {4}, pages = {667--710}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12171} }
Degen, J. and Tanenhaus, M.K.	Constraint-Based Pragmatic Processing [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics	incollection	DOI
Abstract: Processing language requires integrating information from multiple sources, including context, world knowledge, and the linguistic signal itself. How is this information integrated? A range of positions on the issue is possible, spanned by two extreme positions: extreme informational privilege—certain types of information are processed earlier in online processing and weighted most heavily in the resulting utterance interpretation; and extreme parallelism—all information is processed in parallel and weighted equally in the resulting interpretation. In reviewing the current empirical landscape on scalar implicature processing, the chapter argues for a constraint-based approach to pragmatic processing, which is closer in spirit to the parallelism account than the informational privilege account. The approach is also extended to other pragmatic phenomena.
BibTeX: @incollection{Degen2019, author = {Judith Degen and Michael K. Tanenhaus}, title = {Constraint-Based Pragmatic Processing}, booktitle = {The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, year = {2019}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.013.8} }
Delogu, F., Jachmann, T., Staudte, M., Vespignani, F. and Molinaro, N.	Discourse Expectations Are Sensitive to the Question Under Discussion: Evidence From ERPs [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	Discourse Processes Vol. 57(2), pp. 122-140	article	DOI
Abstract: Questions under Discussion (QUDs) have been suggested to influence the integration of individual utterances into a discourse-level representation. Previous work has shown that processing ungrammatical ellipses is facilitated when the elided material addresses an implicit QUD raised through a nonactuality implicature (NAIs). It is not clear, however, if QUDs influence discourse coherence during comprehension of fully acceptable discourse. We present two ERP studies examining the effects of QUDs introduced by NAIs using two-sentence discourses. Experiment 1 showed that processing definite NPs with inaccessible antecedents is facilitated when their content is relevant to the QUD. Using acceptable discourses, Experiment 2 showed that definite NPs failing to address a QUD elicit increased processing cost. Overall, our results indicate that QUDs raise the expectation that the following discourse will address them, providing unambiguous evidence that their influence is not limited to the processing of ungrammatical input.
BibTeX: @article{Delogu2020, author = {Francesca Delogu and Torsten Jachmann and Maria Staudte and Francesco Vespignani and Nicola Molinaro}, title = {Discourse Expectations Are Sensitive to the Question Under Discussion: Evidence From ERPs}, journal = {Discourse Processes}, publisher = {Informa UK Limited}, year = {2020}, volume = {57}, number = {2}, pages = {122--140}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2019.1575140} }
DeVault, D. and Stone, M.	Scorekeeping in an uncertain language game [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2006	Proceedings of the 10th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (SemDial-10), pp. 139-146	inproceedings	URL
Abstract: Received views of utterance context in pragmatic theory characterize the occurrent subjective states of interlocutors using notions like common knowledge or mutual belief. We argue that these views are not compatible with the uncertainty and robustness of context-dependence in human–human dialogue. We present an alternative characterization of utterance context as objective and normative. This view reconciles the need for uncertainty with received intuitions about coordination and meaning in context, and can directly inform computational approaches to dialogue.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{DeVault2006, author = {David DeVault and Matthew Stone}, title = {Scorekeeping in an uncertain language game}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 10th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (SemDial-10)}, year = {2006}, pages = {139-146}, url = {https://people.cs.rutgers.edu/ mdstone/pubs/devault-brandial06.pdf} }
Di Bacco, F.	Ambiguous questions and perfectible conditionals: the perspective from language acquisition [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2018	School: Ulster University	phdthesis	URL
Abstract: This thesis investigates two phenomena - scope ambiguity resolution and conditional perfection, from the point of view of language acquisition. An empirical study was conducted to determine how scopally ambiguous sentences and perfectible conditionals are interpreted by children and adults, and if there are any differences between the two groups. In relation to the first, two experiments conducted on children’s and adults’ interpretation of scopally ambiguous declarative sentences and questions have shown that children are adult-like in their ability to access inverse scope. This is in contrast with the view that sees children as unable to obtain inverse scope, and it is instead compatible with the QUD approach. I propose an extension of the QUD approach to include questions. In the case of conditionals, two experiments were conducted to test the theory that conditional perfection is a scalar implicature: if it is so, children should obtain this inference less often than adults. However, the results show that both children and adults obtain a conjunctive-like reading for these kind of statements. This reading is widely reported in children, and one theory attributes it to their inability to construct the meaning of a conditional in their mind. The conjunctive-like reading is less frequent in adults, but it is possible that pragmatic factors have been reported for the high rate of occurrence observed in this study, as adults’ interpretation of conditionals is reported to be influenced by the task. I also sketch another explanation of the results, based on the idea that both the conjunctive inference and conditional perfection can be derived as scalar implicatures.
BibTeX: @phdthesis{DiBacco2018, author = {Federica Di Bacco}, title = {Ambiguous questions and perfectible conditionals: the perspective from language acquisition}, school = {Ulster University}, year = {2018}, url = {https://pure.ulster.ac.uk/en/studentTheses/ambiguous-questions-and-perfectible-conditionals} }
Dillon, B., Clifton, C. and Frazier, L.	Pushed aside: parentheticals, memory and processing [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2014	Language, Cognition and Neuroscience Vol. 29(4), pp. 483-498	article	DOI
Abstract: In the current work, we test the hypothesis that ‘at-issue’ and ‘not-at-issue’ contents are processed semi-independently. In a written rating study comparing restrictive relative clauses and parentheticals in interrogatives and declaratives, we observe a significantly larger length penalty for restrictive relative clauses than for parentheticals. This difference cannot be attributed to differences in how listeners allocate attention across a sentence; a second study confirms that readers are equally sensitive to agreement violations in at-issue and not-at-issue contents. A third rating experiment shows that the results do not depend on the restrictive relative clause intervening on the subject-verb dependency. A final experiment shows that the observed effects obtain with definite determiners and demonstratives alike. Taken jointly, the results suggest that the parenthetical structures are processed independently of their embedding utterance, which in turn suggests that syntactic memory may be more differentiated than is typically assumed.
BibTeX: @article{Dillon2014, author = {Brian Dillon and Charles Clifton and Lyn Frazier}, title = {Pushed aside: parentheticals, memory and processing}, journal = {Language, Cognition and Neuroscience}, publisher = {Informa}, year = {2014}, volume = {29}, number = {4}, pages = {483--498}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2013.866684} }
Dillon, B., Clifton, C., Sloggett, S. and Frazier, L.	Appositives and their aftermath: Interference depends on at-issue vs. not-at-issue status [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2017	Journal of Memory and Language Vol. 96, pp. 93-109	article	DOI
Abstract: Much research has explored the degree to which not-at-issue content is interpreted independently of at-issue content, or the main assertion of a sentence (AnderBois, Brasoveanu, & Henderson, 2011; Harris & Potts, 2009; Potts, 2005; Schlenker, 2010; Tonhauser, 2011; a.o.). Building on this work, psycholinguistic research has explored the hypothesis that not-at-issue content, such as appositive relative clauses, is treated distinctly from at-issue content in online processing (Dillon, Clifton, & Frazier, 2014; Syrett & Koev, 2015). In the present paper, we explore the way in which appositive relative clauses interact with their host sentences in the course of incremental sentence comprehension. In an offline acceptability judgment, we find that appositive relative clauses contribute significantly less processing difficulty when they intervene between a filler and its gap than do superficially similar restrictive relative clauses. Results from two eye-tracking-while-reading studies suggests that recently processed restrictive relative clauses interfere to a greater degree with processes of integrating the filler at its gap site than do appositive relative clauses. Our findings suggest that the degree of interference observed during sentence processing may depend on the discourse status of potentially interfering constituents. We propose that this arises because the syntactic form of not-at-issue content is rendered relatively unavailable once it has been processed.
BibTeX: @article{Dillon2017, author = {Brian Dillon and Charles Clifton and Shayne Sloggett and Lyn Frazier}, title = {Appositives and their aftermath: Interference depends on at-issue vs. not-at-issue status}, journal = {Journal of Memory and Language}, publisher = {Elsevier}, year = {2017}, volume = {96}, pages = {93--109}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.04.008} }
Frazier, L. and Clifton, C.	The syntax-discourse divide: Processing ellipsis [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2005	Syntax Vol. 8(2), pp. 121-174	article	DOI
Abstract: VP-ellipsis and sluicing are forms of ellipsis that can cross a sentence boundary. We present a series of comprehension studies on these forms of ellipsis to elucidate their processing and the relation of syntactic and discourse processing. One set of studies examines the hypothesis that the representation of elided material is syntactically structured. We present evidence supporting the hypothesis and tentatively attribute the effects to sharing of the structure of the antecedent constituent, with structure building or substitution of a variable for a constituent permitted if it is licensed by the syntactic principles of the language. Another set of studies tests the hypothesis that a new utterance is preferentially related to the main assertion of the preceding utterance, which is typically a constituent high in the syntactic tree. The results suggest that discourse processing differs from syntactic processing, where the most accessible material is recent material found low in the syntactic tree. A final set of studies examines the interplay of the syntactic processor, which may not violate “islands,” and the discourse processor, which may, in the processing of ellipsis sentences involving islands. A novel explanation is offered for the observation (Ross 1967) that sluicing out of relative-clause islands is grammatical except when sprouting is required.
BibTeX: @article{Frazier2005, author = {Lyn Frazier and Charles Clifton}, title = {The syntax-discourse divide: Processing ellipsis}, journal = {Syntax}, year = {2005}, volume = {8}, number = {2}, pages = {121-174}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2005.00077.x} }
Ginzburg, J. and Poesio, M.	Grammar Is a System That Characterizes Talk in Interaction [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Frontiers in Psychology Vol. 7	article	DOI
Abstract: Much of contemporary mainstream formal grammar theory is unable to provide analyses for language as it occurs in actual spoken interaction. Its analyses are developed for a cleaned up version of language which omits the disfluencies, non-sentential utterances, gestures, and many other phenomena that are ubiquitous in spoken language. Using evidence from linguistics, conversation analysis, multimodal communication, psychology, language acquisition, and neuroscience, we show these aspects of language use are rule governed in much the same way as phenomena captured by conventional grammars. Furthermore, we argue that over the past few years some of the tools required to provide a precise characterizations of such phenomena have begun to emerge in theoretical and computational linguistics; hence, there is no reason for treating them as “second class citizens” other than pre-theoretical assumptions about what should fall under the purview of grammar. Finally, we suggest that grammar formalisms covering such phenomena would provide a better foundation not just for linguistic analysis of face-to-face interaction, but also for sister disciplines, such as research on spoken dialogue systems and/or psychological work on language acquisition.
BibTeX: @article{Ginzburg2016, author = {Jonathan Ginzburg and Poesio, Massimo}, title = {Grammar Is a System That Characterizes Talk in Interaction}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, year = {2016}, volume = {7}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01938} }
Glanzberg, M.	About Convention and Grammar [BibTeX]	2018	Vol. 2018Beyond Semantics and Pragmatics, pp. 230-260	incollection
BibTeX: @incollection{Glanzberg2018, author = {Glanzberg, Michael}, title = {About Convention and Grammar}, booktitle = {Beyond Semantics and Pragmatics}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, year = {2018}, volume = {2018}, pages = {230--260} }
Goebel, A.	Representing Context: Presupposition Triggers and Focus-sensitivity [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	School: University of Massachusets, Amherst	phdthesis	DOI
Abstract: This dissertation investigates the role of Focus-sensitivity for a typology of presupposition triggers. The central hypothesis is that Focus-sensitive triggers require a linguistic antecedent in the discourse model, whereas presuppositions of triggers lacking Focus-sensitivity are satisfied as entailments of the Common Ground. This hypothesis is supported by experimental evidence from two borne out predictions. First, Focus-sensitive triggers are sensitive to the salience of the antecedent satisfying their presupposition, as operationalized via the Question Under Discussion, and lead to interference-type effects, while triggers lacking Focus-sensitivity are indifferent to the QUD-structure. Second, Focus-sensitive triggers are harder to globally accommodate than triggers lacking Focus-sensitivity. The picture that emerges from these results is that the same kind of meaning - presuppositions - is grounded in distinct underlying representations of context in relation to an independent property of the trigger - Focus-sensitivity - which directly affects the way a trigger is processed.
BibTeX: @phdthesis{Goebel2020, author = {Alexander Goebel}, title = {Representing Context: Presupposition Triggers and Focus-sensitivity}, school = {University of Massachusets, Amherst}, year = {2020}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.7275/19172131} }
Goodman, N.	Grounding Lexical Meaning in Core Cognition [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2013		unpublished	URL
Abstract: Words are potentially one of the clearest windows on human knowledge and conceptual structure. But what do words mean? In this project we aim to construct and explore a formal model of lexical semantics grounded, via pragmatic inference, in core conceptual structures. Flexible human cognition is derived in large part from our ability to imagine possible worlds. A rich set of concepts, intuitive theories, and other mental representations support imagining and reasoning about possible worlds—together we call these core cognition. Here we posit that the collection of core concepts also forms the set of primitive elements available for lexical semantics: word meanings are built from pieces of core cognition. We propose to study lexical semantics in the setting of an architecture for language understanding that integrates literal meaning with pragmatic inference. This architecture supports underspecified and uncertain lexical meaning, leading to subtle interactions between meaning, conceptual structure, and context. We will explore several cases of lexical semantics where these interactions are particularly important: indexicals, scalar adjectives, generics, and modals. We formalize both core cognition and the natural language architecture using the Church probabilistic programming language. In this project we aim to contribute to our understanding of the connection between words and mental representations; from this we expect to gain critical insights into many aspects of psychology, to construct vastly more useful thinking machines, and to interface natural and artificial intelligences more efficiently.
BibTeX: @unpublished{Goodman2013, author = {Noah Goodman}, title = {Grounding Lexical Meaning in Core Cognition}, year = {2013}, url = {https://web.stanford.edu/ ngoodman/papers/LexSemSquibb.pdf} }
Goodman, N.D. and Lassiter, D.	Probabilistic Semantics and Pragmatics: Uncertainty in Language and Thought [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2015	The handbook of contemporary semantic theory	incollection	DOI
Abstract: This chapter illustrates the use of probabilistic techniques in natural language pragmatics and semantics with a concrete formal model. This model shows that a probabilistic framework for natural language is possible and productive. The chapter provides background on probabilistic modeling and stochastic lambda calculus, and introduce a running example scenario: the game of tug-of-war. It describes a formal fragment of English suitable for the running scenario. Using this fragment the chapter illustrates the emergence of non-monotonic effects in interpretation and the interaction of ambiguity with background knowledge. The chapter then describes pragmatic interpretation of meaning as probabilistic reasoning about an informative speaker, who reasons about a literal listener. It discusses the role of semantic indices in this framework and shows that binding these indices at the pragmatic level allows us to deal with several issues in context-sensitivity of meaning, such as the interpretation of scalar adjectives.
BibTeX: @incollection{Goodman2015, author = {Noah D. Goodman and Daniel Lassiter}, title = {Probabilistic Semantics and Pragmatics: Uncertainty in Language and Thought}, booktitle = {The handbook of contemporary semantic theory}, publisher = {Wiley-Blackwell}, year = {2015}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118882139.ch21} }
Goodman, N.D. and Frank, M.C.	Pragmatic Language Interpretation as Probabilistic Inference [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Trends in Cognitive Sciences Vol. 20(11), pp. 818-829	article	DOI
Abstract: Understanding language requires more than the use of fixed conventions and more than decoding combinatorial structure. Instead, comprehenders make exquisitely sensitive inferences about what utterances mean given their knowledge of the speaker, language, and context. Building on developments in game theory and probabilistic modeling, we describe the rational speech act (RSA) framework for pragmatic reasoning. RSA models provide a principled way to formalize inferences about meaning in context; they have been used to make successful quantitative predictions about human behavior in a variety of different tasks and situations, and they explain why complex phenomena, such as hyperbole and vagueness, occur. More generally, they provide a computational framework for integrating linguistic structure, world knowledge, and context in pragmatic language understanding.
BibTeX: @article{Goodman2016, author = {Noah D. Goodman and Michael C. Frank}, title = {Pragmatic Language Interpretation as Probabilistic Inference}, journal = {Trends in Cognitive Sciences}, publisher = {Elsevier}, year = {2016}, volume = {20}, number = {11}, pages = {818--829}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2016.08.005} }
Gor, V. and Syrett, K.	Beyond Principle C: (Not)-at-issueness and plausibility influence acceptability of coconstrual [BibTeX]	2019	Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Chicago LinguisticSociety (CLS 54)	inproceedings	URL
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Gor2019, author = {Vera Gor and Kristen Syrett}, title = {Beyond Principle C: (Not)-at-issueness and plausibility influence acceptability of coconstrual}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 54th Annual Meeting of the Chicago LinguisticSociety (CLS 54)}, publisher = {Chicago Linguistic Society}, year = {2019}, url = {http://vgor.mycpanel.princeton.edu/CLS2018_proceedings.pdf} }
Grant, M., Clifton, C. and Frazier, L.	The role of Non-Actuality Implicatures in processing elided constituents [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2012	Journal of Memory and Language Vol. 66(1), pp. 326-343	article	DOI
Abstract: When an elided constituent and its antecedent do not match syntactically, the presence of a word implying the non-actuality of the state of affairs described in the antecedent seems to improve the example. (This information should be released but Gorbachev didn’t. vs. This information was released but Gorbachev didn’t.) We model this effect in terms of Non-Actuality Implicatures (NAIs) conveyed by non-epistemic modals like should and other words such as want to and be eager to that imply non-actuality. We report three studies. A rating and interpretation study showed that such implicatures are drawn and that they improve the acceptability of mismatch ellipsis examples. An interpretation study showed that adding a NAI trigger to ambiguous examples increases the likelihood of choosing an antecedent from the NAI clause. An eye movement study shows that a NAI trigger also speeds on-line reading of the ellipsis clause. By introducing alternatives (the desired state of affairs vs. the actual state of affairs), the NAI trigger introduces a potential Question Under Discussion (QUD). Processing an ellipsis clause is easier, the processor is more confident of its analysis, when the ellipsis clause comments on the QUD.
BibTeX: @article{Grant2012, author = {Margaret Grant and Charles Clifton and Lyn Frazier}, title = {The role of Non-Actuality Implicatures in processing elided constituents}, journal = {Journal of Memory and Language}, publisher = {Elsevier}, year = {2012}, volume = {66}, number = {1}, pages = {326--343}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.09.003} }
Grisot, C.	Experimentally assessing the roles of grammatical aspect, lexical aspect and coreference patterns for the inference of temporal relations in English [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2021	Journal of Pragmatics Vol. 184, pp. 122-139	article	DOI
Abstract: The question of the roles of grammatical aspect and of lexical aspect for the inference of temporal relations has richly been investigated from a theoretical point of view in various fields of languages sciences. Nevertheless, previous studies do not formulate similar conclusions, and thus they trigger different predictions for experimental testing. In contrast, the role of coreference patterns did not receive as much attention as grammatical and lexical aspect have received. As such, in this study we experimentally assess the roles of grammatical aspect (perfective vs. imperfective), lexical aspect (activities vs. accomplishments) and coreference patterns (same vs. different agents) in English. By means of an annotation study, we establish that fewer chronological relations emerge in passages with the imperfective aspect and coreference of agents (i.e. the actions are performed by the same agent). Then, by means of a temporal evaluation task, we show that synchronous relations are favoured in narrative passages that describe activities and lack of coreference of agents (i.e. the actions are performed by different agents). To interpret the results, we suggest that the comprehenders’ inference of temporal relations is influenced on the one hand by linguistic biases and on the other hand by their expectations of coherence. We discuss the findings from a cross-linguistic perspective.
BibTeX: @article{Grisot2021, author = {Cristina Grisot}, title = {Experimentally assessing the roles of grammatical aspect, lexical aspect and coreference patterns for the inference of temporal relations in English}, journal = {Journal of Pragmatics}, publisher = {Elsevier BV}, year = {2021}, volume = {184}, pages = {122--139}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2021.08.007} }
Grosz, B. and Sidner, C.	Attention, Intentions, and the Structure of Discourse [Abstract] [Comment] [BibTeX]	1986	Computational Linguistics Vol. 12, pp. 175-204	article	URL
Abstract: In this paper we explore a new theory of discourse structure that stresses the role of purpose and processing in discourse. In this theory, discourse structure is composed of three separate but interrelated components: the structure of the sequence of utterances (called the linguistic structure), a structure of purposes (called the intentional structure), and the state of focus of attention (called the attentional state). The linguistic structure consists of segments of the discourse into which the utterances naturally aggregate. The intentional structure captures the discourse-relevant purposes, expressed in each of the linguistic segments as well as relationships among them. The attentional state is an abstraction of the focus of attention of the participants as the discourse unfolds. The attentional state, being dynamic, records the objects, properties, and relations that are salient at each point of the discourse. The distinction among these components is essential to provide an adequate explanation of such discourse phenomena as cue phrases, referring expressions, and interruptions. The theory of attention, intention, and aggregation of utterances is illustrated in the paper with a number of example discourses. Various properties of discourse are described, and explanations for the behavior of cue phrases, referring expressions, and interruptions are explored. This theory provides a framework for describing the processing of utterances in a discourse. Discourse processing requires recognizing how the utterances of the discourse aggregate into segments, recognizing the intentions expressed in the discourse and the relationships among intentions, and tracking the discourse through the operation of the mechanisms associated with attentional state. This processing description specifies in these recognition tasks the role of information from the discourse and from the participants' knowledge of the domain.
Comment: Grosz and Sidner’s conception of the intentional structure of discourse was an important source for the intentional structure for the context of utterance proposed by Roberts 1996, 2004, 2011.
BibTeX: @article{Grosz1986, author = {Barbara Grosz and Candice Sidner}, title = {Attention, Intentions, and the Structure of Discourse}, journal = {Computational Linguistics}, year = {1986}, volume = {12}, pages = {175-204}, url = {https://aclanthology.org/J86-3001.pdf} }
Gundel, J.K. and Hedberg, N.	Reference and Cognitive Status: Scalar Inference and Typology [Comment] [BibTeX]	2015	Information Structuring of Spoken Language from a Cross-linguistic Perspective	incollection	DOI
Comment: [Summary taken from intro]: In this paper, we will be concerned with referential givenness/newness, specifically within the Givenness Hierarchy theory proposed in Gundel, Hedberg and Zacharski (1993 and subsequent work), which attempts to explain the distribution and interpretation of different nominal expressions, and the fact that such forms succeed in picking out a speaker’s intended interpretation even though the conceptual information they encode rarely, if ever, determines a unique referent. We begin by briefly summarizing the Givenness Hierarchy theory. We then correct some misconceptions and misinterpretations that have appeared in the literature on the predictions of the theory. Finally, we discuss some cross-linguistic and typological facts about the ways in which languages can differ and ways they appear to be alike with respect to encoding cognitive statuses on the Givenness Hierarchy.
BibTeX: @incollection{Gundel2015, author = {Gundel, Jeanette K. and Hedberg, Nancy}, title = {Reference and Cognitive Status: Scalar Inference and Typology}, booktitle = {Information Structuring of Spoken Language from a Cross-linguistic Perspective}, publisher = {De Gruyter Mouton}, year = {2015}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110368758-003} }
Harris, J.A.	Processing let alone coordination in silent reading [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Lingua Vol. 169, pp. 70-94	article	DOI
Abstract: Processing research on coordination indicates that simpler conjuncts are preferred over more complex ones, and that positing ellipsis structure in the second conjunct is taxing to process when a simpler non-ellipsis structure exists. The present study investigates let alone coordination, which is argued to require clausal ellipsis in the second conjunct. It is proposed that the processor always projects a clausal structure for the second conjunct for the ellipsis, obviating a general preference for a less complex conjunct. Experiment 1 consists of several sentence-completion questionnaires testing whether a DP or VP conjunct is preferred in let alone structures as in John doesn’t like Mary, let alone (Sue \| love her). The results found a bias towards VP remnants that was weakly affected by syntactic placement of the focus particle even, as well as by prior context. Experiment 2 examined the effect of remnant type on eye movements during silent reading, revealing only distinct processing patterns, rather than major processing penalties, for different remnant types, and a general facilitation when even was present to signal upcoming scalar contrast.
BibTeX: @article{Harris2016, author = {Jesse A. Harris}, title = {Processing let alone coordination in silent reading}, journal = {Lingua}, publisher = {Elsevier}, year = {2016}, volume = {169}, pages = {70--94}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2015.10.008} }
Hawkins, R.X.D., Stuhlmuller, A., Degen, J. and Goodman, N.D.	Why do you ask? Good questions provoke informative answers [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2015	CogSci	inproceedings	URL
Abstract: What makes a question useful? What makes an answer appropriate? In this paper, we formulate a family of increasingly sophisticated models of question-answer behavior within the Rational Speech Act framework. We compare these models based on three different pieces of evidence: first, we demonstrate how our answerer models capture a classic effect in psycholinguistics showing that an answerer’s level of informativeness varies with the inferred questioner goal, while keeping the question constant. Second, we jointly test the questioner and answerer components of our model based on empirical evidence from a question-answer reasoning game. Third, we examine a special case of this game to further distinguish among the questioner models. We find that sophisticated pragmatic reasoning is needed to account for some of the data. People can use questions to provide cues to the answerer about their interest, and can select answers that are informative about inferred interests.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Hawkins2015, author = {Robert X. D. Hawkins and Andreas Stuhlmuller and Judith Degen and Noah D. Goodman}, title = {Why do you ask? Good questions provoke informative answers}, booktitle = {CogSci}, year = {2015}, url = {http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.706.6698&rep=rep1&type=pdf} }
Hawkins, R. and Goodman, N.	Why do you ask? The informational dynamics of questions and answers [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019		unpublished	URL
Abstract: Asking questions is one of our most efficient and reliable means of learning about the world. Yet we do not often pose these questions to an impartial oracle; we ask cooperative social partners, in dialogue. In this paper, we aim to reconcile formal models of optimal question asking and answering with classic effects of social context. We begin from the observation that question-answer dialogue is motivated by a two-sided asymmetry in beliefs: questioners have a private goal but lack goal-relevant information about the world, and answerers have private information but lack knowledge about the questioner's goal. We formalize this problem in a computational framework and derive pragmatic questioner and answerer behavior from recursive social reasoning. Critically, we predict that pragmatic answerers go beyond the literal meaning of the question to be informative with respect to inferred goals, and that pragmatic questioners may therefore select questions to more unambiguously signal their goals. We evaluate our pragmatic models against asocial models in two ways. First, we present computational simulations accounting for three classic answerer effects in psycholinguistics. We then introduce the Hidden Goal paradigm for experimentally eliciting questioner and answerer behavior in scenarios where there is uncertainty about the questioner's goal. We report data from three experiments in this paradigm and show how our core computational framework can be composed with more sophisticated question semantics, hierarchical goal spaces, and a persistent state over which extended dialogue can unfold. We find that social inference is needed to account for critical aspects of the data.
BibTeX: @unpublished{Hawkins2019, author = {Robert Hawkins and Noah Goodman}, title = {Why do you ask? The informational dynamics of questions and answers}, year = {2019}, note = {In the PsyArxiv Preprints}, url = {https://psyarxiv.com/j2cp6} }
Ito, M.	Japanese-speaking children's interpretation of sentences containing the focus particle datte even: Conventional implicatures, QUD, and processing limitations [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2012	Linguistics Vol. 50(1)	article	DOI
Abstract: This paper investigates Japanese-speaking children’s (in)sensitivity to information strength when interpreting sentences containing the focus particle datte ‘even.’ It examines whether or not their sensitivity is affected by the Question Under Discussion (QUD) and the Felicity Judgment (FJ) task based on the Processing Limitation Hypothesis (PLH; cf. Chierchia et al. 2001, 2004). Because datte ‘even’ is not a scalar term, it does not give rise to scalar implicatures (SIs) by constituting a part of scales. ‘Even’ evokes conventional implicatures. However, an ‘even’ sentence in context — in addition to the conventional implicatures — evokes a special case of SI calculated from contextdependent scales, which is pragmatic inferences induced by ‘even’s conventional implicatures (i.e., the word’s semantic/pragmatic import). The relevant scale (generally) concerns the NP element focused by ‘even’ and a set of alternatives. Because sentences without ‘even’ do not evoke any SI, I assume that the relevant implicatures are conventional in nature. Three experiments were done to examine whether Japanese-speaking children are really (in)capable of calculating conventional implicatures derived from datte sentences. It was found that (i) Children are insensitive to pragmatic anomalies of single “infelicitous” sentences (Experiments 1 and 2). This inability to detect pragmatic infelicity is consistent with findings about their ability to compute SIs. On the other hand, the adults showed sensitivity to conventional implicatures in all three experiments, which may be taken as evidence that the computation of implicatures derived from datte sentences differs from that of SIs. (ii) Unlike the results reported for SI in Zondervan (2007, 2009), the wh-focus/QUD way of asking questions does not facilitate the children’s performance with datte sentences (Experiment 2). (iii) The FJ task improved children’s performance (Experiment 3), thus supporting the PLH, which was applied to SI computation (Chierchia et al. 2004; cf. Reinhart 1999, 2006), and to the computation of implicatures involved in datte sentences. (iv) Children are unable to compute implicatures based on context-specific pragmatic scales derived from datte sentences, when a single “underinformative” statement is given. This partly contradicts previous findings on SI based on context dependent pragmatic scales (Papafragou and Tantalou 2004). The results indicate that children’s insensitivity to the pragmatic infelicity of datte sentences stems from the processing load induced by building and maintaining alternative representations, as reported for SI computation.
BibTeX: @article{Ito2012, author = {Masuyo Ito}, title = {Japanese-speaking children's interpretation of sentences containing the focus particle datte even: Conventional implicatures, QUD, and processing limitations}, journal = {Linguistics}, publisher = {Walter de Gruyter}, year = {2012}, volume = {50}, number = {1}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1515/ling-2012-0004} }
Jasinskaja, E.	The Global Aboutness Topic in German Narrative [BibTeX]	2010		unpublished	URL
BibTeX: @unpublished{Jasinskaja2010, author = {Ekaterina Jasinskaja}, title = {The Global Aboutness Topic in German Narrative}, year = {2010}, note = {Ms. Centre for Advanced Study, Oslo}, url = {https://dslc.phil-fak.uni-koeln.de/sites/dslc/katja_files/jasinskaja_topic.pdf} }
Jasinskaja, K., Salfner, F. and Freitag, C.	Discourse-Level Implicature: A Case for QUD [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2017	Discourse Processes Vol. 54(3), pp. 239-258	article	DOI URL
Abstract: This article argues that multisentence discourses give rise to Gricean quantity implicatures that go beyond the mere sum of the implicatures of the sentences they consist of. We formulate two theories of discourse-level implicature: the null theory, which only has a mechanism for sentence-level implicature and does not rely on any specific notion of discourse structure, and a theory that assumes that discourse is hierarchically structured by Questions Under Discussion (QUD) and that QUDs can guide the derivation of quantity implicatures at all levels of discourse structure. In two experiments using the inference task paradigm and focusing on sequences of sentences with contrastive topic, the QUD-based theory is shown to make more accurate predictions than the null theory. This finding provides additional motivation for the QUD-based approach to discourse structure.
BibTeX: @article{Jasinskaja2017, author = {Katja Jasinskaja and Fabienne Salfner and Constantin Freitag}, title = {Discourse-Level Implicature: A Case for QUD}, journal = {Discourse Processes}, publisher = {Routledge}, year = {2017}, volume = {54}, number = {3}, pages = {239-258}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1150672}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1150672} }
Jayez, J. and Reinecke, R.	Presuppositions and salience An and experimental approach [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Proceedings of SALT	inproceedings	DOI
Abstract: We present an EEG-based experimental investigation on additive discourse continuations of factive sentences according to a pattern: "Paul knows that Peter takes the bus. Louis too takes/knows . . ." . We want to determine whether reference to the main content (with "knows") or to the presupposition (with "takes") elicits a different brain response. We conclude from the data that there is no trace of electrical waveforms usually associated with deviation from a norm or reprocessing, although there is an observable moderate contrast in the 250-400 ms time window at frontal sites, which is in need of controlled replication to be properly interpreted.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Jayez2016, author = {Jacques Jayez and Rob Reinecke}, title = {Presuppositions and salience An and experimental approach}, booktitle = {Proceedings of SALT}, year = {2016}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v26i0.3943} }
Káldi, T.	Hungarian Pre-verbal Focus: Representation and Interpretation [BibTeX]	2021	School: Budapest University of Technology and Economics	phdthesis	URL
BibTeX: @phdthesis{Kaldi2021, author = {Tamás Káldi}, title = {Hungarian Pre-verbal Focus: Representation and Interpretation}, school = {Budapest University of Technology and Economics}, year = {2021}, url = {https://repozitorium.omikk.bme.hu/handle/10890/15355?locale-attribute=en} }
Kehler, A. and Rohde, H.	Evaluating an Expectation-Driven Question-Under-Discussion Model of Discourse Interpretation [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Discourse Processes Vol. 54(3), pp. 219-238	article	DOI
Abstract: According to Question-Under-Discussion (QUD) models of discourse interpretation, clauses cohere with the preceding context by virtue of providing answers to (usually implicit) questions that are situated within a speaker's goal-driven strategy of inquiry. In this article we present four experiments that examine the predictions of a QUD model of interpretation when cast in terms of an integrated, expectation-driven model of discourse processing. The results of these studies together support the predictions of the model, demonstrating that contextual cues affect comprehenders' expectations about ensuing QUDs (Experiment 1), QUD expectations in turn influence the interpretation of discourse-dependent linguistic expressions (Experiment 2), and the biases associated with those expressions in turn influence the anticipation of QUDs (Experiments 3a and b).
BibTeX: @article{Kehler2016a, author = {Andrew Kehler and Hannah Rohde}, title = {Evaluating an Expectation-Driven Question-Under-Discussion Model of Discourse Interpretation}, journal = {Discourse Processes}, publisher = {Informa UK Limited}, year = {2016}, volume = {54}, number = {3}, pages = {219--238}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853x.2016.1169069} }
Kehler, A. and Rohde, H.	Evaluating an Expectation-Driven Question-Under-Discussion Model of Discourse Interpretation [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2017	Discourse Processes Vol. 54(3), pp. 219-238	article	DOI URL
Abstract: According to Question-Under-Discussion (QUD) models of discourse interpretation, clauses cohere with the preceding context by virtue of providing answers to (usually implicit) questions that are situated within a speaker's goal-driven strategy of inquiry. In this article we present four experiments that examine the predictions of a QUD model of interpretation when cast in terms of an integrated, expectation-driven model of discourse processing. The results of these studies together support the predictions of the model, demonstrating that contextual cues affect comprehenders' expectations about ensuing QUDs (Experiment 1), QUD expectations in turn influence the interpretation of discourse-dependent linguistic expressions (Experiment 2), and the biases associated with those expressions in turn influence the anticipation of QUDs (Experiments 3a and b).
BibTeX: @article{Kehler2017, author = {Andrew Kehler and Hannah Rohde}, title = {Evaluating an Expectation-Driven Question-Under-Discussion Model of Discourse Interpretation}, journal = {Discourse Processes}, publisher = {Routledge}, year = {2017}, volume = {54}, number = {3}, pages = {219-238}, url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1169069}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2016.1169069} }
Kursat, L., Degen, J., Denison, S., Mack, M., Xu, Y. and Armstrong, B.C.	Probability and processing speed of scalar inferences is context-dependent. [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	CogSci	inproceedings	URL
Abstract: Studies addressing the question of whether scalar inferences generally incur a processing cost have yielded conflicting results. Constraint-based accounts, which seek to unify these conflicting results, make a prediction which we test here: the probability of an interpretation and the speed with which it is processed depends on the contextual support it receives. We manipulated contextual support for the scalar inference in two truth-value judgment experiments by manipulating a lexical feature (presence of partitive “of the”) and a pragmatic feature (the implicit Question Under Discussion). Participants’ responder type – whether their majority response was pragmatic (reflecting the inference) or literal (reflecting its absence) – was the main predictor of response times: pragmatic responses were faster than literal responses when generated by pragmatic responders; the reverse was true for literal responders. We interpret this as further evidence against costly inference accounts and in support of constraint-based accounts of pragmatic processing.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Kursat2020, author = {Kursat, Leyla and Degen, Judith and Denison, Stephanie and Mack, Michael and Xu, Yang and Armstrong, Blair C}, title = {Probability and processing speed of scalar inferences is context-dependent.}, booktitle = {CogSci}, year = {2020}, url = {https://www.cognitivesciencesociety.org/cogsci20/papers/0233/0233.pdf} }
Lai, C.	Rises all the way up: The interpretation of prosody, discourse attitudes and dialogue structure [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2012	School: University of Pennsylvania	phdthesis
Abstract: This dissertation is about what prosody contributes to dialogue interpretation. The view of prosody developed in this account is based on detailed quantitative investigations of the prosodic forms and interpretations of cue word and declarative responses, specifically with respect to the distribution and interpretation of terminal pitch rises. Drawing on results from corpus, production and perception studies, I argue that the underlying contribution of terminal rises is to signal that the dialogue has not come to a viable stopping point with respect to the task at hand. This approach enables us to explain previously incongruent findings about the connection between rises and attitudes like uncertainty. From this perspective, the perception of such attitudes does not arise directly from prosodic form, but instead depends upon a range of contextual factors. The experimental results indicate that the most important of these is how an utterance relates to the current question under discussion, rather than sentence or dialogue act type. However, variation in prosodic form is also affected by higher level factors like dialect, task, and speaker role: rises become more frequent on non-questioning moves as the need to co-ordinate becomes greater. The experimental results allows us to make significant headway in clarifying the relationship between the prosodic, semantic and information structural properties of responses. This, in turn, sheds light on several outstanding questions about the contribution of the rise in fall-rise accents and its relationship to information structural categories like contrastive topic. Overall, we see that rises don't act on the proposition that carries them, nor do they mark out specific IS categories. Instead they reveal the state of the discourse from the speaker's perspective. From a methodological point of view, I show that to gain a robust understanding the contribution of prosody on a particular meaning dimension, we need to take into account the baseline induced by the discourse configuration itself. These studies show the utility of using functional data analysis techniques to give more direct view of prosodic variation in larger datasets without manual prosodic annotation.
BibTeX: @phdthesis{Lai2012, author = {Catherine Lai}, title = {Rises all the way up: The interpretation of prosody, discourse attitudes and dialogue structure}, school = {University of Pennsylvania}, year = {2012} }
Lassiter, D. and Goodman, N.D.	Adjectival vagueness in a Bayesian model of interpretation [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2015	Synthese Vol. 194(10), pp. 3801-3836	article	DOI
Abstract: We derive a probabilistic account of the vagueness and context-sensitivity of scalar adjectives from a Bayesian approach to communication and interpretation. We describe an iterated-reasoning architecture for pragmatic interpretation and illustrate it with a simple scalar implicature example. We then show how to enrich the apparatus to handle pragmatic reasoning about the values of free variables, explore its predictions about the interpretation of scalar adjectives, and show how this model implements Edgington’s (Analysis 2:193–204,1992, Keefe and Smith (eds.) Vagueness: a reader, 1997) account of the sorites paradox, with variations. The Bayesian approach has a number of explanatory virtues: in particular, it does not require any special-purpose machinery for handling vagueness, and it is integrated with a promising new approach to pragmatics and other areas of cognitive science.
BibTeX: @article{Lassiter2015, author = {Daniel Lassiter and Noah D. Goodman}, title = {Adjectival vagueness in a Bayesian model of interpretation}, journal = {Synthese}, publisher = {Springer}, year = {2015}, volume = {194}, number = {10}, pages = {3801--3836}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0786-1} }
Lewis, S., Hacquard, V. and Lidz, J.	"Think" Pragmatically: Children's Interpretation of Belief Reports [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2017	Language Learning and Development Vol. 13(4), pp. 395-417	article	DOI
Abstract: Children under 4 years of age often evaluate belief reports based on reality instead of beliefs. They tend to reject sentences like, “John thinks that giraffes have stripes” on the grounds that giraffes do not have stripes. Previous accounts have proposed that such judgments reflect immature Theory of Mind or immature syntactic/semantic representations. We argue that the difficulty is actually pragmatic. Adults frequently use belief reports to provide information about reality (e.g., “I think the stove is still hot”). Young children have difficulty determining when the main point is reality (the stove situation) vs. mental states (John’s ideas about giraffes). We show that if the context emphasizes beliefs, children are more able to evaluate belief reports appropriately (Experiment 1). The pattern of children’s truth value judgments demonstrates that they understand the literal meaning of think sentences, despite their pragmatic difficulty grasping the speaker’s intention (Experiment 2).
BibTeX: @article{Lewis2017, author = {Shevaun Lewis and Valentine Hacquard and Jeffrey Lidz}, title = {"Think" Pragmatically: Children's Interpretation of Belief Reports}, journal = {Language Learning and Development}, publisher = {Informa UK Limited}, year = {2017}, volume = {13}, number = {4}, pages = {395--417}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2017.1296768} }
Lorson, A., Cummins, C. and Rohde, H.	When objecting to presupposed content comes easily [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	Vol. 54Proceedings of the 23rd workshop on the semantics and pragmatics of dialogue. London: SemDial, pp. 60	inproceedings	URL
Abstract: New content can be introduced into dialogue via presupposition as well as by assertion, but on traditional accounts presupposed information is expected to be less addressable in the subsequent dialogue. An alternative approach is to argue that addressability is more closely connected to whether content is at-issue with respect to the current Question Under Discussion. This paper investigates which of these factors is dominant. We report the results of a dialogue-based experiment designed to test whether and how false at-issue content is responded to in an ongoing discourse, and whether this is affected by its status as asserted or presupposed. Our findings suggest that when material is at-issue it can be challenged directly, independently of whether it is presupposed or asserted. However, relevant information introduced by a presupposition was found to be more likely to escape the participants’ attention.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Lorson2019, author = {Lorson, Alexandra and Cummins, Chris and Rohde, Hannah}, title = {When objecting to presupposed content comes easily}, booktitle = {Proceedings of the 23rd workshop on the semantics and pragmatics of dialogue. London: SemDial}, year = {2019}, volume = {54}, pages = {60}, url = {http://www.lel.ed.ac.uk/ hrohde/papers/LorsonCumminsRohde.2019.pdf} }
de Marneffe, Marie-Catherine. and Tonhauser, J.	Inferring Meaning from Indirect Answers to Polar Questions: the Contribution of the Rise-Fall-Rise Contour [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	Questions in Discourse, pp. 132-163	incollection	DOI
Abstract: Polar questions can be given direct answers (e.g., Do you want to eat? – No) and indirect answers (e.g., Do you want to eat? – I’m not hungry). Listeners infer positive or negative responses from indirect answers to polar questions with varying degrees of confidence (e.g., Clark 1979, Hirschberg 1985, Green & Carberry 1992, 1994, de Marneffe et al. 2009). For spoken language, the prosodic realization of the indirect answer has been speculated to provide a cue to the intended meaning of the indirect answer (Green & Carberry 1999, fn. 34). This paper presents an experiment designed to identify whether and how the prosodic realization of an indirect answer to a polar question influences the response that listeners infer from the indirect answer. The experiment explored American English listeners’ interpretations of indirect answers with scalar adjectives (e.g., She’s attractive) realized with a neutral contour (H* L-L%) or the rise-fall-rise contour (L*+H L-H%) in response to polar questions with semantically stronger adjectives (e.g., Is your sister beautiful?). Listeners inferred significantly more negative responses to the polar questions when the indirect answer was realized with the rise-fall-rise contour than with the neutral contour. These findings show that the prosodic realization of an indirect answer can provide a cue to the speaker’s intended meaning. The paper also discusses implications of our findings for scalar implicature generation and the meaning of the rise-fall-rise contour.
BibTeX: @incollection{Marneffe2019, author = {Marie-Catherine de Marneffe and Judith Tonhauser}, title = {Inferring Meaning from Indirect Answers to Polar Questions: the Contribution of the Rise-Fall-Rise Contour}, booktitle = {Questions in Discourse}, publisher = {Brill}, year = {2019}, pages = {132-163}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004378322_006} }
Meertens, E., Egger, S. and Romero, M.	Multiple accent in alternative questions [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	Vol. 23(2)Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung	inproceedings	DOI
Abstract: Alternative Questions (AltQs) are typically characterized by two prosodic cues: a final falling boundary tone and a pitch accent on each disjunct. Recent accounts in the literature have taken the final fall as the central surface cue for AltQ interpretation or have assigned a vacuous semantic contribution to the multiple accent on the disjuncts. Based on data from English and Turkish, we argue that both cues are equally important and require modelling in a unified account of AltQs. Combining ingredients from the literature (Roberts, 1996; Biezma, 2009; Westera, 2017), we propose that, essentially, the multiple accent shapes the Question under Discussion (QUD) and that the final fall, or the lack thereof, indicates restrictions on the content of the QUD via (un)satisfaction of Attention Maxims.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Meertens2019, author = {Erlinde Meertens and Sophie Egger and Maribel Romero}, title = {Multiple accent in alternative questions}, booktitle = {Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung}, year = {2019}, volume = {23}, number = {2}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.18148/sub/2019.v23i2.605} }
Meroni, L. and Gualmini, A.	Question under discussion triggers implicature calculation in young children [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2013	Lingue e Linguaggio Vol. 12(1), pp. 121-139	article	DOI
Abstract: Many experimental studies have shown that children don't compute scalar implicatures (SIs) as much as adults, despite mastering the prerequisites to their computation (Chierchia et al. 2001). In addition, different tasks (e.g., picture-selection or act-out) have been shown to affect SIs computation in children, leading to the claim that the complexity of judgment-tasks is beyond children's limited cognitive resources. (Pouscoulous et al. 2007; Katsos & Bishop 2011). This paper presents experimental data showing that (i) children can in fact compute SIs to the same extent as adults when this is the only contextually available option (Gualmini et al. 2008) and that (ii) they do so in a typical Truth Value Judgment task (Crain & Thornton 1998).
BibTeX: @article{Meroni2013, author = {Luisa Meroni and Andrea Gualmini}, title = {Question under discussion triggers implicature calculation in young children}, journal = {Lingue e Linguaggio}, year = {2013}, volume = {12}, number = {1}, pages = {121-139}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1418/73679} }
Moradlou, S. and Ginzburg, J.	Learning to Understand Questions [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2014	Proceedings of SemDial 2014 (DialWatt)	inproceedings	URL
Abstract: Our aim in this paper is to characterise the learning process by means of which children get to understand questions. In contrast to the acquisition of production of questions, an area which has a long history, the emergence of question comprehension is largely uncharted territory. We limit our attention in this paper to wh–interrogatives, since generally there is overt evidence for their understanding before other types of questions such as polar questions. The general idea we follow is that the child learns to understand questions interactively, as there is a long period of “training” during which the carer asks questions and answers them himself. Since the answers can be understood by the child, given sufficient exposure the child deduces an association between the pre-answer utterance and a question. Nonetheless, the process as we describe it here assumes a number of very strong priors. In particular, we will be assuming for some stages of the process that the child is attuned to a very simple erotetic logic—a logic which given certain assumptions allows one to deduce questions. We provide evidence for our model based on classifying interactions between a child and her parents in the multimodal Providence corpus from CHILDES.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Moradlou2014, author = {Sara Moradlou and Jonathan Ginzburg}, title = {Learning to Understand Questions}, booktitle = {Proceedings of SemDial 2014 (DialWatt)}, year = {2014}, url = {https://sites.google.com/site/jonathanginzburgswebsite/publications/semdial14-mg.pdf?attredirects=0&d=1} }
Roberts, C.	Focus, the Flow of Information, and Universal Grammar [BibTeX]	1998	The Limits of Syntax, pp. 109-160	incollection	URL
BibTeX: @incollection{Roberts1998, author = {Craige Roberts}, title = {Focus, the Flow of Information, and Universal Grammar}, booktitle = {The Limits of Syntax}, publisher = {Academic Press}, year = {1998}, pages = {109-160}, url = {https://www.asc.ohio-state.edu/roberts.21/focusflow.pdf} }
Roberts, C.	Linguistic Convention and the Architecture of Interpretation [BibTeX]	2017	Analytic Philosophy Vol. 58(4), pp. 418-439	article	DOI
BibTeX: @article{Roberts2017, author = {Craige Roberts}, title = {Linguistic Convention and the Architecture of Interpretation}, journal = {Analytic Philosophy}, year = {2017}, volume = {58}, number = {4}, pages = {418-439}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1111/phib.12113} }
Romoli, J., Folli, R. and Sevdali, C.	Testing the QUD approach: Children’s comprehension of scopally ambiguous questions [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics	inproceedings	URL
Abstract: Children and adults have been reported to differ in their interpretation of scopally ambiguous sen- tences such as Every horse didn’t jump over the fence (Musolino 1998; Gualmini 2004; Gualmini et al. 2008; Musolino & Lidz 2006; see also Lidz & Musolino 2002; Musolino et al. 2000; Musolino & Lidz 2006; Kra ̈mer 2000; Moscati & Crain 2014; Moscati et al. 2016, among many others). A recent approach in the literature treats this difference as fully pragmatic in nature. In particular, Gualmini et al. (2008) have proposed an explanation based on what they call the Question-Answer Requirement (QAR), which locates the source of the difference in the understood Question Under Discussion (QUD) in the context. The main idea behind the QAR is that any sentence is to be understood as an answer to a QUD. As a consequence, in the case of scopally ambiguous sentences, a given reading of the sentence is accessible (to adults and children) only if it constitutes a possible answer to the contextual QUD. Children and adults are then claimed to differ only in how they handle and accommodate QUDs. In particular, if the reading that would answer the salient QUD is false in the context, adults, but not children, are able to accommodate a new QUD in order to access the true interpretation of the ambiguous sentence.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Romoli2016, author = {Jacopo Romoli and Raffaella Folli and Christina Sevdali}, title = {Testing the QUD approach: Children’s comprehension of scopally ambiguous questions}, booktitle = {West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics}, year = {2016}, url = {https://pure.ulster.ac.uk/en/publications/testing-the-qud-approach-childrens-comprehension-of-scopally-ambi-3} }
Ronai, E. and Xiang, M.	Pragmatic inferences are QUD-sensitive: an experimental study [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	Journal of Linguistics	article	DOI
Abstract: Implicatures serve as an important testing ground for examining the process of integrating semantic and pragmatic information. Starting with Bott & Noveck (2004), several studies have found that implicature computation is costly. More recently, attention has shifted toward identifying contextual cues that modulate this processing cost. Specifically, it has been hypothesized that calculation rate and processing cost are a function of whether the Question Under Discussion (QUD) supports generating the implicature (Degen 2013; Degen & Tanenhaus 2015). In this paper, we present a novel elicitation task establishing what the relevant QUDs are for a given context (Experiment 1). In Experiment 2, a sentence-picture verification study, we extend earlier findings about the effect of QUDs on scalar inference to a different kind of pragmatic inference: it-cleft exhaustivity. For both inferences, we find that under QUDs that bias toward calculation, there is no increase in reaction times, but under QUDs that bias against calculating the inference we observe longer reaction times. These results are most compatible with a constraint-based account of implicature, where QUD is one of many cues. Additionally, we explore whether our findings can be informative in narrowing down precisely what aspect of the inferential process incurs a cost.
BibTeX: @article{Ronai2020, author = {Eszter Ronai and Ming Xiang}, title = {Pragmatic inferences are QUD-sensitive: an experimental study}, journal = {Journal of Linguistics}, year = {2020}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226720000389} }
Savinelli, K., Scontras, G. and Pearl, L.	Modeling scope ambiguity resolution as pragmatic inference: Formalizing differences in child and adult behavior. [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2017	CogSci	inproceedings	URL
Abstract: Investigations of scope ambiguity resolution suggest that child behavior differs from adult behavior, with children struggling to access inverse scope interpretations. For example, children often fail to accept Every horse didn’t succeed to mean not all the horses succeeded. Current accounts of children’s scope behavior involve both pragmatic and processing factors. Inspired by these accounts, we use the Rational Speech Act framework to articulate a formal model that yields a more precise, explanatory, and predictive description of the observed developmental behavior.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Savinelli2017, author = {Savinelli, KJ and Scontras, Gregory and Pearl, Lisa}, title = {Modeling scope ambiguity resolution as pragmatic inference: Formalizing differences in child and adult behavior.}, booktitle = {CogSci}, year = {2017}, url = {https://cogsci.mindmodeling.org/2017/papers/0579/index.html} }
Schafer, A.J., Camp, A., Rohde, H. and Grüter, T.	Contrastive Prosody and the Subsequent Mention of Alternatives During Discourse Processing [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	Grammatical Approaches to Language Processing, pp. 29-44	incollection	DOI
Abstract: Linguistic research has long viewed prosody as an important indicator of information structure in intonationally rich languages like English. Correspondingly, numerous psycholinguistic studies have shown significant effects of prosody, particularly with respect to the immediate processing of a prosodically prominent phrase. Although co-reference resolution is known to be influenced by information structure, it has been less clear whether prosodic prominence can affect decisions about next mention in a discourse, and if so, how. We present results from an open-ended story continuation task, conducted as part of a series of experiments that examine how prosody influences the anticipation and resolution of co-reference. Overall results from the project suggest that prosodic prominence can increase or decrease reference to a saliently pitch-accented phrase, depending on additional circumstances of the referential decision. We argue that an adequate account of prosody’s role in co-reference requires consideration of how the processing system interfaces with multiple levels of linguistic representation.
BibTeX: @incollection{Schafer2019, author = {Amy J. Schafer and Amber Camp and Hannah Rohde and Theres Grüter}, title = {Contrastive Prosody and the Subsequent Mention of Alternatives During Discourse Processing}, booktitle = {Grammatical Approaches to Language Processing}, publisher = {Springer International Publishing}, year = {2019}, pages = {29--44}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01563-3_3} }
Schwarz, F.	Definites, Domain Restriction, and Discourse Structure in Online Processing [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	Grammatical Approaches to Language Processing, pp. 187-208	incollection	DOI
Abstract: Definite descriptions are commonly assumed to involve a uniqueness requirement, which is crucially constrained by contextual domain restriction. Theoretical proposals differ with regards to whether a variable for domain restriction should be represented in the linguistic representation or not, and if so, whether it should be seen as contributing a property or a situation. From the perspective of actual language use and comprehension, a key question is just how contextual information is integrated for purposes of domain restriction. Two visual world eye tracking studies addressing these issues are presented. They look at participants’ eye movements as they visually inspect an array of colored shapes and listen to descriptions thereof. For example, ‘The circle is black’ is evaluated relative to a display that contains two circles in different colors and positions. This is preceded by a context sentence that helps to set up a domain that narrows the referential choice to varying degrees, e.g. by containing ‘on the top.’ Various measures are used to assess to what extent the circle that happens to be at the top is taken to be the referent of the definite description, both in real time online while the sentence unfolds and in terms of ultimate response behavior. The results suggest that people are very much sensitive to the subtle contextual clues, and in particular that the discourse status of the key prepositional phrase in the discourse context is crucial. This has implications for theoretical perspectives on domain restriction, based on their capability to incorporate the role of discourse structure.
BibTeX: @incollection{Schwarz2019, author = {Florian Schwarz}, title = {Definites, Domain Restriction, and Discourse Structure in Online Processing}, booktitle = {Grammatical Approaches to Language Processing}, publisher = {Springer International Publishing}, year = {2019}, pages = {187--208}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-01563-3_10} }
Singh, R., Wexler, K., Astle-Rahim, A., Kamawar, D. and Fox, D.	Children interpret disjunction as conjunction: Consequences for theories of implicature and child development [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Natural Language Semantics Vol. 24(4), pp. 305-352	article	DOI
Abstract: We present evidence that preschool children oftentimes understand disjunctive sentences as if they were conjunctive. The result holds for matrix disjunctions as well as disjunctions embedded under every. At the same time, there is evidence in the literature that children understand or as inclusive disjunction in downward-entailing contexts. We propose to explain this seemingly conflicting pattern of results by assuming that the child knows the inclusive disjunction semantics of or, and that the conjunctive inference is a scalar implicature. We make two assumptions about implicature computation in the child: (i) that children access only a proper subset of the adult alternatives (specifically, they do not access the lexicon when generating alternatives), and (ii) that children possess the adult capacity to strengthen sentences with implicatures. As a consequence, children are expected to sometimes not compute any implicatures at all, but in other cases they are expected to compute an implicature that is different from the adult implicature. We argue that the child’s conjunctive strengthening of disjunctive sentences realizes the latter possibility: the adult infers that the conjunction is false but the child infers that the conjunction is true. This behaviour is predicted when our assumptions about child development are coupled with the assumption that a covert exhaustive operator is responsible for strengthening in both the child and the adult. Specifically, children’s conjunctive strengthening is predicted to follow from the same mechanism used by adults to compute conjunctive free choice implicatures in response to disjunctive permission sentences (recursive exhaustification). We furthermore argue that this parallel between the child and the adult extends to disambiguation preferences. In particular, we present evidence that children prefer to strengthen disjunctions to conjunctions, in matrix and embedded positions (under every); this result mirrors previous findings that adults prefer to compute free choice, at the root and under every. We propose a disambiguation strategy that explains the preference for conjunctive strengthening – by both the child and the adult – even though there is no general preference for exhaustification. Specifically, we propose that the preference for a conjunctive strengthening follows from a pragmatic preference for a complete answer to the Question Under Discussion.
BibTeX: @article{Singh2016, author = {Raj Singh and Ken Wexler and Andrea Astle-Rahim and Deepthi Kamawar and Danny Fox}, title = {Children interpret disjunction as conjunction: Consequences for theories of implicature and child development}, journal = {Natural Language Semantics}, publisher = {Springer}, year = {2016}, volume = {24}, number = {4}, pages = {305--352}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s11050-016-9126-3} }
Skordos, D. and Papafragou, A.	Children's derivation of scalar implicatures: Alternatives and relevance [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Cognition Vol. 153, pp. 6-18	article	DOI
Abstract: Utterances such as “Megan ate some of the cupcakes” are often interpreted as “Megan ate some but not all of the cupcakes”. Such an interpretation is thought to arise from a pragmatic inference called scalar implicature (SI). Preschoolers typically fail to spontaneously generate SIs without the assistance of training or context that make the stronger alternative salient. However, the exact role of alternatives in generating SIs remains contested. Specifically, it is not clear whether children have difficulty with spontaneously generating possible informationally stronger scalemates, or with considering how alternatives might be relevant. We present three studies with English-speaking 5-year-olds and adults designed to address these questions. We show that (a) the accessibility of the stronger alternative is important for children’s SI generation (Experiment 1); (b) the explicit presence of the stronger alternative leads children to generate SIs only when the stronger scalar term can easily be seen as relevant (Experiment 2); and (c) in contexts that establish relevant alternatives, the explicit presence of the stronger alternative is not necessary (Experiment 3). We conclude that children’s considerations of lexical alternatives during SI-computation include an important role for conversational relevance. We also show that this more nuanced approach to the role of lexical alternatives in pragmatic inference unifies previously unconnected findings about children’s early pragmatic development and bears on major accounts proposed to date for children’s problems with SIs.
BibTeX: @article{Skordos2016, author = {Dimitrios Skordos and Anna Papafragou}, title = {Children's derivation of scalar implicatures: Alternatives and relevance}, journal = {Cognition}, publisher = {Elsevier}, year = {2016}, volume = {153}, pages = {6--18}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2016.04.006} }
Skordos, D. and Barner, D.	Language Comprehension, Inference, and Alternatives [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics	incollection	DOI
Abstract: This chapter discusses the importance of pragmatic inference involving alternatives for language comprehension, reviewing the problem of restricting the inferential hypothesis space. It presents a brief overview of theoretical and empirical work on adults and then turns to developmental evidence from two characteristic case studies: scalar implicature and quantifier spreading, where children struggle when interpreting sentences including quantifiers. The authors argue that in both cases, children’s problems are closely linked to difficulties in reducing the inferential hypothesis space, while matching what is said to what is meant. Children are argued to misidentify the Question Under Discussion (QUD), which leads them to consider irrelevant alternatives and make non-adult-like inferences. When relevant alternatives are made salient and the QUD is appropriately identified, children make inferences in an adult-like manner.
BibTeX: @incollection{Skordos2019, author = {Dimitrios Skordos and David Barner}, title = {Language Comprehension, Inference, and Alternatives}, booktitle = {The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, year = {2019}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.013.1} }
Skordos, D., Feiman, R., Bale, A. and Barner, D.	Do Children Interpret `or' Conjunctively? [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	Journal of Semantics Vol. 37(2), pp. 247-267	article	DOI
Abstract: Preschoolers often struggle to compute scalar implicatures involving disjunction (or), in which they are required to strengthen an utterance by negating stronger alternatives, e.g. to infer that, ‘The girl has an apple or an orange’ likely means she does not have both. However, recent reports surprisingly find that a substantial subset of children interpret disjunction as conjunction, concluding instead that the girl must have both fruits. According to these studies, children arrive at conjunctive readings not because they have a non-adult-like semantics, but because they lack access to the stronger scalar alternative and, and employ doubly exhaustified disjuncts when computing implicatures. Using stimuli modelled on previous studies, we test English-speaking preschoolers and replicate the finding that many children interpret or conjunctively. However, we speculate that conditions which replicate this finding may be pragmatically infelicitous, such that results do not offer a valid test of children’s semantic competence. We show that when disjunctive statements are uttered in contexts that render the speaker’s intended question more transparent, conjunctive readings disappear almost entirely.
BibTeX: @article{Skordos2020, author = {Dimitrios Skordos and Roman Feiman and Alan Bale and David Barner}, title = {Do Children Interpret `or' Conjunctively?}, journal = {Journal of Semantics}, publisher = {Oxford University Press (OUP)}, year = {2020}, volume = {37}, number = {2}, pages = {247--267}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffz022} }
Smeets, L. and Meroni, L.	Stress or Context for the Computation of Scalar Implicatures [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, pp. 313-331	incollection	DOI
Abstract: Since the work of Chierchia et al. (2001) and Noveck (2001), children’s ability to compute scalar implicatures (SIs) has been widely studied. The results of many studies showed that while children master the prerequisites to compute SIs, they are not as proficient as adults in computing them (a.o., Papafragou and Musolino 2003; Napoleon and Bishop 2011). Other studies (i.e., Meroni and Gualmini 2013), on the other hand, showed that even four-year-old children can compute SIs on the scale at adult-like levels when the context is made pragmatically felicitous. Specifically, they show that the implicature is computed when an explicit Question Under Discussion (QUD) is added, as this reading constitutes the only felicitous answer to that question (Gualmini et al. 2008). Under the most natural intonation, when some is presented after a QUD that contains the stronger alternative all it receives stress, but it is destressed when the QUD contains some, which does not trigger a SI. Interestingly, only the former condition led children to compute SIs. As a consequence, it could well be the case that children in the study by Meroni and Gualmini (2013) compute SIs when the scalar item is stressed (Miller et al. 2005), independently of the QUD. In this study we aim to disentangle the relative contribution of stress and the explicit QUD to children’s (un)successful SI computation. To test the relative contribution of stress and the QUD, a Truth Value Judgment task (TVJt) was designed in which the target sentences exhibited the opposite stress pattern than in the original study. We conclude that prosody also plays a role in helping children to recognize the set of contextual alternatives which lead them to SI derivation. This study strengthens the claim that young children use and need both contextual and prosodic information to make pragmatic inferences.
BibTeX: @incollection{Smeets2020, author = {Liz Smeets and Luisa Meroni}, title = {Stress or Context for the Computation of Scalar Implicatures}, booktitle = {Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics}, publisher = {Springer Netherlands}, year = {2020}, pages = {313--331}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-1932-0_13} }
Smith, E.A., Castroviejo, E. and Mayol, L.	Cross-Linguistic Experimental Evidence Distinguishing the Role of Context in Disputes over Taste and Possibility [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2015	Context 2015: Modeling and Using Context	inproceedings	DOI
Abstract: One might think that Sam’s utterance in (1) is a subjective one, essentially expressing that he personally finds the cake tasty, in which case one would not expect significant meaning differences between (1) and a similar utterance where the subjectivity is made explicit, such as (3).
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Smith2015, author = {E. Allyn Smith and Elena Castroviejo and Laia Mayol}, title = {Cross-Linguistic Experimental Evidence Distinguishing the Role of Context in Disputes over Taste and Possibility}, booktitle = {Context 2015: Modeling and Using Context}, publisher = {Springer International Publishing}, year = {2015}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25591-0} }
Soares, E.C.	Anaphors in discourse : anaphoric subjects in Brazilian Portuguese [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2017	School: Université Sorbonne Paris Cité	phdthesis	URL
Abstract: The present dissertation is concerned with the use and interpretation of null and pronominal subjects in Brazilian Portuguese. This investigation examines these phenomena in an attempt to disentangle the semantic and discursive factors that can be relevant for choice between these anaphoric expressions in Brazilian Portuguese and the way in which this choice is articulated with the general theory of anaphora resolution. The starting point of this dissertation was the research looking into null and overt subjects from the perspective of Generative Grammar, specially the Parametric Theory. Throughout the present work, however, the analyses proposed in this perspective were shown not to account for the data at stake. The generalization that poor verbal morphology is directly related to the absence or reduced frequency of null subjects, for example, is challenged through experimental data and an investigation of the relative frequency of null subjects across discourse persons in corpora. An alternative explanation presented in the previous literature, namely the importance of the antecedents’ features of Animacy and Specificity, seems to better account for the attested distribution. However, this explanation is not sufficient for understanding the choice between null and overt subjects in Brazilian Portuguese, since the number of animate and specific null subjects is still relatively higher than in languages with obligatory expression of subjects. Therefore, it is argued that discourse factors seem to play a crucial role in the use of null and overt subjects in Brazilian Portuguese. The main factors identified here are Obviousness and Contrast. The first is a standard feature in the literature about anaphora resolution (expressed by a variety of terms, such as Salience, Familiarity, Accessibility, etc.), which is part of the reverse mapping hypothesis according to which the more obvious the subject is, the less explicit the co-referential form is allowed to be. The second factor, Contrast, is the main finding of the present dissertation: as is the case for other levels of linguistic analyses and other phenomena in language, the choice of anaphoric expression in Brazilian Portuguese seems to be driven by efficiency. In the present case, this means that, when the backgrounded information and the asserted (focused) in- formation in an utterance contrast the most, it is more likely that a null subject will be used. The design of a grammar that deals with these multiple features is sketched, specifically, a multi-layered scalar probabilistic grammar is proposed, whose semantic and discourse constraints act in parallel through a probabilistic mapping. It is, thus, shown that null subjects are likely in discursive co- reference, since in these contexts their antecedents are more obvious and the focused information contrasts the most with the background. An apparent counter-example to the proposal sketched here is analyzed: the generic interpretation of null subjects. However, it is shown that the same semantic constraints cross-linguistically applied to other generic constructions can produce generic null subjects in Brazilian Portuguese, given the failure to be grounded predicted by the approach proposed here. Finally, on-line evidence for the analysis of the use and interpretation of null and pronominal subjects is provided. The results found in three eye-tracking while reading experiments provide striking evidence in favor of the proposal put forward here, according to which null and overt subjects and their interpretation can be accounted for in terms of constraints on interpretation rather than licensing.
BibTeX: @phdthesis{Soares2017, author = {Eduardo Correa Soares}, title = {Anaphors in discourse : anaphoric subjects in Brazilian Portuguese}, school = {Université Sorbonne Paris Cité}, year = {2017}, url = {https://tel.archives-ouvertes.fr/tel-01984623} }
Starr, W.B.	Conditionals, Meaning and Mood [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2010	School: Rutgers University	phdthesis	URL
Abstract: This work explores the hypothesis that natural language is a tool for changing a language user's state of mind and, more specically, the hypothesis that a sentence's meaning is constituted by its characteristic role in fullling this purpose. This view contrasts with the dominant approach to semantics due to Frege, Tarski and others' work on articial languages: language is rst and foremost a tool for representing the world. Adapted to natural language by Davidson, Lewis, Montague, et. al. this dominant approach has crystalized as truth-conditional semantics: to know the meaning of a sentence is to know the conditions under which that sentence is true. Chapter 1 details the animating ideas of my alternative approach and shows that the representational function of language can be understood in terms of the more general function of changing representational mental states. Chapters 2-4 argue that the additional resources of this more general conception of meaning allow us to explain certain phenomena involving conditionals (e.g. if Bob danced then Leland danced) and grammatical mood (e.g. declarative, interrogative, imperative mood) that truth-conditional semantics does not. In the analysis of these specic phenomena and the articulation of the general approach on oer, it emerges that this approach combines insights and benets from both use-theoretic and truth-theoretic work on meaning.
BibTeX: @phdthesis{Starr2010, author = {William B. Starr}, title = {Conditionals, Meaning and Mood}, school = {Rutgers University}, year = {2010}, url = {https://rucore.libraries.rutgers.edu/rutgers-lib/30442/pdf/1/} }
Steedman, M.	The Syntactic Process (Language, Speech, and Communication) [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2001		book
Abstract: In this book Mark Steedman argues that the surface syntax of natural languages maps spoken and written forms directly to a compositional semantic representation that includes predicate-argument structure, quantification, and information structure without constructing any intervening structural representation. His purpose is to construct a principled theory of natural grammar that is directly compatible with both explanatory linguistic accounts of a number of problematic syntactic phenomena and a straightforward computational account of the way sentences are mapped onto representations of meaning. The radical nature of Steedman's proposal stems from his claim that much of the apparent complexity of syntax, prosody, and processing follows from the lexical specification of the grammar and from the involvement of a small number of universal rule-types for combining predicates and arguments. These syntactic operations are related to the combinators of Combinatory Logic, engendering a much freer definition of derivational constituency than is traditionally assumed. This property allows Combinatory Categorial Grammar to capture elegantly the structure and interpretation of coordination and intonation contour in English as well as some well-known interactions between word order, coordination, and relativization across a number of other languages. It also allows more direct compatibility with incremental semantic interpretation during parsing. The book covers topics in formal linguistics, intonational phonology, computational linguistics, and experimental psycholinguistics, presenting them as an integrated theory of the language faculty in a form accessible to readers from any of those fields.
BibTeX: @book{Steedman2001, author = {Mark Steedman}, title = {The Syntactic Process (Language, Speech, and Communication)}, publisher = {MIT Press}, year = {2001} }
Stone, M.	Communicative intentions and conversational processes in human-human and humancomputer dialogue [Abstract] [Comment] [BibTeX]	2004	Wold-Situated Language Use, pp. 39-70	incollection
Abstract: This chapter investigates the computational consequences of a broadly Gricean view of language use as intentional activity. In this view, dialogue rests on coordinated reasoning about communicative intentions. The speaker produces each utterance by formulating a suitable communicative intention. The hearer understands it by recognizing the communicative intention behind it. When this coordination is successful, interlocutors succeed in considering the same intentions— that is, the same representations of utterance meaning—as the dialogue proceeds. In this paper, I emphasize that these intentions can be formalized; we can provide abstract but systematic representations that spell out what a speaker is trying to do with an utterance. Such representations describe utterances simultaneously as the product of our knowledge of grammar and as actions chosen for a reason. In particular, they must characterize the speaker’s utterance in grammatical terms, provide the links to the context that the grammar requires, and so arrive at a contribution that the speaker aims to achieve. Because I have implemented this formalism, we can regard it as a possible analysis of conversational processes at the level of computational theory. Nevertheless, this analysis leaves open what the nature of the biological computation involved in inference to intentions is, and what regularities in language use support this computation.
Comment: Stone is a computer scientist who works on artificial intelligence with a special focus on how agents collaborate in linguistic interpretation. He uses tools from planning theory to show how tasks and goals come to bear on interpretation. See his work with DeVault and Thomason on presupposition accommodation (section 8 and 9 of this bibliography) and the rich body of published work on interpretation on his website: http://www.cs.rutgers.edu/ mdstone/publist-by-date.html.
BibTeX: @incollection{Stone2004, author = {Matthew Stone}, title = {Communicative intentions and conversational processes in human-human and humancomputer dialogue}, booktitle = {Wold-Situated Language Use}, publisher = {MIT Press}, year = {2004}, pages = {39-70} }
Tian, Y.	Negation Processing: A Dynamic Pragmatic Account [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2014	School: UCL	phdthesis	URL
Abstract: This thesis investigates the processing of negative assertions. Psycholinguistic research shows that out-of-context negative sentences are more difficult to process than positive sentences. In the early stages of negation processing, the positive counterpart is often represented. Pragmatic research shows that negative sentences have richer pragmatic functions than positive sentences. These findings require a theory of negative sentence processing that can account for both the processing effects and pragmatic functions. Among current theories, a popular approach – rejection approach – attributes the processing effects to the processing of the linguistically coded meaning of negative sentences. They propose that negative sentences are represented as the rejection of their positive counterparts. They state that the representation of the positive counterpart is a mandatory first step of negation processing, and explain the processing cost in terms of the extra step of embedding. Arguing against current theories (especially rejection accounts), I propose the dynamic pragmatic account. In general, sentence processing – with or without explicit context- should not only involve processing the linguistically coded content, but also involve inferring pragmatically retrieved content such as how the sentence relates to the broader discourse. Specifically, when we interpret an assertion, we not only process the asserted meaning, but also the Question Under Discussion (QUD) addressed by this assertion, which can be retrieved and accommodated using linguistic and non-linguistic cues. Negation is a cue for retrieving the prominent QUD. Without contextual support or further cues, the most prominent QUD for a negative sentence ¬p is the positive question whether p. The projection of this positive QUD is due to the most frequent uses of negation, and is sensitive to other factors (e.g. frequency of the predicate and context) and other QUD cues (e.g. prosodic focus and cleft construction). I propose that the accommodation of a positive QUD contributes to the processing cost of negation, explains why the positive counterparts are often represented, and accounts for the pragmatic effects of negative sentences. The dynamic pragmatic account and competing theories are tested in three series of experiments in Chapters 3-5. In Chapter 3, I show that the representation of the positive counterpart is not a mandatory first step for negation processing. Rather it is likely due to QUD accommodation. When a negative sentence projects a negative prominent QUD (such as a cleft negative sentence “It is John who hasn’t ironed his shirt”), the positive counterpart is no longer represented. In Chapter 4, I investigate the verification of negative sentences against pictures. Previous studies have reported inconsistent results where verifying true negative sentences can take less, equal amount or more time than verifying false negatives. I argue that two strategies can be used in the task: the default strategy and the truth-functional strategy. The default strategy is to infer and represent the situation that makes the sentence true and compare it with the evidence. In addition, the accommodation of the positive QUD may encourage the development of a truth-functional strategy, in which participants answer the positive QUD and then switch the truth index. I show that when negative sentences project positive QUDs, there is a training effect: the reaction time pattern of true and false negatives change over time, indicating a development of a taskspecific strategy; on the other hand, when negative sentences project negative QUDs, participants no longer develop the task-specific strategy. In Chapter 5, I investigate the time course of negative sentence processing in a visual world eye-tracking study. The results show that processing simple negative sentences is delayed compared to processing simple positives, but processing cleft negatives is no more delayed than processing cleft positives. Importantly, both QUD accommodation and the integration of the meaning of negation can happen incrementally. Overall, the findings speak against current models of negation processing (especially rejection accounts), and support the dynamic pragmatic account.
BibTeX: @phdthesis{Tian2014, author = {Ye Tian}, title = {Negation Processing: A Dynamic Pragmatic Account}, school = {UCL}, year = {2014}, url = {https://www.academia.edu/download/35133559/thesis_YTian_2014_UCL_final.pdf} }
Tian, Y. and Breheny, R.	Dynamic Pragmatic View of Negation Processing [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Language, Cognition, and Mind, pp. 21-43	incollection	DOI
Abstract: Many psycholinguistic studies have found that processing negative sentences is difficult, and often involves the representation of the positive argument. Current rejection accounts suggest that processing the positive argument is the mandatory first step of negation processing, and the difficulty of negation comes from the extra step of embedding. We argue for a dynamic pragmatic view, suggesting that even when processing a sentence without context, comprehenders retrieve contextual information such as its Question Under Discussion (QUD), using linguistic cues. Without supporting context, negation acts as a cue for retrieving and accommodating the most prominent QUD, where the truth of the positive counterpart is at issue. QUD accommodation happens incrementally and automatically, which triggers the representation of the positive argument and contributes to the extra processing cost related to negation.
BibTeX: @incollection{Tian2016, author = {Ye Tian and Richard Breheny}, title = {Dynamic Pragmatic View of Negation Processing}, booktitle = {Language, Cognition, and Mind}, publisher = {Springer International Publishing}, year = {2016}, pages = {21--43}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-17464-8_2} }
Tian, Y., Ferguson, H. and Breheny, R.	Processing negation without context – why and when we represent the positive argument [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2016	Language, Cognition and Neuroscience Vol. 31(5), pp. 683-698	article	DOI
Abstract: When processing negative sentences without context, participants often represent states of the positive arguments. Why and when does this occur? Using visual world eye-tracking, participants listened to positive and negative sentences in simple or cleft forms (e.g., [It is] Matt [who] hasn’t shut his dad’s window), while looking at scenes containing a target and a competitor (matches or mismatches the implied shape of the final noun). Results show that in the simple but not the cleft condition, there is a difference between negatives and positives: shortly after the verb, there is more looks to the competitor in the simple negatives than the positives. This suggests that the representation of the positive is not a mandatory first step of negation processing (as per rejection accounts). Rather results support the Question Under Discussion (QUD) accommodation account wherein both sentence content and contextual source of relevance are targets of incremental sentence processing.
BibTeX: @article{Tian2016a, author = {Ye Tian and Heather Ferguson and Richard Breheny}, title = {Processing negation without context – why and when we represent the positive argument}, journal = {Language, Cognition and Neuroscience}, publisher = {Informa UK Limited}, year = {2016}, volume = {31}, number = {5}, pages = {683--698}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2016.1140214} }
Tian, Y. and Breheny, R.	Negation [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics	incollection	DOI
Abstract: Negation has long been of interest to logicians and philosophers, and relatively recently to psycholinguists and pragmatists. In terms of the processing of negation, psycholinguistics studies have shown two effects that call for an explanation: the first is the asymmetry between its frequent use in natural language and its apparent processing costs, often reported in psycholinguistics studies; the second is the finding that, in early stages of processing, negation seems to be ignored and attention seems to be focused on its positive argument. In terms of pragmatic functions, it has been shown that despite its simple semantic meaning, negation interacts with context to produce rich pragmatic effects. Both negation processing and its pragmatic functions present puzzles that cannot be explained by its semantic function.
BibTeX: @incollection{Tian2019, author = {Ye Tian and Richard Breheny}, title = {Negation}, booktitle = {The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, year = {2019}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.013.29} }
Degen, J. and Goodman, N.	Lost your marbles The and puzzle of dependent measures in experimental pragmatics [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2014	UC Merced Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society	inproceedings	URL
Abstract: A rarely discussed but important issue in research on pragmatic inference is the choice of dependent measure for estimating the robustness of pragmatic inferences and their sensitivity to contextual manipulations. Here we present the results from three studies exploring the effect of contextual manipulations on scalar implicature. In all three studies we manipulate the salient question under discussion and the perceptual availability of relevant set sizes. The studies differ only in the dependent measure used: Exp. 1 uses truth judgements, Exp. 2 uses word probability ratings, and Exp. 3 uses a direct measure of sentence interpretation. We argue that the first two are effectively measures of production, and find they are sensitive to our contextual manipulations. In contrast the interpretation measure shows no effect of context. We argue that this methodologically troubling finding can be understood and predicted by using the framework of probabilistic pragmatics.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Title2014, author = {Judith Degen and Noah Goodman}, title = {Lost your marbles The and puzzle of dependent measures in experimental pragmatics}, booktitle = {UC Merced Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society}, year = {2014}, url = {https://escholarship.org/uc/item/97t2w1f3} }
Verbuck, A.	Developmental evidence against the theoretical distinction between Horn and pragmatic scales [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2012	Journal of Pragmatics Vol. 44(12), pp. 1680-1700	article	DOI
Abstract: A theoretical distinction between Horn and pragmatic scales that are instrumental in generating scalar implicatures (SIs) is widely accepted in neo-Gricean pragmatics; at the same time, this distinction has been questioned in some neo-Gricean and post-Gricean accounts of SIs. In order to explore whether or not this distinction has a reflex on the way in which children acquire SIs, I tested 40 children (4;3-7;7) on computing SIs based on Horn and pragmatic scales. If this distinction is postulated, children are predicted to perform better on computing SIs based on Horn scales. In my experiment, children did significantly better on computing SIs based on pragmatic scales. Moreover, children performed worse on certain Horn scales than on the pragmatic scales, and better on other Horn scales than on the pragmatic scales. I provide theoretical reasons against distinguishing between Horn and pragmatic scales, and propose my own Context-based QUD account of SIs on which children's performance on computing SIs is a function of challenges presented by individual scales. I identify three major linguistic and cognitive acquisitional challenges presented by scales, and how these predict the timeline of SI acquisition.
BibTeX: @article{Verbuck2012, author = {Anna Verbuck}, title = {Developmental evidence against the theoretical distinction between Horn and pragmatic scales}, journal = {Journal of Pragmatics}, year = {2012}, volume = {44}, number = {12}, pages = {1680-1700}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.07.007} }
Wang, S., Sun, C., Tian, Y. and Breheny, R.	Verifying Negative Sentences [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2021	Journal of Psycholinguistic Research	article	DOI
Abstract: In the long history of psycholinguistic research on verifying negative sentences, an often-reported finding is that participants take longer to correctly judge negative sentences true than false, while being faster to judge their positive counterparts true (e.g. Clark & Chase, Cogn Psychol 3(3):472−517, 1972; Carpenter & Just, Psychol Rev 82(1):45–73, 1975). While many linguists and psycholinguists have strongly advocated the idea that the costs and complexity of negation can be explained by appeal to context, context-based approaches have not been able to provide a satisfying account of this polarity*truth-value interaction. By contrast, the alternative theory of negation processing, which says that negation is processed by separately representing the positive, does provide a plausible account. Our proposals provide a means for reconciliation between the two views since we argue that negation is a strong cue to a positive context. Here we present our account of why and when negation is often apparently processed via the positive. We review many of the factors that are seen to be at play in sentence verification involving negation. We present evidence that participants’ adoption of the positive-first procedure in sentence-picture verification tasks is conditioned by context.
BibTeX: @article{Wang2021, author = {Shenshen Wang and Chao Sun and Ye Tian and Richard Breheny}, title = {Verifying Negative Sentences}, journal = {Journal of Psycholinguistic Research}, publisher = {Springer Science and Business Media LLC}, year = {2021}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-021-09798-9} }
Washburn, M.B.	Narrowing the Focus: Experimental studies on exhaustivity and contrast [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2013	School: University of Southern California	phdthesis	URL
Abstract: Focus structure has a profound effect on language production and processing. Yet, despite that focus has so much influence on an utterance, it still remains unclear what the meaning of focus is. Some theories consider focus to be entirely pragmatic, having no influence on the truth conditions or presuppositions of a focused sentence. Other theories consider focus to have a semantic contribution, contributing either to the truth conditions or the presuppositions of a focused sentence, but even within these, there is disagreement. For instance, von Stechow (1981, 1982) developed a theory in which the meaning of focus is to divide an utterance into an assertion and a background. On the other hand, Rooth (1985) developed a theory in which the meaning of focus is to introduce alternatives to the focused sentence into the derivation. Much of the debate between these theories of meaning has so far centered around how adequately the theory can compositionally account for the congruence between questions and focus in their answers, truth conditional focus association effects with operators like only, and, occasionally, word order. The difficulty for research into focus is that several very different types of theories have been demonstrated to be equivalently capable of accounting for these patterns. This dissertation, then, will attempt to address the question of what focus means from a slightly different angle. Its goal will be to narrow the realm of possible meanings for focus by experimentally testing for one possible property of focus: contrast. Specifically, this dissertation uses five experiments to test whether comprehenders need to compare a focused proposition to other propositions in order to interpret it. It investigates three things: 1) It investigates whether focus accesses a set of alternatives to an utterance. It will be looking for evidence that hearers are using alternatives to interpret a sentence with a focused word. 2) It investigates whether the members of this set are contrasted with the actual utterance. If hearers are using a set of alternatives to interpret focus, it could be the case that they access the set without forming any opinions about its members or the case that they consider all members except the actual proposition to be less ideal or even false. 3) It investigates whether this set of alternatives is accessed as part of the semantic derivation (ex: assertion or presupposition) or as a separate pragmatic process. Furthermore, it investigates whether the presence of a set of alternatives is a part of the truth conditions of a focused sentence (ex: an assertion of the sentence) or a part of the definedness conditions of a focused sentence (ex: a presupposition of the sentence). This dissertation finds that focus has two important properties: focus accesses a set of alternatives and at least this part of its meaning is semantically encoded as either a presupposition, an expressive meaning, or a context definedness condition. Additionally, members of the set of alternatives can be true and are semantic relations of the focused word. Even the English it-cleft is non-exhaustive. This recommends against purely pragmatic accounts of focus, and demonstrates that any theory of focus must include access to a set of alternatives.
BibTeX: @phdthesis{Washburn2013, author = {Mary Byram Washburn}, title = {Narrowing the Focus: Experimental studies on exhaustivity and contrast}, school = {University of Southern California}, year = {2013}, url = {https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/narrowing-focus-experimental-studies-on/docview/1458633257/se-2?accountid=9783} }
Westera, M. and Brasoveanu, A.	Ignorance in context The interaction of and modified numerals and QUDs [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2014	Proceedings of SALT 24	inproceedings	DOI
Abstract: We argue for a purely pragmatic account of the ignorance inferences associated with superlative but not comparative modifiers (at least vs. more than). Ignorance inferences for both modifiers are triggered when the question under discussion (QUD) requires an exact answer, but when these modifiers are used out of the blue the QUD is implicitly reconstructed based on the way these modifiers are typically used, and on the fact that at least n, but not more than n, mentions and does not exclude the lower bound exactly n. The paper presents new experimental evidence for the context-sensitivity of ignorance inferences, and also for the hypothesis that the higher processing cost reported in the literature for superlative modifiers is context-dependent in the exact same way.
BibTeX: @inproceedings{Westera2014, author = {Matthijs Westera and Adrian Brasoveanu}, title = {Ignorance in context The interaction of and modified numerals and QUDs}, booktitle = {Proceedings of SALT 24}, year = {2014}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.3765/salt.v24i0.2436} }
Westera, M.	A pragmatic approach to Hurford disjunctions [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2018		unpublished	URL
Abstract: Hurford disjunctions are disjunctions where one disjunct entails another. Some of these are fine while others seem infelicitous. The predominant approach to this phenomenon relies on Hurford’s Constraint, which states that such disjunctions are generally bad, together with grammatical exhaustification, which can rescue some of them by exhaustifying the weaker disjunct to break the entailment. This paper explores an alternative, based on a non-grammatical, pragmatic approach to exhaustivity. Instead of adopting Hurford’s Constraint it takes the felicitous examples as basic, and aims to explain the infelicitous ones by means of a frequently made assumption about the pragmatics of disjunction. A detailed comparison shows that the two approaches divide the empirical landscape in sometimes surprisingly different ways. Moreover, it shows that several theoretical choices in the field are deeply connected: whether or not to assume the general validity of Hurford’s constraint, whether to adopt a pragmatic or grammatical approach to exhaustivity, and which type of semantics to use as the backbone.
BibTeX: @unpublished{Westera2018, author = {Matthijs Westera}, title = {A pragmatic approach to Hurford disjunctions}, year = {2018}, url = {http://mwestera.humanities.uva.nl/downloads/Westera2018-ms-Hurford.pdf} }
Wilson, E.A.	Children’s development of Quantity, Relevance and Manner implicature understanding and the role of the speaker’s epistemic state [BibTeX]	2017	School: University of Cambridge	phdthesis	DOI
BibTeX: @phdthesis{Wilson2017, author = {Wilson, Elspeth Amabel}, title = {Children’s development of Quantity, Relevance and Manner implicature understanding and the role of the speaker’s epistemic state}, school = {University of Cambridge}, year = {2017}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.17152} }
Wilson, E. and Katsos, N.	Acquiring implicatures [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	Developmental and Clinical Pragmatics	incollection	DOI
Abstract: Children begin to acquire the ability to make inferences based on expectations of speaker co-operativity – implicatures – from the fourth year of life, but gaining adultlike proficiency in more complex communicative situations seems to take several more years. In this chapter we review what is known about children’s developing ability to derive quantity, relevance and manner implicatures, and identify some key ingredients of this development: acquiring knowledge about communication, the world, and vocabulary and grammar; learning the inferencing process itself; and developing social cognition. We suggest that integrating these skills and types of knowledge in conversation is a key challenge faced by children, and outline directions for future research.
BibTeX: @incollection{Wilson2020, author = {Elspeth Wilson and Napoleon Katsos}, title = {Acquiring implicatures}, booktitle = {Developmental and Clinical Pragmatics}, publisher = {de Gruyter Mouton}, year = {2020}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110431056-007} }
Xiang, M., Kramer, A. and Nordmeyer, A.E.	An informativity-based account of negation complexity. [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2020	Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition Vol. 46(10), pp. 1857-1867	article	DOI
Abstract: In sentence comprehension, negative sentences tend to elicit more processing cost than affirmative sentences. A growing body of work has shown that pragmatic context is an important factor that contributes to negation comprehension cost. The nature of this pragmatic effect, however, is yet to be determined. In 4 behavioral experiments, the current study assesses 2 possible pragmatic accounts: the expectation-based and the informativity-based accounts. Our findings suggest that informativity, instead of contextual expectation, is more directly responsible for negation comprehension. Contextual expectation only modulates negation comprehension cost if it facilitates the appropriate type of question under discussion.
BibTeX: @article{Xiang2020, author = {Ming Xiang and Alex Kramer and Ann E. Nordmeyer}, title = {An informativity-based account of negation complexity.}, journal = {Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition}, publisher = {American Psychological Association (APA)}, year = {2020}, volume = {46}, number = {10}, pages = {1857--1867}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000851} }
Yan, M. and Calhoun, S.	Priming Effects of Focus in Mandarin Chinese [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2019	Frontiers in Psychology	article	DOI
Abstract: Psycholinguistic research has long established that focus-marked words have a processing advantage over other words in an utterance, e.g., they are recognized more quickly and remembered better. More recently, studies have shown that listeners infer contextual alternatives to a focused word in a spoken utterance, when marked with a contrastive accent, even when the alternatives are not explicitly mentioned in the discourse. This has been shown by strengthened priming of contextual alternatives to the word, but not other non-contrastive semantic associates, when it is contrastively accented, e.g., after hearing “The customer opened the window," salesman is strongly primed, but not product. This is consistent with Rooth's (1992) theory that focus-marking signals the presence of alternatives to the focus. However, almost all of the research carried out in this area has been on Germanic languages. Further, most of this work has looked only at one kind of focus-marking, by contrastive accenting (prosody). This paper reports on a cross-modal lexical priming study in Mandarin Chinese, looking at whether focus-marking heightens activation, i.e., priming, of words and their alternatives. Two kinds of focus-marking were investigated: prosodic and syntactic. Prosodic prominence is an important means of focus-marking in Chinese, however, it is realized through pitch range expansion, rather than accenting. The results showed that focused words, as well as their alternatives, were primed when the subject prime word carried contrastive prosodic prominence. Syntactic focus-marking, however, did not enhance priming of focused words or their alternatives. Non-contrastive semantic associates were not primed with either kind of focus-marking. These results extend previous findings on focus and alternative priming for the first time to Chinese. They also suggest that the processing advantages of focus, including priming alternatives, are particularly related to prosodic prominence, at least in Chinese and Germanic languages. This research sheds light on what linguistic mechanisms listeners use to identify important information, generate alternatives, and understand implicature necessary for successful communication.
BibTeX: @article{Yan2019, author = {Mengzhu Yan and Sasha Calhoun}, title = {Priming Effects of Focus in Mandarin Chinese}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, year = {2019}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01985} }
Yang, X., Minai, U. and Fiorentino, R.	Context-Sensitivity and Individual Differences in the Derivation of Scalar Implicature [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2018	Frontiers in Psychology Vol. 9	article	DOI
Abstract: The derivation of scalar implicatures for the quantifier some has been widely studied to investigate the computation of pragmatically enriched meanings. For example, the sentence “I found some books” carries the semantic interpretation that at least one book was found, but its interpretation is often enriched to include the implicature that not all the books were found. The implicature is argued to be more likely to arise when it is relevant for addressing a question under discussion (QUD) in the context, e.g., when “I found some books” is uttered in response to “Did you find all the books?” as opposed to “Did you find any books?”. However, most experimental studies have not examined the influence of context on some, instead testing some sentences in isolation. Moreover, no study to our knowledge has examined individual differences in the ability to utilize context in interpreting some, whereas individual variation in deriving implicatures for some sentences in isolation is widely attested, with alternative proposals attributing this variation to individual differences in cognitive resources (e.g., working memory) or personality-based pragmatic abilities (e.g., as assessed by the Autism-Spectrum Quotient). The current study examined how context influences the interpretation of some in a story-sentence matching task, where participants rated some statements (“I cut some steaks”) uttered by one character, in response to another character’s question (QUD) that established the implicature as relevant (“Did you cut all the steaks?”) or irrelevant (“Did you cut any steaks?”). We also examined to what extent individuals’ sensitivity to QUD is modulated by individual differences via a battery of measures assessing cognitive resources, personality-based pragmatic abilities, and language abilities (which have been argued to modulate comprehension in other domains). Our results demonstrate that QUD affects the interpretation of some, and reveal that individual differences in sensitivity to QUD are modulated by both cognitive resources and personality-based pragmatic abilities. While previous studies have argued alternatively for cognitive resources or personality-based pragmatic abilities as important for deriving implicatures for some in isolation, we argue that arriving at a context-sensitive interpretation for some depends on both cognitive and personality-based properties of the individual.
BibTeX: @article{Yang2018, author = {Xiao Yang and Utako Minai and Robert Fiorentino}, title = {Context-Sensitivity and Individual Differences in the Derivation of Scalar Implicature}, journal = {Frontiers in Psychology}, publisher = {Frontiers Media SA}, year = {2018}, volume = {9}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01720} }
Hawthorne, J. and Manley, D.	The Reference Book [Abstract] [BibTeX]	2012		book
Abstract: This book critically examines some widespread views about the semantic phenomenon of reference and the cognitive phenomenon of singular thought. It begins by denying that either is tied to a special relation of causal or epistemic acquaintance. It goes on to challenge the alleged semantic rift between definite and indefinite descriptions on the one hand, and names and demonstratives on the other—a division that has been motivated in part by appeals to considerations of acquaintance. Drawing on recent work in semantics, a more unified account of all four types of expression is explored, according to which none of them paradigmatically fits the profile of a referential term. The authors argue that all four involve existential quantification but admit of uses that exhibit many of the traits associated with reference—a phenomenon that is due to the presence of what we call a ‘singular restriction’ on the existentially quantified domain. The Afterword draws out some implications of the proposed semantic picture for the traditional categories of reference and singular thought.
BibTeX: @book{, author = {John Hawthorne and David Manley}, title = {The Reference Book}, publisher = {Oxford University Press}, year = {2012} }