Pragmatic influences on sentence integration: Evidence from eye movements
Lijing Chen, Kevin B. Paterson, Xingshan Li, Li Lin, Yufang Yang
Fujian Normal University Institute of Psychology, Chinese Academy of Sciences University of Leicester Tianjin Normal University
阅读操作
确认中在文库中上传 PDF 后可生成中文音频讲解。
摘要与影响
To understand a discourse, readers must rapidly process semantic and syntactic information and extract the pragmatic information these sources imply. An important question concerns how this pragmatic information influences discourse processing in return. We address this issue in two eye movement experiments that investigate the influence of pragmatic inferences on the processing of inter-sentence integration. In Experiments 1a and 1b, participants read two-sentence discourses in Chinese in which the first sentence introduced an event and the second described its consequence, where the sentences were linked using either the causal connective “suoyi” (meaning “so” or “therefore”) or not. The second sentence included a target word that was unmarked or marked using the focus particle “zhiyou” (meaning “only”) in Experiment 1a or “shi” (equivalent to an it-cleft) in Experiment 1b. These particles have the pragmatic function of implying a contrast between a target element and its alternatives. The results showed that while the causal connective facilitated the processing of unmarked words in causal contexts (a connective facilitation effect), this effect was eliminated by the presence of the focus particle. This implies that contrastive information is inferred sufficiently rapidly during reading that it can influence semantic processes involved in sentence integration. Experiment 2 showed that disruption due to conflict between the processing requirements of focus and inter-sentence integration occurred only in causal and not adversative connective contexts, confirming that processing difficulty occurred when a contrastive relationship was not possible.
逐年被引趋势
关键指标
同类平均 = 1
同领域 · 同年份 · 同类型
Google Scholar 与 OpenAlex 的被引统计范围不同,数值存在差异属正常。
AI 辅助阅读
依据:摘要
可就本文提问;依据不足时会说明。
学术脉络
学科主题
生物医学Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Second Language Acquisition and Learning · Reading and Literacy Development
参考文献 45
此处列出前 3 条
引用本文 9
按被引量排序,此处列出前 3 条