Loading…
Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study
This work employs Evoked Potential techniques as 19 participants are confronted with sentences that have the potential to produce scalar implicatures, like in Some elephants have trunks. Such an Underinformative utterance is of interest to pragmatists because it can be considered to have two differe...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Brain and language 2003-05, Vol.85 (2), p.203-210 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Subjects: | |
| Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a597t-8fe6336574d3ff640dfc6504cacfe44b88580190e7a27e57ae715a8ef71729753 |
|---|---|
| cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a597t-8fe6336574d3ff640dfc6504cacfe44b88580190e7a27e57ae715a8ef71729753 |
| container_end_page | 210 |
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 203 |
| container_title | Brain and language |
| container_volume | 85 |
| creator | Noveck, Ira A Posada, Andres |
| description | This work employs Evoked Potential techniques as 19 participants are confronted with sentences that have the potential to produce scalar implicatures, like in
Some elephants have trunks. Such an Underinformative utterance is of interest to pragmatists because it can be considered to have two different truth values. It can be considered true when taken at face value but false if one were to treat
Some with the implicature
Not All. Two accounts of implicature production are compared. The neo-Gricean approach (e.g.,
Levinson, 2000) assumes that implicatures intrude automatically on the semantics of a term like
Some. Relevance Theory (
Sperber & Wilson, 1985/1996) assumes that implicatures are effortful and not automatic. In this experiment, the participants are presented with 25 Underinformative sentences along with 25 sentences that are Patently True (e.g.
Some houses have bricks) and 25 that are Patently False (e.g.
Some crows have radios). As reported in an earlier study (
Noveck, 2001), Underinformative sentences prompt strong individual differences. Seven participants here responded true to all (or nearly all) of the Underinformative sentences and the remaining 12 responded false to all (or nearly all) of them. The present study showed that those who responded false to the Underinformative sentences took significantly longer to do so that those who responded true. The ERP data indicate that: (a) the Patently True and Patently False sentences prompt steeper N400’s—indicating greater semantic integration—than the Underinformative sentences and that (b)
regardless of one’s ultimate response to the Underinformative sentences, the N400’s were remarkably flat, indicating no particular reaction to these sentences. Collectively, the data are taken to show that implicatures are part of a late-arriving, effort-demanding decision process. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00053-1 |
| format | article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_hal_p</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_00653805v1</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0093934X03000531</els_id><sourcerecordid>73236368</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a597t-8fe6336574d3ff640dfc6504cacfe44b88580190e7a27e57ae715a8ef71729753</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqF0UFPHCEYBmBi2uhW_Qk2XNrUw9iPYRgYL2azaavJJh5qk94IMh9d2plhBWYT--uddTd69EQgD_DlfQk5Y3DBgNVffwI0vGh49fsL8HMAELxgB2TGoIGiZEK8I7MXckQ-pPQXgLFKsUNyxErJRcPVjCwXKxONzRj9fz_8oXmFNPseqQ1jTEiDo2agvl933po8Rryk84HiJvzDlq5DxiF70yWa8tg-npD3btrg6X49Jr--f7tbXBfL2x83i_myMKKRuVAOa85rIauWO1dX0DpbC6issQ6r6l4poYA1gNKUEoU0KJkwCp1ksmyk4MfkfPfuynR6HX1v4qMOxuvr-VJvzwBqwRWIDZvs551dx_AwYsq698li15kBw5i0EkJOcZVvQslLXvNaTVDsoI0hpYjuZQQGetuNfu5Gb4PXwPVzN3o7ycf9B-N9j-3rrX0ZE_i0ByZZ07loBuvTq6uUACbl5K52DqeMNx6jTtbjYLH1EW3WbfBvjPIEpFGpxQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>73236368</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection 2022-2024</source><source>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</source><creator>Noveck, Ira A ; Posada, Andres</creator><creatorcontrib>Noveck, Ira A ; Posada, Andres</creatorcontrib><description>This work employs Evoked Potential techniques as 19 participants are confronted with sentences that have the potential to produce scalar implicatures, like in
Some elephants have trunks. Such an Underinformative utterance is of interest to pragmatists because it can be considered to have two different truth values. It can be considered true when taken at face value but false if one were to treat
Some with the implicature
Not All. Two accounts of implicature production are compared. The neo-Gricean approach (e.g.,
Levinson, 2000) assumes that implicatures intrude automatically on the semantics of a term like
Some. Relevance Theory (
Sperber & Wilson, 1985/1996) assumes that implicatures are effortful and not automatic. In this experiment, the participants are presented with 25 Underinformative sentences along with 25 sentences that are Patently True (e.g.
Some houses have bricks) and 25 that are Patently False (e.g.
Some crows have radios). As reported in an earlier study (
Noveck, 2001), Underinformative sentences prompt strong individual differences. Seven participants here responded true to all (or nearly all) of the Underinformative sentences and the remaining 12 responded false to all (or nearly all) of them. The present study showed that those who responded false to the Underinformative sentences took significantly longer to do so that those who responded true. The ERP data indicate that: (a) the Patently True and Patently False sentences prompt steeper N400’s—indicating greater semantic integration—than the Underinformative sentences and that (b)
regardless of one’s ultimate response to the Underinformative sentences, the N400’s were remarkably flat, indicating no particular reaction to these sentences. Collectively, the data are taken to show that implicatures are part of a late-arriving, effort-demanding decision process.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0093-934X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1090-2155</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00053-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 12735938</identifier><identifier>CODEN: BRLGAZ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>San Diego, CA: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adolescent ; Adult ; Anatomical correlates of behavior ; Behavioral psychophysiology ; Biological and medical sciences ; Brain - physiology ; Cognitive science ; Electroencephalography ; Electrooculography ; Evoked Potentials - physiology ; Functional Laterality - physiology ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Humans ; Implicature ; Language ; Linguistic-Pragmatics ; Linguistics ; N400 ; Neuroscience ; Psychology ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Reaction Time ; Scalar terms ; Semantics ; Speech Perception</subject><ispartof>Brain and language, 2003-05, Vol.85 (2), p.203-210</ispartof><rights>2003</rights><rights>2003 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a597t-8fe6336574d3ff640dfc6504cacfe44b88580190e7a27e57ae715a8ef71729753</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a597t-8fe6336574d3ff640dfc6504cacfe44b88580190e7a27e57ae715a8ef71729753</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,315,786,790,891,27957,27958,31305</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=14850177$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12735938$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://hal.science/hal-00653805$$DView record in HAL$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Noveck, Ira A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Posada, Andres</creatorcontrib><title>Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study</title><title>Brain and language</title><addtitle>Brain Lang</addtitle><description>This work employs Evoked Potential techniques as 19 participants are confronted with sentences that have the potential to produce scalar implicatures, like in
Some elephants have trunks. Such an Underinformative utterance is of interest to pragmatists because it can be considered to have two different truth values. It can be considered true when taken at face value but false if one were to treat
Some with the implicature
Not All. Two accounts of implicature production are compared. The neo-Gricean approach (e.g.,
Levinson, 2000) assumes that implicatures intrude automatically on the semantics of a term like
Some. Relevance Theory (
Sperber & Wilson, 1985/1996) assumes that implicatures are effortful and not automatic. In this experiment, the participants are presented with 25 Underinformative sentences along with 25 sentences that are Patently True (e.g.
Some houses have bricks) and 25 that are Patently False (e.g.
Some crows have radios). As reported in an earlier study (
Noveck, 2001), Underinformative sentences prompt strong individual differences. Seven participants here responded true to all (or nearly all) of the Underinformative sentences and the remaining 12 responded false to all (or nearly all) of them. The present study showed that those who responded false to the Underinformative sentences took significantly longer to do so that those who responded true. The ERP data indicate that: (a) the Patently True and Patently False sentences prompt steeper N400’s—indicating greater semantic integration—than the Underinformative sentences and that (b)
regardless of one’s ultimate response to the Underinformative sentences, the N400’s were remarkably flat, indicating no particular reaction to these sentences. Collectively, the data are taken to show that implicatures are part of a late-arriving, effort-demanding decision process.</description><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Anatomical correlates of behavior</subject><subject>Behavioral psychophysiology</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Brain - physiology</subject><subject>Cognitive science</subject><subject>Electroencephalography</subject><subject>Electrooculography</subject><subject>Evoked Potentials - physiology</subject><subject>Functional Laterality - physiology</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implicature</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Linguistic-Pragmatics</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>N400</subject><subject>Neuroscience</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Reaction Time</subject><subject>Scalar terms</subject><subject>Semantics</subject><subject>Speech Perception</subject><issn>0093-934X</issn><issn>1090-2155</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7T9</sourceid><recordid>eNqF0UFPHCEYBmBi2uhW_Qk2XNrUw9iPYRgYL2azaavJJh5qk94IMh9d2plhBWYT--uddTd69EQgD_DlfQk5Y3DBgNVffwI0vGh49fsL8HMAELxgB2TGoIGiZEK8I7MXckQ-pPQXgLFKsUNyxErJRcPVjCwXKxONzRj9fz_8oXmFNPseqQ1jTEiDo2agvl933po8Rryk84HiJvzDlq5DxiF70yWa8tg-npD3btrg6X49Jr--f7tbXBfL2x83i_myMKKRuVAOa85rIauWO1dX0DpbC6issQ6r6l4poYA1gNKUEoU0KJkwCp1ksmyk4MfkfPfuynR6HX1v4qMOxuvr-VJvzwBqwRWIDZvs551dx_AwYsq698li15kBw5i0EkJOcZVvQslLXvNaTVDsoI0hpYjuZQQGetuNfu5Gb4PXwPVzN3o7ycf9B-N9j-3rrX0ZE_i0ByZZ07loBuvTq6uUACbl5K52DqeMNx6jTtbjYLH1EW3WbfBvjPIEpFGpxQ</recordid><startdate>20030501</startdate><enddate>20030501</enddate><creator>Noveck, Ira A</creator><creator>Posada, Andres</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>8BM</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>1XC</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20030501</creationdate><title>Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study</title><author>Noveck, Ira A ; Posada, Andres</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a597t-8fe6336574d3ff640dfc6504cacfe44b88580190e7a27e57ae715a8ef71729753</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Anatomical correlates of behavior</topic><topic>Behavioral psychophysiology</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Brain - physiology</topic><topic>Cognitive science</topic><topic>Electroencephalography</topic><topic>Electrooculography</topic><topic>Evoked Potentials - physiology</topic><topic>Functional Laterality - physiology</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implicature</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Linguistic-Pragmatics</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>N400</topic><topic>Neuroscience</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Reaction Time</topic><topic>Scalar terms</topic><topic>Semantics</topic><topic>Speech Perception</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Noveck, Ira A</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Posada, Andres</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>Hyper Article en Ligne (HAL)</collection><jtitle>Brain and language</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Noveck, Ira A</au><au>Posada, Andres</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study</atitle><jtitle>Brain and language</jtitle><addtitle>Brain Lang</addtitle><date>2003-05-01</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>85</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>203</spage><epage>210</epage><pages>203-210</pages><issn>0093-934X</issn><eissn>1090-2155</eissn><coden>BRLGAZ</coden><notes>ObjectType-Article-1</notes><notes>SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1</notes><notes>ObjectType-Feature-2</notes><notes>content type line 23</notes><abstract>This work employs Evoked Potential techniques as 19 participants are confronted with sentences that have the potential to produce scalar implicatures, like in
Some elephants have trunks. Such an Underinformative utterance is of interest to pragmatists because it can be considered to have two different truth values. It can be considered true when taken at face value but false if one were to treat
Some with the implicature
Not All. Two accounts of implicature production are compared. The neo-Gricean approach (e.g.,
Levinson, 2000) assumes that implicatures intrude automatically on the semantics of a term like
Some. Relevance Theory (
Sperber & Wilson, 1985/1996) assumes that implicatures are effortful and not automatic. In this experiment, the participants are presented with 25 Underinformative sentences along with 25 sentences that are Patently True (e.g.
Some houses have bricks) and 25 that are Patently False (e.g.
Some crows have radios). As reported in an earlier study (
Noveck, 2001), Underinformative sentences prompt strong individual differences. Seven participants here responded true to all (or nearly all) of the Underinformative sentences and the remaining 12 responded false to all (or nearly all) of them. The present study showed that those who responded false to the Underinformative sentences took significantly longer to do so that those who responded true. The ERP data indicate that: (a) the Patently True and Patently False sentences prompt steeper N400’s—indicating greater semantic integration—than the Underinformative sentences and that (b)
regardless of one’s ultimate response to the Underinformative sentences, the N400’s were remarkably flat, indicating no particular reaction to these sentences. Collectively, the data are taken to show that implicatures are part of a late-arriving, effort-demanding decision process.</abstract><cop>San Diego, CA</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>12735938</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00053-1</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0093-934X |
| ispartof | Brain and language, 2003-05, Vol.85 (2), p.203-210 |
| issn | 0093-934X 1090-2155 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_hal_primary_oai_HAL_hal_00653805v1 |
| source | ScienceDirect Freedom Collection 2022-2024; Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA) |
| subjects | Adolescent Adult Anatomical correlates of behavior Behavioral psychophysiology Biological and medical sciences Brain - physiology Cognitive science Electroencephalography Electrooculography Evoked Potentials - physiology Functional Laterality - physiology Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology Humans Implicature Language Linguistic-Pragmatics Linguistics N400 Neuroscience Psychology Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry Psychology. Psychophysiology Reaction Time Scalar terms Semantics Speech Perception |
| title | Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study |
| url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-09-22T09%3A28%3A07IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_hal_p&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Characterizing%20the%20time%20course%20of%20an%20implicature:%20An%20evoked%20potentials%20study&rft.jtitle=Brain%20and%20language&rft.au=Noveck,%20Ira%20A&rft.date=2003-05-01&rft.volume=85&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=203&rft.epage=210&rft.pages=203-210&rft.issn=0093-934X&rft.eissn=1090-2155&rft.coden=BRLGAZ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00053-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_hal_p%3E73236368%3C/proquest_hal_p%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a597t-8fe6336574d3ff640dfc6504cacfe44b88580190e7a27e57ae715a8ef71729753%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=73236368&rft_id=info:pmid/12735938&rfr_iscdi=true |