<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p>In a forced-choice mouse-tracking paradigm, true and false statements (ranging from very true, to ambiguous, to very false) were tested in both affirmative and negated forms. Replicating prior research, mouse trajectories reveal subtle differences in a continuum of true to false statements. However, negation modifies this process, particularly for very true statements (i.e. Bread is not made from sand). The mouse trajectories were more curved with negated sentences, with end-points of the continuum of truth (very true and very false statements) having the greatest area under the curve. The proposed explanation is the pragmatic meaning of a negated statement such as <italic>“Gummie bears are not alive”</italic> is infelicitous, whereas a true statement <italic>“People live on Earth”</italic> is felicitous. This study reveals the online dynamics of processing these statements and possible confusion, particularly when very true statements contain a negation.</p></abstract>

In a forced-choice mouse-tracking paradigm, true and false statements (ranging from very true, to ambiguous, to very false) were tested in both affirmative and negated forms. Replicating prior research, mouse trajectories reveal subtle differences in a continuum of true to false statements. However, negation modifies this process, particularly for very true statements (i.e. Bread is not made from sand). The mouse trajectories were more curved with negated sentences, with end-points of the continuum of truth (very true and very false statements) having the greatest area under the curve. The proposed explanation is the pragmatic meaning of a negated statement such as “Gummie bears are not alive” is infelicitous, whereas a true statement “People live on Earth” is felicitous. This study reveals the online dynamics of processing these statements and possible confusion, particularly when very true statements contain a negation.

Negation Polarizes Agreement Dynamics During Sentence Comprehension

Psychology of Language and Communication

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

{"article-title":"Negation Polarizes Agreement Dynamics During Sentence Comprehension"}

In a forced-choice mouse-tracking paradigm, true and false statements (ranging from very true, to ambiguous, to very false) were tested in both affirmative and...

Negation Polarizes Agreement Dynamics During Sentence Comprehension

Pubblicato online: 13 apr 2020

Pagine: 1 - 21

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2020-0001

Parole chiave
Embodiment, Eye-tracking, Language processing, Metaphor & Figurative, Language, Pragmaticss

© 2020 Stephanie Huette, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Negation Polarizes Agreement Dynamics During Sentence Comprehension

Pubblicato online: 13 apr 2020

Pagine: 1 - 21

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2020-0001

Parole chiaveEmbodiment, Eye-tracking, Language processing, Metaphor & Figurative, Language, Pragmaticss

© 2020 Stephanie Huette, published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Parole chiave
Embodiment, Eye-tracking, Language processing, Metaphor & Figurative, Language, Pragmaticss