DOC PREVIEW
UT PSY 394U - Lecture notes

This preview shows page 1-2-3-4-24-25-26-50-51-52-53 out of 53 pages.

Save
View full document
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
View full document
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience
Premium Document
Do you want full access? Go Premium and unlock all 53 pages.
Access to all documents
Download any document
Ad free experience

Unformatted text preview:

Restriction of referential domains 1 Running Head: Referential domains in conversation This uncorrected manuscript has been accepted for publication in Cognitive Science. Real-time investigation of referential domains in unscripted conversation: a targeted language game approach Sarah Brown-Schmidt Michael K. Tanenhaus Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences University of Rochester Please direct correspondence to: Sarah Brown-Schmidt Beckman Institute 405 N Mathews Ave. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign Urbana, IL 61801 tel: (217) 244-4787 fax: (217) 333-2922 e-mail: [email protected] of referential domains 2 Abstract Two experiments examined the restriction of referential domains during unscripted conversation by analyzing the modification and on-line interpretation of referring expressions. Experiment 1 demonstrated that from the earliest moments of processing, addressees interpreted referring expressions with respect to referential domains constrained by the conversation. Analysis of eye movements during the conversation showed elimination of standard competition effects seen with scripted language. Results from Experiment 2 pinpointed two pragmatic factors responsible for restriction of the referential domains used by speakers to design referential expressions and demonstrated that the same factors predict whether addressees consider local competitors to be potential referents during on-line interpretation of the same expressions. These experiments demonstrate for the first time that on-line interpretation of referring expressions in conversation is facilitated by referential domains constrained by pragmatic factors which predict when addressees are likely to encounter temporary ambiguity in language processing. Keywords: Eye-tracking; conversation; alignment; on-line; language processing; referential communication; cohort; point-of-disambiguation.Restriction of referential domains 3 1. Introduction Most psycholinguistic research on spoken language comprehension can be divided into one of two traditions, each with its roots in seminal work from the 1960s (Clark, 1992; Trueswell & Tanenhaus, 2005), and each with its own characteristic theoretical concerns and dominant methodologies. The language-as-product tradition has its roots in George Miller’s synthesis of the then emerging information processing paradigm and Chomsky's theory of transformational grammar (e.g. Miller, 1962; Miller & Chomsky, 1963). The product tradition emphasizes the individual cognitive processes by which listeners recover linguistic representations—the ‘products’ of language comprehension. Psycholinguistic research within the product tradition typically examines moment-by-moment processes in real-time language processing, using carefully controlled stimuli, scripted materials, and fine-grained on-line measures that are closely time-locked to the input. The motivation for on-line measures comes from two observations. The first is that speech unfolds over time as a series of rapidly changing acoustic events. The second is that listeners continuously integrate the input, making provisional commitments at multiple levels of representations (Marslen-Wilson, 1973; 1975; Tanenhaus, Spivey-Knowlton, Eberhard, & Sedivy, 1995). As a consequence, evaluating models of how linguistic representations are accessed, constructed and integrated requires data that can only be obtained from response measures that are closely time-locked to the input and sensitive to how the listener’s representations change as the input unfolds in time. One case-in-point is temporary ambiguity. One of the consequences of the combination of sequential input and continuous processing is that listeners are continuously faced with resolving temporary ambiguity at multiple levels of representation. For example, the initial sounds of clown are briefly consistent with both cloud and clown. Response measures that are closely time-locked to the input have revealed that as a listener hears clown, both cloud and clown are briefly activated, with activation to cloud decreasing as soon as coarticulatory information in the vowel becomes more consistent with clown (Dahan, Magnuson, Tanenhaus, & Hogan, 2001; Zwitserlood, 1989). Similarly, in a context that includes both a large silver fork and a large silver spoon, a listener hearing the large silver spoon will actively consider both as potential referents until the disambiguating sounds at the onset of spoon (Eberhard, Spivey-Restriction of referential domains 4 Knowlton, Sedivy, & Tanenhaus, 1995; Hanna, Tanenhaus, & Trueswell, 2003). Response measures that are not closely time-locked to the input are of limited value for examining processes like these, which are central to language processing. The language-as-action tradition has its roots in work by the Oxford philosophers of language use, e.g., Austin, (1962), Grice (1957) and Searle (1969), and work on conversational analysis, e.g., Schegloff and Sachs (1973). The action tradition focuses on how people use language to perform acts in conversation--the most basic form of language use. Psycholinguistic research within the action tradition typically examines unscripted interactive conversation involving two or more participants engaged in a cooperative task, typically with real-world referents and well-defined behavioral goals. One reason is that many aspects of utterances in a conversation can only be understood with respect to the context of the language use, which includes the time, place and participant’s conversational goals, as well as the collaborative processes that are intrinsic to conversation. Moreover, many characteristic features of conversation emerge only when interlocutors have joint goals and when they participate in a dialogue both as a speaker and an addressee. Detailed analyses of participants’ linguistic behavior and actions in cooperative tasks have provided important insights into how interlocutors track information to achieve successful communication. They demonstrate that many aspects of communication, establishing successful reference, for instance, are not simply individual cognitive processes; they are achieved as the result of coordinated actions among two or more individuals across multiple linguistic and non-linguistic exchanges (Bangerter, 2004; Clark & Wilkes-Gibbs, 1986; Clark & Krych, 2004; Gergle, Kraut, & Fussell, 2004; Schober & Brennan, 2003). The


View Full Document

UT PSY 394U - Lecture notes

Documents in this Course
Roadmap

Roadmap

6 pages

Load more
Download Lecture notes
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view Lecture notes and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view Lecture notes 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?