Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dk4vv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-18T03:23:57.576Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The inference of affective meanings: an experimental study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 October 2014

DANIELA ROSSI ,
MARC DOMINICY  and
RÉGINE KOLINSKY
DANIELA ROSSI*
Affiliation:
Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique-FNRS, Belgium, Centre de Linguistique, Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Belgium, and Unité de Recherche en Neurosciences Cognitives (UNESCOG), Center for Research in Cognition & Neurosciences (CRCN), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Belgium
MARC DOMINICY
Affiliation:
Centre de Linguistique, Faculté de Philosophie et Lettres, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Belgium
RÉGINE KOLINSKY
Affiliation:
Fonds de la Recherche Scientifique-FNRS, Belgium, and Unité de Recherche en Neurosciences Cognitives (UNESCOG), Center for Research in Cognition & Neurosciences (CRCN), Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Belgium
*
†Address for correspondence: Daniela Rossi, Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB), Avenue F. Roosevelt, 50, CP 175, 1050 Brussels, Belgium. e-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Communicating information about our affective states is an important aspect of utterance meaning. Affective meanings can be expressed either explicitly or in an implicit way, for example by using particular linguistic structures like Creative Total Reduplication (CTR), the intentional and immediate repetition of a word (“It’s a little little cat”). We claim that, in addition to its explicit meaning (‘very little’), CTR conveys an affective meaning reflecting the speaker’s evaluation of the world as good or bad, pleasant or unpleasant (“It’s a cute little cat”). The experiment reported here used a verification task with judgments of consistency. It aimed at verifying two hypotheses: first, the presence of CTR generates valued affective inferences; second, affective inferences are generated faster with CTR than with the simplex (i.e., non-reduplicated) form. Results strongly confirm the first hypothesis and disconfirm the second.

Keywords

affective evaluationaffective meaningsCreative Total Reduplicationexperimental pragmaticsinference
Type
Research Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , September 2015 , pp. 351 - 370
Copyright
Copyright © UK Cognitive Linguistics Association 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

references

Audacity Team (2011). Audacity (Version 1.3.13-beta) [Computer software]. Online: <http://audacity.sourceforge.net/>..>Google Scholar
Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Bolker, B. (2012). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. CRAN. R project. Online: <http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/lme4.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Besnier, N. (1990). Language and affect. Annual Review of Anthropology, 19, 419–451.Google Scholar
Boersma, P. (2001). Praat: a system for doing phonetics by computer. Glot International, 5, 341–345.Google Scholar
Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2013). Praat: doing phonetics by computer (Version 5.3.42) [Computer software]. Online: <http://www.praat.org/>..>Google Scholar
Bransford, J. D., Barclay, R. J., & Francks, J. J. (1972). Sentence memory: a constructive versus interpretive approach. Cognitive Psychology, 3, 193−209.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bransford, J. D., & Francks, J. J. (1971). The abstraction of linguistic ideas. Cognitive Psychology, 2, 331–350.Google Scholar
Cook, A. E., Limber, J. E., & O’Brien, E. J. (2001). Situation-based context and the availability of predictive inferences. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 220−234.Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A. (1994). Activating knowledge of fictional characters’ emotional states. In Weaver, C. A., Mannes, S., & Fletcher, C. R. (Eds.), Discourse comprehension: essays in honor of Walter Kintsch (pp. 141−155). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. A., Goldsmith, H. H., & Robertson, R. (1992). Do readers mentally represent characters’ emotional states? Cognition and Emotion, 6(2), 89−111.Google Scholar
Ghomeshi, J., Jackendoff, R., Rosen, N., & Russell, K. (2004). Contrastive focus reduplication in English (the salad-salad paper). Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 22, 307−357.Google Scholar
Graesser, A. C., Singer, M., & Trabasso, T. (1994). Constructing inferences during text comprehension. Psychological Review 101(3), 371−395.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gygax, P. (2010). L’inférence émotionnelle durant la lecture et sa composante comportementale. L’Année Psychologique, 110, 253−273.Google Scholar
Gygax, P., Garnham, A., & Oakhill, J. (2004). Inferring characters’ emotional states: can readers infer specific emotions? Language and Cognitive Processes, 19, 613−639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaschak, M. P., & Glenberg, A. M. (2000). Constructing meaning: the role of affordances and grammatical construction in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 508−529.Google Scholar
Keenan, J. M., Potts, G. R., Golding, J. M., & Jennings, T. M. (1990). Which elaborative inferences are drawn during reading? A question of methodologies. In Balota, D. A., d’Arcais, F., & Rayner, K. (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 377–403). Hove: LEA.Google Scholar
Kouwenberg, S., & LaCharité, D. (2005). Less is more: evidence from diminutive reduplication in Caribbean Creole languages. In Hurch, B. (Ed.), Studies on reduplication (pp. 533−547). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Levinson, S. (2000). Presumptive meanings: the theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1988). Contextually relevant aspects of meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 14(2), 331−343.Google ScholarPubMed
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1989). Semantic associations and elaborative inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 15(2), 326−338.Google Scholar
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99(3), 440−466.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgenstern, A., & Michaud, A. (2007). La réduplication: Universaux iconiques et valeurs en système. Faits de Langue, 29, 117−124.Google Scholar
Rossi, D. (2011). Lexical reduplication and affective contents: a pragmatic and experimental perspective. In Bochner, G., De Brabanter, Ph., Kissine, M., & Rossi, D. (Eds.), Cognitive and empirical pragmatics: issues and perspectives (pp. 148−175). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Rubino, C. (2005). Reduplication: form, function and distribution. In Hurch, B. (Ed.), Studies on reduplication (pp. 11–29). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scherer, K. R. (2005). What are emotions? And how can they be measured? Social Science Information, 44(4), 695−729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-prime reference guide. Pittsburgh, PA: Psychology Software Tools Inc.Google Scholar
Schwarz, N. (2007). Attitude construction: evaluation in context. Social Cognition, 25(5), 638−656.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singer, M. (2007). Inference processing in discourse comprehension. In Gaskell, M. G. (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 343−359). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Stolz, T. (2008). Grammatica ex nihilo? Total reduplication and grammaticalisation. Paper presented at the conference New Reflections on Grammaticalization 4, University of Leuven. Online: <http://wwwling.arts.kuleuven.be/nrg4/>..>Google Scholar
Stolz, T., Stroh, C., & Urdze, A. (2011). Total reduplication: the areal linguistics of a potential universal. Bremen: Akademie Verlag.Google Scholar
Wharton, T. (2009). Pragmatics and non-verbal communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wierzbicka, A. (1991). Cross-cultural pragmatics: the semantic of human interaction (Trends in Linguistics, Studies and Monographs 53) (esp. chapter 7). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Wilson, D., & Sperber, D. (2004). Relevance Theory. In Horn, L. & Ward, G. (Eds.), The handbook of pragmatics (pp. 607–632). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar