How do speakers avoid ambiguous linguistic expressions?

被引:82
作者
Ferreira, VS [1 ]
Slevc, LR
Rogers, ES
机构
[1] Univ Calif San Diego, Dept Psychol, La Jolla, CA 92093 USA
[2] Univ Calif Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA USA
关键词
language production; referential communication; ambiguity; monitoring; homophones;
D O I
10.1016/j.cognition.2004.09.002
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Three experiments assessed how speakers avoid linguistically and nonlinguistically ambiguous expressions. Speakers described target objects (a flying mammal, bat) in contexts including foil objects that caused linguistic (a baseball bat) and nonlinguistic (a larger flying mammal) ambiguity. Speakers sometimes avoided linguistic-ambiguity, and they did so equally regardless of whether they also were about to describe foils. This suggests that comprehension processes can sometimes detect linguistic-ambiguity before producing it. However, once produced, speakers consistently avoided using the same linguistically ambiguous expression again for a different meaning. This suggests that production processes can successfully detect linguistic-ambiguity after-the-fact. Speakers almost always avoided nonlinguistic-ambiguity. Thus, production processes are especially sensitive to nonlinguistic- but not linguistic-ambiguity, with the latter avoided consistently only once it is already articulated. (c) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:263 / 284
页数:22
相关论文
共 39 条
[1]   Reliability of prosodic cues for resolving syntactic ambiguity [J].
Allbritton, DW ;
McKoon, G ;
Ratcliff, R .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 1996, 22 (03) :714-735
[2]   Timed picture naming in seven languages [J].
Bates, E ;
D'Amico, S ;
Jacobsen, T ;
Székely, A ;
Andonova, E ;
Devescovi, A ;
Herron, D ;
Lu, CC ;
Pechmann, T ;
Pléh, C ;
Wicha, N ;
Federmeier, K ;
Gerdjikova, I ;
Gutierrez, G ;
Hung, D ;
Hsu, J ;
Iyer, G ;
Kohnert, K ;
Mehotcheva, T ;
Orozco-Figueroa, A ;
Tzeng, A ;
Tzeng, O .
PSYCHONOMIC BULLETIN & REVIEW, 2003, 10 (02) :344-380
[4]   Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation [J].
Brennan, SE ;
Clark, HH .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 1996, 22 (06) :1482-1493
[5]   How many levels of processing are there in lexical access? [J].
Caramazza, A .
COGNITIVE NEUROPSYCHOLOGY, 1997, 14 (01) :177-208
[6]   The specific-word frequency effect: Implications for the representation of homophones in speech production [J].
Caramazza, A ;
Costa, A ;
Miozzo, M ;
Bi, YC .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 2001, 27 (06) :1430-1450
[7]   PSYSCOPE - AN INTERACTIVE GRAPHIC SYSTEM FOR DESIGNING AND CONTROLLING EXPERIMENTS IN THE PSYCHOLOGY LABORATORY USING MACINTOSH COMPUTERS [J].
COHEN, J ;
MACWHINNEY, B ;
FLATT, M ;
PROVOST, J .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS INSTRUMENTS & COMPUTERS, 1993, 25 (02) :257-271
[8]  
CRAIG TB, 1995, 8 ANN CUNY C HUM SEN
[9]   Semantic and phonological information flow in the production lexicon [J].
Cutting, JC ;
Ferreira, VS .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-LEARNING MEMORY AND COGNITION, 1999, 25 (02) :318-344
[10]   A SPREADING-ACTIVATION THEORY OF RETRIEVAL IN SENTENCE PRODUCTION [J].
DELL, GS .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1986, 93 (03) :283-321