Whorfian Hypothesis
Assumes: language determines or influences thinking;
Strong position: language determines thinking
Intermediate position:
language influences thinking
Linguistic Relativity
Ways in which speakers of a language think, are influenced by the language they speak
Language influence on thinking
- Color discrimination
- temporal estimation
- categorization
- can enhance memory and categorical perception
- > only weaker version of Whorfian supported
Pragmatics
Study of the ways language is used and understood in the real world
-> consideration of intended meaning not literal meaning
Intended meaning
literal meaning - semantics
Metaphor
figure of speech that describes an object or action in a way that isn’t literally true, but helps explain an idea or make a comparison
Metaphor Theories
Standard Pragmatic model (Grice) Predication Model (Kintsch)
Standard pragmatic model of Metaphors
Grice, 1975;
Literal meaning is accessed;
-> if literal meaning inadequate: non-literal meaning searched
-> figurative meaning accessed slower than literal (evidence contradicts that)
Predication Model
Kintsch;
Latent semantic analysis content: relations of words in sentence is analyzed
Construction-integration component: interpretations of statements is made
-> appropriate predicate features are selected (“lawyers are sharks”)
Common Ground
Shared knowledge and beliefs of speaker and listener during conversation
-> facilitates communication
Egocentric Heuristic
Strategy used by listeners: interpret what they hear based on own knowledge rather than common ground
-> displayed more by individualist cultures than interdependent
Working Memory Capacity
Ability to store and process information at the same time;
-> higher capacity: better language comprehension (greater vocab, maintain task-goals better, more focused)
Discourse
Language with minimum of several sentences in length (incl. written text and connected speech)
Discourse Inferences
Logic Inferences
Bridging inferences
Elaborative inferences
Logic Inferences
Inferences based on meaning of words
Bridging inferences
Inferences increasing coherence between current and preceding parts of a text
-> backward inferences
Elaborative inferences
Inferences based on our knowledge of the world; expanding on information of content
-> e.g. anticipating future, adding nuances to text that is read
Constructionist Position (Branford)
Inferences in discourse made based on mental models:
- internal representation of possible situation or event
- many automatic inferences are made
- > when reader attempts to read text for enjoyment or mastery
Minimalist Hypothesis (McKoon and Ratcliff)
In absence of specific, goal-directed processes: automatic and strategic inferences made
- > not many automatic inferences made, only necessary ones
- > for quick reading: little background knowledge and text lacks coherence
Anaphor resolution
Attributing to a previously mentioned referent (noun or noun phrase)
- > e.g. Fred sold his house to John, he sold it for 100k;
- > you know who did what
Schema theory (inferences)
Bartlett:
packets of knowledge (e.g. scripts)
-Associative structure: consist of interconnected units
-Basis in multiple episodes
-Lack of unit detail
-Adaptability: change and adapt over time
Complex inferences
Bridgin inferences involving working out causal relationships between two sentences
- Bonding: automatic activation of words from preceding sentences
- Resolution: ensuring interpretation is consistent with contextual information
Schema errors
Rationalization: errors in story recall inconsistent with rememberer’s cultural expectations (e.g. dictator not called hitler)
Levelling: omitting unfamiliar details from recall
Sharpening: selecting certain details for embellishment
Kintsch’s construction-integration model (inferences)
Elements of schema-theory and mental model approach;
- readers turn sentences into propositions (true/false statements)
- three representations constructed: surface, propositional, situation
- Bottom-up during construction
- Top-down during integration
