1 / 62

Talking about Objects

Talking about Objects. Jason Kahn & Jennifer E. Arnold UNC – Chapel Hill Amlap. Did you get the reading group organized for this semester yet?. Did you get the reading group organized for this semester yet?. You wanted a reading group this semester, too?.

anson
Download Presentation

Talking about Objects

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Talking about Objects Jason Kahn & Jennifer E. Arnold UNC – Chapel Hill Amlap

  2. Did you get the reading group organized for this semester yet?

  3. Did you get the reading group organized for this semester yet? You wanted a reading group this semester, too?

  4. Did you get the reading group organized for this semester yet? You wanted a reading group this semester, too?

  5. Why does “reading group” get reduced? • Givenness Explanations • Probability Explanations

  6. Why does “reading group” get reduced? • Givenness Explanations • Uttered words become given in a discourse (Prince 1992) • Given information has a different discourse status/representation (Halliday 1967) • Given discourse information gets reduced on subsequent mention (Fowler & Housum, 1987) • Probability Explanations

  7. Why does “reading group” get reduced? • Givenness Explanations • Uttered words become given in a discourse (Prince 1992) • Given information has a different discourse status/representation (Halliday 1967) • Given discourse information gets reduced on subsequent mention (Fowler & Housum, 1987) • Probability Explanations • Context increases the probability of mentioning a word • Highly probable words get reduced (Bell et al., 2009) • Words that convey little information also get reduced (Levy & Jaeger 2007)

  8. Well, what kind of reading group did you want? [Reading group] Bard & Aylett 2004; Brown-Schmidt 2009

  9. Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction Adapted from Levelt 1989

  10. Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction Givenness

  11. Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction Givenness • Facilitation • Pre-planning

  12. Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction Givenness Probability • Facilitation • Pre-planning

  13. Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction Givenness Probability • Facilitation • Pre-planning • Associative facilitation • Pre-planning

  14. Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction Givenness Probability (Arnold, 1998; Givón, 1983; Tily & Piantodosi, 2009)

  15. Facilitation-Based Reduction • Any stimulus that activates representations that are used for language production should lead to some measurable amount of reduction. This includes probability, givenness, and their combination.

  16. Novel Predictions • Referential events should “count” for reduction

  17. Novel Predictions • Referential events should “count” for reduction • We should observe reduction from non-linguistic information

  18. Novel Predictions • Referential events should “count” for reduction • We should observe reduction from non-linguistic information • We should observe a difference between linguistic and non-linguistic information

  19. Experimental Layout (Exp 1) X X X X

  20. Non-linguistic Stimuli Should Elicit Reduction X X X X

  21. Linguistic Stimuli Should Elicit More Reduction X X X X

  22. We Will Return to Predictability X X X X

  23. Instruction-giving Task Speaker Listener

  24. Move Speaker Listener

  25. Move “The accordion rotates right” Speaker Listener

  26. x 3 Move “The accordion rotates right” Speaker Listener

  27. Move “The toothbrush. The belt. The accordion.” Speaker Listener

  28. Move “The toothbrush. The belt. The accordion.” “The accordion rotates right” Speaker Listener

  29. x 3 Move “The accordion rotates right” Speaker Listener

  30. Move Speaker Listener

  31. Move “The accordion rotates right” Speaker Listener

  32. x 3 Move “The accordion rotates right” Speaker Listener

  33. 1) Or… Or…

  34. 1) 2) Or… Or…

  35. 1) 2) 3) Or… Or… “[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.”

  36. 1) 2) 3) 4) Or… Or… “[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.”

  37. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Or… Or… “[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.” “[Onset] The belt expands.”

  38. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) Or… Or… “[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.” “[Onset] The belt expands.”

  39. 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) Or… Or… “[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.” “[Onset] The belt expands.” “[Onset] The accordion rotates right.”

  40. Analysis • Multi-level Modeled • Information condition (ling, non-ling, control) • Control variables (syllables, imageability, etc.) • Random intercept for subject and item (cross-classified)

  41. Reduced Onset Duration Linguistic = Non-linguistic < Control * Third Instruction: “[Onset] the accordion rotates right”

  42. Reduced Object Duration Linguistic < Non-linguistic < Control * * Third instruction: “[Onset] the accordion shrinks”

  43. Non-linguistic Stimuli Elicited Reduction X X X X

  44. Linguistic Stimuli Elicited More Reduction X X X X

  45. Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction Givenness Predictability

  46. Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction Givenness Predictability

  47. Predictability May (partly) Produce This Effect X X X X See also Lam & Watson 2009

  48. Experimental Layout (Exp 2) X X X X X X

  49. Experiment 2: Is Predictability Necessary? • Reduce the number of instructions per trial to one • Vastly reduce the validity of the prime – the object that gets primed is the object that moves only 12.5% (1/8th) of the time • Changed the relationship between the experimental and control condition 1/8: 7/8:

  50. Experimental Layout (Exp 2) Primed Unprimed

More Related