Abstract
A sentence such as We finished the paper is indeterminate with regards to what we finished doing with the paper. Indeterminate sentences constitute a test case for two major issues regarding language comprehension: (1) how we compose sentence meaning; and (2) what is retained in memory about what we read in context over time. In an eye-tracking experiment, participants read short stories that were unexpectedly followed by one of three recognition probes: (a) an indeterminate sentence (Lisa began the book), that is identical to the one in the story; (b) an enriched but false probe (Lisa began reading the book); and (c) a contextually unrelated probe (Lisa began writing the book). The probes were presented either at the offset of the original indeterminate sentence in context or following additional neutral discourse. We measured accuracy, probe recognition time, and reading times of the probe sentences. Results showed that, at the immediate time point, participants correctly accepted the identical probes with high accuracy and short recognition times, but that this effect reversed to chance-level accuracy and significantly longer recognition times at the delayed time point. We also found that participants falsely accept the enriched probe at both time points 50% of the time. There were no reading-time differences between identical and enriched probes, suggesting that enrichment might not be an early, mandatory process for indeterminate sentences. Overall, results suggest that while context produces an enriched proposition, an unenriched proposition true to the indeterminate sentence also lingers in memory.
Highlights
Sentences such as Lisa began the book are semantically indeterminate because they are not explicit about the event that the speaker intends to convey
This study suggests that the proposition consistent with the original indeterminate sentence lingers in memory, against the view that sentences are enriched by mandatory, default semantic processes
At the immediate probe time position, participants recognized the identical probe with significantly greater accuracy than the enriched probe (z-ratio = 5.58, p < 0.001)
Summary
Sentences such as Lisa began the book are semantically indeterminate because they are not explicit about the event that the speaker intends to convey. Fodor and Lepore, 2002; de Almeida and Dwivedi, 2008; de Swart, 2012; Asher, 2015; de Almeida and Lepore, 2018). One is based on the lexical constituents and how they are combined syntactically, known as “classical” compositionality (e.g., Partee, 1995; Fodor and Lepore, 2002). The other, known as “enriched” compositionality (e.g., Pustejovsky, 1995; Jackendoff, 2002; Recanati, 2004), is based on the features of these lexical constituents and other so-called unarticulated or default constituents
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
