Abstract
This study examined the interpretation and processing of third-person pronouns when global discourse context supports a less-salient referent as antecedent of a subject pronoun. In particular, we investigated whether such information cancels a default generalized conversational implicature (GCI) biasing a local subject antecedent interpretation for an English overt pronoun. Eye-tracking data was recorded as participants heard four-sentence mini-stories with one of three Contexts: one biasing the subject of the previous clause as antecedent (SB), one biasing another human referent (OB), and one neutral to biasing either referent. Results showed that looking patterns did not diverge in OB and Neutral conditions until after crucial information tying into the larger discourse context was given in the post-pronoun verb. Strong preferences for non-subject referents did not emerge until after the sentence ended, a time-course consistent with participants calculating and then cancelling a default implicature for a subject antecedent. Meanwhile, discourse context reinforcing the default subject implicature in the SB condition facilitated processing, in terms of less time spent looking at either human referent compared the Neutral condition. Overall, results suggest that upon hearing an overt pronoun, English speakers first calculate a GCI that results in a local subject antecedent interpretation, but that, like all implicatures, this GCI can be defeated by contextual factors.
Highlights
This paper investigates the interpretation and processing of English thirdperson pronouns when the global discourse context supports a less-salient referent as the pronominal antecedent, In particular, we explore whether such contextual information cancels a default conversational implicature biasing a local subject interpretation for these pronouns
Interpretation data in the Neutral condition confirmed a preference for a subject pronoun to retrieve a local subject antecedent in English, with the subordinate clause subject chosen as pronominal antecedent in 94% of the time
Interpretation data revealed that the biasing contexts worked as intended: participants chose the subject of the preceding subordinate clause as the pronominal antecedent for only 55% of the Other Bias (OB) trials, statistically less often than in the Neutral condition (z=-7.58, p
Summary
This paper investigates the interpretation and processing of English thirdperson pronouns when the global discourse context supports a less-salient referent as the pronominal antecedent, In particular, we explore whether such contextual information cancels a default conversational implicature biasing a local subject interpretation for these pronouns. Psycholinguistic studies of pronoun interpretation often refer to the discourse-pragmatic concept of an anaphora hierarchy, in which “lighter” referring expressions (e.g., pronouns) retrieve highlysalient referents, while “heavier” expressions (e.g., full NPs) retrieve less-salient ones, a pattern that has been claimed to be rooted in Gricean conversational implicature (Givon, 1983; Ariel, 1990; Gundel, Hedberg & Zacharski, 1993; Levinson, 2000). As “light” anaphors, are claimed to retrieve referents that are highly salient in the discourse (such as a recent subject) under certain discourse-pragmatic models of anaphora Such models argue that not just overt pronouns, but all types of referring expressions (e.g., null pronouns, demonstratives, full NPs, etc.) each prefer antecedents of a corresponding level of salience/prominence in the discourse (Givon, 1983; Ariel, 1990; Gundel, Hedberg & Zacharski, 1993). Implicit in such models is (iii) a justification for the coordination between anaphor rank and antecedent saliency
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.
