Speaker-specific processing of anomalous utterances

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Existing work shows that readers often interpret grammatical errors (e.g., The key to the cabinets *were shiny) and sentence-level blends (“without-blend”: Claudia left without her headphones *off) in a non-literal fashion, inferring that a more frequent or more canonical utterance was intended instead. This work examines how interlocutor identity affects the processing and interpretation of anomalous sentences. We presented anomalies in the context of “emails” attributed to various writers in a self-paced reading paradigm and used comprehension questions to probe how sentence interpretation changed based upon properties of the item and properties of the “speaker.” Experiment 1 compared standardised American English speakers to L2 English speakers; Experiment 2 compared the same standardised English speakers to speakers of a non-Standardised American English dialect. Agreement errors and without-blends both led to more non-literal responses than comparable canonical items. For agreement errors, more non-literal interpretations also occurred when sentences were attributed to speakers of Standardised American English than either non-Standardised group. These data suggest that understanding sentences relies on expectations and heuristics about which utterances are likely. These are based upon experience with language, with speaker-specific differences, and upon more general cognitive biases.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)764-778
Number of pages15
JournalQuarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology
Volume72
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Apr 1 2019

Fingerprint

Reading
Language
Heuristics

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Physiology
  • Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Psychology(all)
  • Physiology (medical)

Cite this

@article{f8f12c30922b4747a245bf2137d289f4,
title = "Speaker-specific processing of anomalous utterances",
abstract = "Existing work shows that readers often interpret grammatical errors (e.g., The key to the cabinets *were shiny) and sentence-level blends (“without-blend”: Claudia left without her headphones *off) in a non-literal fashion, inferring that a more frequent or more canonical utterance was intended instead. This work examines how interlocutor identity affects the processing and interpretation of anomalous sentences. We presented anomalies in the context of “emails” attributed to various writers in a self-paced reading paradigm and used comprehension questions to probe how sentence interpretation changed based upon properties of the item and properties of the “speaker.” Experiment 1 compared standardised American English speakers to L2 English speakers; Experiment 2 compared the same standardised English speakers to speakers of a non-Standardised American English dialect. Agreement errors and without-blends both led to more non-literal responses than comparable canonical items. For agreement errors, more non-literal interpretations also occurred when sentences were attributed to speakers of Standardised American English than either non-Standardised group. These data suggest that understanding sentences relies on expectations and heuristics about which utterances are likely. These are based upon experience with language, with speaker-specific differences, and upon more general cognitive biases.",
author = "Laurel Brehm and Jackson, {Carrie Neal} and Miller, {Karen Lynn}",
year = "2019",
month = "4",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1177/1747021818765547",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "72",
pages = "764--778",
journal = "Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology",
issn = "1747-0218",
publisher = "Psychology Press Ltd",
number = "4",

}

Speaker-specific processing of anomalous utterances. / Brehm, Laurel; Jackson, Carrie Neal; Miller, Karen Lynn.

In: Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Vol. 72, No. 4, 01.04.2019, p. 764-778.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Speaker-specific processing of anomalous utterances

AU - Brehm, Laurel

AU - Jackson, Carrie Neal

AU - Miller, Karen Lynn

PY - 2019/4/1

Y1 - 2019/4/1

N2 - Existing work shows that readers often interpret grammatical errors (e.g., The key to the cabinets *were shiny) and sentence-level blends (“without-blend”: Claudia left without her headphones *off) in a non-literal fashion, inferring that a more frequent or more canonical utterance was intended instead. This work examines how interlocutor identity affects the processing and interpretation of anomalous sentences. We presented anomalies in the context of “emails” attributed to various writers in a self-paced reading paradigm and used comprehension questions to probe how sentence interpretation changed based upon properties of the item and properties of the “speaker.” Experiment 1 compared standardised American English speakers to L2 English speakers; Experiment 2 compared the same standardised English speakers to speakers of a non-Standardised American English dialect. Agreement errors and without-blends both led to more non-literal responses than comparable canonical items. For agreement errors, more non-literal interpretations also occurred when sentences were attributed to speakers of Standardised American English than either non-Standardised group. These data suggest that understanding sentences relies on expectations and heuristics about which utterances are likely. These are based upon experience with language, with speaker-specific differences, and upon more general cognitive biases.

AB - Existing work shows that readers often interpret grammatical errors (e.g., The key to the cabinets *were shiny) and sentence-level blends (“without-blend”: Claudia left without her headphones *off) in a non-literal fashion, inferring that a more frequent or more canonical utterance was intended instead. This work examines how interlocutor identity affects the processing and interpretation of anomalous sentences. We presented anomalies in the context of “emails” attributed to various writers in a self-paced reading paradigm and used comprehension questions to probe how sentence interpretation changed based upon properties of the item and properties of the “speaker.” Experiment 1 compared standardised American English speakers to L2 English speakers; Experiment 2 compared the same standardised English speakers to speakers of a non-Standardised American English dialect. Agreement errors and without-blends both led to more non-literal responses than comparable canonical items. For agreement errors, more non-literal interpretations also occurred when sentences were attributed to speakers of Standardised American English than either non-Standardised group. These data suggest that understanding sentences relies on expectations and heuristics about which utterances are likely. These are based upon experience with language, with speaker-specific differences, and upon more general cognitive biases.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85063664468&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85063664468&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1747021818765547

DO - 10.1177/1747021818765547

M3 - Article

C2 - 29504462

AN - SCOPUS:85063664468

VL - 72

SP - 764

EP - 778

JO - Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

JF - Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

SN - 1747-0218

IS - 4

ER -