Post on 06-Jan-2016
description
Talking about Objects
Jason Kahn & Jennifer E. ArnoldUNC – 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?
Did you get the reading group organized for this semester yet?
You wanted a reading group this semester, too?
Why does “reading group” get reduced?
• Givenness Explanations • Probability Explanations
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
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)
Well, what kind of reading group did you want?
[Reading group]
Bard & Aylett 2004; Brown-Schmidt 2009
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Adapted from Levelt 1989
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness
•Facilitation•Pre-planning
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness
•Facilitation•Pre-planning
Probability
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness
•Facilitation•Pre-planning
Probability
•Associative facilitation•Pre-planning
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness
Probability
(Arnold, 1998; Givón, 1983; Tily & Piantodosi, 2009)
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.
Novel Predictions
• Referential events should “count” for reduction
Novel Predictions
• Referential events should “count” for reduction
• We should observe reduction from non-linguistic information
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
Linguistically Given
Non-linguistically (conceptually)
Given Predictable
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Control
X
Experimental Layout (Exp 1)
XXX
Linguistically Given
Non-linguistically (conceptually)
Given Predictable
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Control
X
Non-linguistic Stimuli Should Elicit Reduction
XXX
Linguistically Given
Non-linguistically (conceptually)
Given Predictable
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Control
X
Linguistic Stimuli Should Elicit More Reduction
XXX
Linguistically Given
Non-linguistically (conceptually)
Given Predictable
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Control
X
XXX
We Will Return to Predictability
Instruction-giving Task
Speaker Listener
Speaker Listener
Move
Speaker Listener
“The accordion rotates right”
Move
Speaker Listener
“The accordion rotates right”
x 3
Move
Speaker Listener
“The toothbrush. The belt. The accordion.”
Move
Speaker Listener
“The accordion rotates right”
“The toothbrush. The belt. The accordion.”
Move
Speaker Listener
“The accordion rotates right”
x 3
Move
Speaker Listener
Move
Speaker Listener
“The accordion rotates right”
Move
Speaker Listener
“The accordion rotates right”
x 3
Move
1)Or… Or…
1)
2)
Or… Or…
“[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.”
1)
2)
3)
Or… Or…
“[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.”
1)
2)
3)
4)
Or… Or…
“[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.”
“[Onset] The belt expands.”
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Or… Or…
“[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.”
“[Onset] The belt expands.”
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Or… Or…
“[Onset] The toothbrush shrinks.”
“[Onset] The belt expands.”
“[Onset] The accordion rotates right.”
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Or… Or…
Analysis
• Multi-level Modeled– Information condition (ling, non-ling, control)– Control variables (syllables, imageability, etc.)– Random intercept for subject and item (cross-classified)
Reduced Onset DurationLinguistic = Non-linguistic < Control
Third Instruction: “[Onset] the accordion rotates right”
*
Reduced Object DurationLinguistic < Non-linguistic < Control
Third instruction: “[Onset] the accordion shrinks”
*
*
Linguistically Given
Non-linguistically (conceptually)
Given Predictable
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Control
X
Non-linguistic Stimuli Elicited Reduction
XXX
Linguistically Given
Non-linguistically (conceptually)
Given Predictable
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Control
X
Linguistic Stimuli Elicited More Reduction
XXX
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness Predictability
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness Predictability
Linguistically Given
Non-linguistically (conceptually)
Given Predictable
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Control
X
Predictability May (partly) Produce This Effect
XXX
See also Lam & Watson 2009
Linguistically Given
Non-linguistically (conceptually)
Given Predictable
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Control
X
Experimental Layout (Exp 2)
X
X
XXX
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
7/8:1/8:
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Experimental Layout (Exp 2)
Primed Unprimed
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Experimental Layout (Exp 2)
Primed Unprimed
Reduced Object Duration (Ling. Only)Given < Not Given
“[Onset] the accordion shrinks”
*
“The accordion”
“The heart”
Given < Not Given
“[Onset] the accordion shrinks”
(Numerically) Reduced Object Duration
Linguistic
Non-linguistic
Experimental Layout (Exp 2)
?
*
Primed Unprimed
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness Predictability
Non-linguisticpredictabilitymay be necessary
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness Predictability
LinguisticpredictabilityIs not necessary
Non-linguisticpredictabilitymay be necessary
Cognitive Mechanisms for Reduction
Givenness Predictability
LinguisticpredictabilityIs not necessary
Non-linguisticpredictabilitymay be necessary
…but it may help planning
Facilitation-Based Reduction• Referential event information can
affect reduction (linguistic or not)
• Non-linguistic information can elicit reduction
• Linguistic information elicits more reduction (suggesting a facilitation effect)
• Predictability does not appear to be necessary for reduction in all cases
Facilitation-Based Reduction• Referential event information can
affect reduction (linguistic or not)
• Non-linguistic information can elicit reduction
• Linguistic information elicits more reduction (suggesting a facilitation effect)
• Predictability does not appear to be necessary for reduction in all cases
Facilitation-Based Reduction• Referential event information can
affect reduction (linguistic or not)
• Non-linguistic information can elicit reduction
• Linguistic information elicits more reduction (suggesting a facilitation effect)
• Predictability does not appear to be necessary for reduction in all cases
Well, what kind of reading group did you want?
[Reading group]
Acknowledgements
• Kellen Carpenter and Giulia Pancani (our lab managers), Jennifer Tait, Alyssa Ventimiglia, Leighanne McGill (our RA’s)
• The Cognitive Department at UNC, whose comments have sharpened our focus here
• NSF BCS-0745627 to Jennifer E. Arnold