On the incrementality of pragmatic processing: An ERP investigation of informativeness and pragmatic abilities

Journal of Memory and Language

Volumn 63, Issue 3, 2010, Pages 324-346

  Nieuwland, Mante S ^a,b,c   Ditman, Tali ^b,c   Kuperberg, Gina R ^b,c  

^a BASQUE CENTER ON COGNITION   (Spain)

^b TUFTS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Autism Quotient Communication subscale; Electrophysiology; Individual differences; Informativeness; Language comprehension; N400 ERP; Pragmatic abilities; Pragmatics; Scalar quantifiers

Indexed keywords

EID: 77956057230     PISSN: 0749596X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2010.06.005     Document Type: Article

References (109)

1. Altmann G.T.M., Steedman M. Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition 1988, 30:191-238.
2. American Psychiatric Association Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorder 1994, American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC.
3. Bach K. The top 10 misconceptions about implicature. A festschrift for Larry Horn 2006, John Benjamins, Amsterdam. B.J. Birner, G. Ward (Eds.).
4. Banga A., Heutinck I., Berends S.M., Hendriks P. Some implicatures reveal semantic differences. Linguistics in the Netherlands 2009, 1-13. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. B. Botma, J. van Kampen (Eds.).
5. Baron-Cohen S. Autism, hypersystemizing, and truth. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2008, 61:64-75.
6. Baron-Cohen S., Tager-Flusberg H., Cohen D.J. Understanding other minds: Perspectives from autism and developmental cognitive neuroscience 2000, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
7. Baron-Cohen S., Wheelwright S., Skinner R., Martin J., Clubley E. The autism spectrum quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger syndrome/high functioning autism, males and females, scientists and mathematicians. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 2001, 31:5-17.
8. Bezuidenhout A., Cutting J.C. Literal meaning, minimal propositions, and pragmatic processing. Journal of Pragmatics 2002, 34:433-456.
9. Bezuidenhout A., Morris R. Implicature, relevance and default inferences. Experimental pragmatics 2004, Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. I. Noveck, D. Sperber (Eds.).
10. Birch S., Rayner K. Linguistic focus affects eye movements during reading. Memory & Cognition 1997, 28:653-660.
11. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Schlesewsky M. An alternative perspective on "semantic P600" effects in language comprehension. Brain Research Reviews 2008, 59:55-73.
12. Bott L., Noveck I.A. Some utterances are underinformative: The onset and time course of scalar inferences. Journal of Memory and Language 2004, 51:437-457.
13. Branigan H.P. Syntactic priming. Language and Linguistics Compass 2007, 1:1-16.
14. Breheny R., Katsos N., Williams J. Are generalized scalar implicatures generated by default? An on-line investigation into the role of context in generating pragmatic inferences. Cognition 2006, 100:434-463.
15. Brown C.M., Hagoort P., Kutas M. Postlexical integration processes in language comprehension: Evidence from brain-imaging research. The cognitive neurosciences 2000, 881-895. MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. 2nd ed. M.S. Gazzaniga (Ed.).
16. Camblin C.C., Ledoux K., Boudewyn M., Gordon P.C., Swaab T.Y. Processing new and repeated names: Effects of coreference on repetition priming with speech and fast RSVP. Brain Research 2007, 1146:172-184.
17. Carston R. Informativeness, relevance and scalar implicature. Relevance theory: Applications and implications 1998, 179-236. John Benjamins, Amsterdam. R. Carston, S. Uchida (Eds.).
18. Chierchia G. Scalar implicatures, polarity phenomena, and the syntax/pragmatics interface. Structures and beyond 2004, Oxford University Press, Oxford. A. Belletti (Ed.).
19. Chwilla D.J., Brown C.M., Hagoort P. The N400 as a function of the level of processing. Psychophysiology 1995, 32:274-285.
20. Clark H.H. Using language 1996, Cambridge University Press, New York, NY, US.
21. Coulson S. Electrophysiology and pragmatic language comprehension. Experimental pragmatics 2004, 187-206. Palgrave Macmillan, San Diego. I. Noveck, D. Sperber (Eds.).
22. Crain S., Steedman M. On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the psychological parser. Natural language parsing 1985, 320-358. Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK. D.R. Dowty, L. Karttunen, A.M.N. Zwicky (Eds.).
23. Cutler A., Clifton C.E. Comprehending spoken language: A blueprint of the listener. The neurocognition of language 1999, 123-166. Oxford University Press, Oxford. C.M. Brown, P. Hagoort (Eds.).
24. Cutler A., Dahan D., van Donselaar W. Prosody in the comprehension of spoken language: A literature review. Language and Speech 1997, 40:141-201.
25. De Neys W., Schaeken W. When people are more logical under cognitive load: Dual task impact on scalar implicature. Experimental Psychology 2007, 54:128-133.
26. Delong K.A., Urbach T.P., Kutas M. Probabilistic word pre-activation during language comprehension inferred from electrical brain activity. Nature Neuroscience 2005, 8:1117-1121.
27. Ditman T., Holcomb P.J., Kuperberg G.R. An investigation of concurrent ERP and self-paced reading methodologies. Psychophysiology 2007, 44:927-935.
28. Ditman T., Holcomb P.J., Kuperberg G.R. The contributions of lexico-semantic and discourse information to the resolution of ambiguous categorical anaphors. Language and Cognitive Processes 2007, 22:793-827.
29. Engelhardt P.E., Bailey K.G.D., Ferreira F. Do speakers and listeners observe the Gricean maxim of quantity?. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 54:554-573.
30. Federmeier K.D. Thinking ahead: The role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology 2007, 44:491-505.
31. Federmeier K.D., Kutas M. A rose by any other name: Long-term memory structure and sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language 1999, 41:469-495.
32. Feeney A., Scrafton S., Duckworth A., Handley S.J. The story of some: Everyday pragmatic inference by children and adults. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 2004, 58:121-132.
33. Ferreira F., Bailey K.G.D., Ferraro V. Good-enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science 2002, 11:11-15.
34. Filik R., Sanford A.J., Leuthold H. Processing pronouns without antecedents: Evidence fromevent-related brain potentials. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008, 20:1315-1326.
35. Fischler I., Bloom P.A., Childers D.G., Roucos S.E., Perry N.W. Brain potentials related to stages of sentence verification. Psychophysiology 1983, 20:400-409.
36. Fischler I., Childers D.G., Achariyapaopan T., Perry N.W. Brain potentials during sentence verification: Automatic aspects of comprehension. Psychophysiology 1985, 20:400-409.
37. Fodor J.A. The modularity of mind 1983, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
38. Forster K. Levels of processing and the structure of the language processor. Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett 1979, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ. W.E. Cooper, E.C.T. Walker (Eds.).
39. Francis W., Kucera H. Frequency analysis of English usage 1982, Houghton Mifflin, New York.
40. Frazier L., Carlson K., Clifton C. Prosodic phrasing is central to language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2006, 10:244-249.
41. Gamut L. Logic, Language, and Meaning 1991, Vol. 1. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois.
42. Gazdar G. Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition, and logical form 1979, Academic Press, New York.
43. Geurts B. Scalar implicature and local pragmatics. Mind and language 2009, 24:51-79.
44. Grice H.P. Logic and conversation. Syntax and semantics 3: Speech acts 1975, 41-58. Academic Press, New York. P. Cole, J. Morgan (Eds.).
45. Grodner D., Klein N.M., Carbary K.M., Tanenhaus M.K. "Some", and possibly all, scalar inferences are not delayed: Evidence for immediate pragmatic enrichment. Cognition 2010, 116:42-55.
46. Guasti M.T., Chierchia G., Crain S., Foppolo F., Gualmini A., Meroni L. Why children and adults sometimes (but not always) compute implicatures. Language and Cognitive Processes 2005, 20:667-696.
47. Hagoort P., Hald L.A., Bastiaansen M., Petersson K.M. Integration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science 2004, 304:438-441.
48. Hald L.A., Steenbeek-Planting E.G., Hagoort P. The interaction of discourse context and world knowledge in online sentence comprehension. Evidence from the N400. Brain Research 2007, 1146:210-218.
49. Handley S.J., Feeney A. Reasoning and pragmatics: The case of even if. Experimental pragmatics 2004, Palgrave Press, London. I. Noveck, D. Sperber (Eds.).
50. Happé F.G.E. Communicative competence and theory of mind in autism. A test of relevance theory. Cognition 1993, 48:101-109.
51. Hirotani M., Frazier L., Rayner K. Punctuation and intonation effects on clause and sentence wrap-up: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 54:425-443.
52. Horn, L. R. (1972). On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Ph.D. thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.
53. Horn L.R. The border wars: A neo-Gricean perspective. Where semantics meets pragmatics 2006, 21-48. Elsevier, Amsterdam. K. von Heusinger, K. Turner (Eds.).
54. Huang Y., Snedeker J. Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: Insight into the semantics-pragmatics interface. Cognitive Psychology 2009, 58:376-415.
55. Joliffe T., Baron-Cohen S. A test of central coherence theory: Linguistic processing in high-functioning adults with autism or Asperger syndrome: Is local coherence impaired?. Cognition 1999, 71:149-185.
56. Koornneef A.W., Van Berkum J.J.A. On the use of verb-based implicit causality in sentence comprehension: Evidence from self-paced reading and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language 2006, 54:445-465.
57. Kounios J., Holcomb P.J. Structure and process in semantic memory: Evidence from event-related brain potentials and reaction times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1992, 121:459-479.
58. Kucera J., Francis W.N. Computational analysis of present- day American English 1967, Brown University Press, Providence, RI.
59. Kuperberg G.R. Neural mechanisms of language comprehension: Challenges to syntax. Brain Research 2007, 1146:23-49.
60. Kuperberg G.R., Choi A., Cohn N., Paczynski M., Jackendoff R. Electrophysiological correlates of Complement Coercion. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 10.1162/jocn.2009.21333.
61. Kuperberg G.R., Paczynski M., Ditman T. Establishing causal coherence across sentences: An ERP study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2010, 10.1162/jocn.2010.21452.
62. Kuperberg G.R., Sitnikova T., Caplan D., Holcomb P.J. Electrophysiological distinctions in processing conceptual relationships within simple sentences. Cognitive Brain Research 2003, 17:117-129.
63. Kutas M., Federmeier K.D. Electrophysiology reveals semantic memory use in language comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2000, 4:463-470.
64. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science 1980, 207:203-205.
65. Kutas M., Hillyard S.A. Brain potentials during reading reflect word expectancy and semantic association. Nature 1984, 307:161-163.
66. Kutas M., Van Petten C., Kluender R. Psycholinguistics electrified II: 1994-2005. Handbook of psycholinguistics 2006, 659-724. Elsevier, New York. 2nd ed. M. Traxler, M.A. Gernsbacher (Eds.).
67. Landauer T.K., Dumais S.T. A solution to Plato's problem: The latent semantic analysis theory of acquisition, induction, and representation of knowledge. Psychological Review 1997, 104:211-240.
68. Landauer T.K., Foltz P.W., Dumais S.T. Introduction to latent semantic analysis. Discourse Processes 1998, 25:259-284.
69. Lau E.F., Phillips C., Poeppel D. A cortical network for semantics: (De)constructing the n400. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2008, 9:920-933.
70. Legge G.E., Ahn S.J., Klitz T.S., Luebker A. Psychophysics of reading-XVI. The visual span in normal and low vision. Vision Research 1997, 37:1999-2010.
71. Levinson S. Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature 2000, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
72. Lord C., Risi S., Lambrecht L., et al. The autism diagnostic observation schedule - Generic: A standard measure of social and communication deficits associated with the spectrum of autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 2000, 30:205-223.
73. Lord C., Rutter M., Le Couteur A. Autism diagnostic interview - Revised: A revised version of a diagnostic interview for caregivers of individuals with possible pervasive developmental disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 1994, 24:659-685.
74. MacDonald M.C., Pearlmutter N.J., Seidenberg M.S. Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review 1994, 101:676-703.
75. Musolino J., Lidz J. Why children are not universally successful with quantification. Linguistics 2006, 44:817-852.
76. Nieuwland M.S., Kuperberg G.R. When the truth is not too hard to handle: An event-related potential study on the pragmatics of negation. Psychological Science 2008, 19:1213-1218.
77. Nieuwland M.S., Van Berkum J.J.A. Testing the limits of the semantic illusion phenomenon: ERPs reveal temporary change deafness in discourse comprehension. Cognitive Brain Research 2005, 24:691-701.
78. Noveck I.A. When children are more logical than adults: Experimental investigations of scalar implicature. Cognition 2001, 78:165-188.
79. Noveck I.A., Posada A. Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study. Brain and Language 2003, 85:203-210.
80. Noveck I.A., Reboul A. Experimental pragmatics: A Gricean turn in the study of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2008, 12:425-431.
81. Noveck I.A., Sperber D. Experimental pragmatics 2004, Palgrave, Basingstoke.
82. Noveck I.A., Sperber D. The why and how of experimental pragmatics: The case of 'scalar inferences'. Advances in pragmatics 2007, Palgrave. N. Roberts (Ed.).
83. Otten M., Van Berkum J.J.A. What makes a discourse constraining? Comparing the effects of discourse message and scenario fit on the discourse-dependent N400 effect. Brain Research 2007, 1153:166-177.
84. Otten M., Van Berkum J.J.A. Discourse-based lexical anticipation: Prediction or priming?. Discourse Processes 2008, 45:464-496.
85. Pijnacker J., Hagoort P., Buitelaar J., Teunisse J., Geurts B. Pragmatic inferences in high-functioning adults with autism and Asperger syndrome. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 2009, 39:607-618.
86. Pouscoulous N., Noveck I., Politzer G., Bastide A. Processing costs and implicature development. Language Acquisition 2007, 14:347-375.
87. Rayner K., Kambe G., Duffy S.A. The effect of clause wrap-up on eye movements during reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2000, 53A:1061-1080.
88. Recanati F. Embedded implicatures. Philosophical Perspectives 2003, 17:299-332.
89. Regel, S., Gunter, T. C., & Friederici, A. D. (2010). Isn't it ironic? An electrophysiological exploration of figurative language comprehension. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. doi: doi:10.1162/jocn.2010.21411.
90. Rips L.J. Quantification and semantic memory. Cognitive Psychology 1975, 7:307-340.
91. Sanford A.J., Garrod S.C. The role of scenario mapping in text comprehension. Discourse Processes 1998, 26:159-190.
92. Sanford A.J., Sturt P. Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2002, 6:382-386.
93. Schindele R., Lüdtke J., Kaup B. Comprehending negation: A study with adults diagnosed with high functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome. Intercultural Pragmatics 2008, 5:421-444.
94. Sedivy J. Implicatures in real-time conversation: A view from language processing research. Philosophy Compass 2007, 2:475-496. doi: 10.1111/j.1747-9991.2007.00082.x.
95. Smith C.L. Quantifiers and question answering in young children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 1980, 30:191-205.
96. Sperber D., Wilson D. Relevance: Communication and cognition 1986, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.
97. Stanovich K.E., West R.F. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2000, 127:645-726.
98. Steinhauer K., Friederici A.D. Prosodic boundaries, comma rules, and brain responses: The closure positive shift in ERPs as a universal marker for prosodic phrasing in listeners and readers. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 2001, 30:267-295.
99. Tager-Flusberg H. On the nature of linguistic functioning in early infantile autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 1981, 11:45-56.
100. Tager-Flusberg H. Psycholinguistic approaches to language and communication in autism. Current issues in autism 1985, 69-88. Kluwer, New York. E. Schopler, G.B. Mesibov (Eds.).
101. Tanenhaus M.K., Trueswell J.C. Sentence comprehension. Speech, language, and communication 1995, 217-262. Academic Press, Inc, San Diego, CA, US. J.L. Miller, P.D. Eimas (Eds.).
102. Van Berkum J.J.A. Sentence comprehension in a wider discourse: Can we use ERPs to keep track of things?. The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERPs and beyond 2004, 229-270. Psychology Press, New York. M. Carreiras, C. Clifton (Eds.).
103. Van Berkum J.J.A. The neuropragmatics of 'simple' utterance comprehension: An ERP review. Semantics and pragmatics: From experiment to theory 2009, 276-316. Palgrave Macmillan, Basingstoke. U. Sauerland, K. Yatsushiro (Eds.).
104. Van Berkum J.J.A., Brown C.M., Zwitserlood P., Kooijman V., Hagoort P. Anticipating upcoming words in discourse: Evidence from ERPs and reading times. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition 2005, 31:443-467.
105. Van Berkum J.J.A., Van den Brink D., Tesink C.M.J.Y., Kos M., Hagoort P. The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2008, 20:580-591.
106. Van Petten C. A comparison of lexical and sentence-level context effects in event-related potentials. Language and Cognitive Processes 1993, 8:485-531.
107. Van Petten C., Weckerly J., McIsaac H.K., Kutas M. Working memory capacity dissociates lexical and sentential context effects. Psychological Science 1997, 8:238-242.
108. Wilson D., Sperber D. Relevance theory. Handbook of pragmatics 2004, 607-632. Blackwell, Oxford. G. Ward, L. Horn (Eds.).
109. Woodbury-Smith M.R., Robinson J., Wheelwright S., Baron-Cohen S. Screening adults for Asperger syndrome using the AQ: A preliminary study of its diagnostic validity in clinical practice. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 2005, 35:331-335.