Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

A well-established finding in the simulation literature is that participants simulate the positive argument of negation soon after reading a negative sentence, prior to simulating a scene consistent with the negated sentence (Kaup, Lüdtke, & Zwaan, 2006; Kaup, Yaxley, Madden, Zwaan, & Lüdtke, 2007). One interpretation of this finding is that negation requires two steps to process: first represent what is being negated then “reject” that in favour of a representation of a negation-consistent state of affairs (Kaup et al., 2007). In this paper we argue that this finding with negative sentences could be a by-product of the dynamic way that language is interpreted relative to a common ground and not the way that negation is represented. We present a study based on Kaup et al. (2007) that tests the competing accounts. Our results suggest that some negative sentences are not processed in two steps, but provide support for the alternative, dynamic account.

Keywords

Negation Language comprehension Simulation Pragmatics

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barsalou

L. W.

(1999). Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22, 577–660.

Barwise

(1989). The situation in logic (CSLI Lecture Note). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.

Barwise

Perry

(1983). Situations and attitudes Cambridge, MA: Bradford Books, MIT Press.

Brown-Schmidt

Gunlogson

Tanenhaus

M. K.

(2008). Addressees distinguish shared from private information when interpreting questions during interactive conversation. Cognition 107, 1122–1134.

Clark

(1996). Using language Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Cooper

(1998). Austinian propositions, Davidsonian events and perception complements. The Tbilisi Symposium on Logic, Language and Computation: Selected Papers. Ginzburg

Khasidashvili

Vogel

Lévy

J.-J.

Vallduví

Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.

Ginzburg

(in press). The interactive stance: Meaning for conversation Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Grice

H. P.

(1989). Studies in the ways of words Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Hobbs

Stickel

Appelt

Martin

(1993). Interpretation as abduction. Artificial Intelligence 63, 1–2 69–142.

10.

Huddleston

Pullum

G. K.

(2002). The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

11.

Kaup

Lüdtke

Zwaan

R. A.

(2006). Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed?. Journal of Pragmatics 38, 1033–1050.

12.

Kaup

Yaxley

R. H.

Madden

C. J.

Zwaan

R. A.

Lüdtke

(2007). Experiential simulations of negated text information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 60, 976–990.

13.

Levinson

(1983). Pragmatics Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

14.

Lewis

D. K.

(1979). Score keeping in a language game. Semantics from different points of view. Bauerle

Berlin, Germany: Springer 172–187.

15.

Lüdtke

Kaup

(2006). Context effects when reading negative and affirmative sentences. Proceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Sun

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates 1735–1740.

16.

Mayo

Schul

Burnstein

(2004). “I am not guilty” vs. “I am innocent”: Successful negation may depend on the schema used for its encoding. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 40, 433–449.

17.

Nieuwland

M. S.

Kuperberg

G. R.

(2008). When the truth isn't too hard to handle: An event-related potential study on the pragmatics of negation. Psychological Science 19, 1213–1218.

18.

Roberts, C. (1996). Information structure: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. In J. H. Yoon & A. Kathol (Eds.), OSUWPL Volume 49: Papers in semantics. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Department of Linguistics.

19.

Stalnaker

R. C.

(1978). Assertion. Syntax and semantics. Cole

New York, NY: Academic Press 9, 315–332.

20.

van Kuppevelt

(1996). Inferring from topics. Linguistics & Philosophy 19, 393–443.

21.

Wason

P. C.

(1965). The contexts of plausible denial. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 4, 7–11.

22.

Zwaan

R. A.

(2004). The immersed experiencer: Toward an embodied theory of language comprehension. The psychology of learning and motivation. Ross

B. H.

New York, NY: Academic Press 44, 35–62.

Why We Simulate Negated Information: A Dynamic Pragmatic Account

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References