scholarly journals Toward an accommodation account of deaccenting under nonidentity

2021 ◽  
Vol 1 ◽  
pp. 172
Author(s):  
Jeffrey Geiger ◽  
Ming Xiang
Keyword(s):  
String Instruments ◽  
Discourse Context ◽  
Competing Models ◽  
Principled Account

Two competing models attempt to explain the deaccentuation of antecedent-nonidentical discourse-inferable material (e.g., Bach wrote many pieces for viola. He must have LOVED string instruments). One uses a single grammatical constraint to license deaccenting for identical and nonidentical material. The second licenses deaccenting grammatically only for identical constituents, whereas deaccented nonidentical material requires accommodation of an alternative antecedent. In three experiments, we tested listeners’ preferences for accentuation or deaccentuation on nonidentical inferable material in out-of-the-blue contexts, supportive discourse contexts, and in the presence of the presupposition trigger too. The results indicate that listeners by default prefer for inferable material to be accented, but that this preference can be mitigated or even reversed with the help of manipulations in the broader discourse context. By contrast, listeners reliably preferred for repeated material to be deaccented. We argue that these results are more compatible with the accommodation model of deaccenting licensing, which allows for differential licensing of deaccentuation on inferable versus repeated constituents and provides a principled account of the sensitivity of accentuation preferences on inferable material to broader contextual manipulations.

Strength of Discourse Context as a Determinant of the Subordinate Bias Effect

1999 ◽  
Vol 52 (4) ◽  
pp. 813-839 ◽  
Author(s):  
Charles Martin ◽  
Hoang Vu ◽  
George Kellas ◽  
Kimberly Metcalf
Keyword(s):  
Bias Effect ◽  
Discourse Context

Portuguese Version of the Posttraumatic Stress Disorder Checklist for DSM-5 (PCL-5): Comparison of Latent Models and Other Psychometric Properties in a Sample of Fire Fighters

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Teresa Carvalho ◽  
Carolina da Motta ◽  
José Pinto Gouveia
Keyword(s):  
Psychometric Properties ◽  
Externalizing Behavior ◽  
Convergent Validity ◽  
Factor Model ◽  
Latent Structure ◽  
Ptsd Symptoms ◽  
Portuguese Version ◽  
Dsm 5 ◽  
Competing Models ◽  
Arousal Model

<p>The PCL (Weathers et al., 1993) is a useful and widely used measure to assess PTSD symptoms in clinical and research contexts, exhibiting adequate psychometric properties across its several versions and translations (e. g. Carvalho et al., 2015; Wilkins et al., 2011). The current study analyzed the psychometric properties (latent structure, internal consistency, temporal reliability, and convergent validity) of the Portuguese version of the PCL for the DSM-5 (PCL-5, Weathers et al., 2013) in a sample of firefighters. This study also aimed to contribute with empirical data to clarify the best latent structure of DSM-5 PTSD symptoms. Specifically, the DSM-5 four-factor model and other competing models for PTSD symptoms (four-factor Dysphoria model, five-factor Dysphoric Arousal model, six-factor Anhedonia model, six-factor Externalizing Behavior model, and seven-factor Hybrid model) applied to PCL-5 were analyzed and compared in this paper.<br></p>

The nature of metacognitive inefficiency in perceptual decision making

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Medha Shekhar ◽  
Dobromir Rahnev
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Mechanistic Model ◽  
Perceptual Decision Making ◽  
Large Dataset ◽  
Substantial Body ◽  
Confidence Levels ◽  
Continuous Scale ◽  
Competing Models ◽  
Metacognitive Ability ◽  
Confidence Ratings

Humans have the metacognitive ability to judge the accuracy of their own decisions via confidence ratings. A substantial body of research has demonstrated that human metacognition is fallible but it remains unclear how metacognitive inefficiency should be incorporated into a mechanistic model of confidence generation. Here we show that, contrary to what is typically assumed, metacognitive inefficiency depends on the level of confidence. We found that, across five different datasets and four different measures of metacognition, metacognitive ability decreased with higher confidence ratings. To understand the nature of this effect, we collected a large dataset of 20 subjects completing 2,800 trials each and providing confidence ratings on a continuous scale. The results demonstrated a robustly nonlinear zROC curve with downward curvature, despite a decades-old assumption of linearity. This pattern of results was reproduced by a new mechanistic model of confidence generation, which assumes the existence of lognormally-distributed metacognitive noise. The model outperformed competing models either lacking metacognitive noise altogether or featuring Gaussian metacognitive noise. Further, the model could generate a measure of metacognitive ability which was independent of confidence levels. These findings establish an empirically-validated model of confidence generation, have significant implications about measures of metacognitive ability, and begin to reveal the underlying nature of metacognitive inefficiency.

Speech Acts in Discourse Context

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Craige Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Speech Acts ◽  
Speech Act ◽  
Language Game ◽  
Illocutionary Force ◽  
Semantic Type ◽  
Discourse Context ◽  
Semantics And Pragmatics ◽  
Consensus View ◽  
Grammatical Mood ◽  
The Relationship

This essay sketches an approach to speech acts in which mood does not semantically determine illocutionary force. The conventional content of mood determines the semantic type of the clause in which it occurs, and, given the nature of discourse, that type most naturally lends itself to a particular type of speech act, i.e. one of the three basic types of language game moves—making an assertion (declarative), posing a question (interrogative), or proposing to one’s addressee(s) the adoption of a goal (imperative). There is relative consensus about the semantics of two of these, the declarative and interrogative; and this consensus view is entirely compatible with the present proposal about the relationship between the semantics and pragmatics of grammatical mood. Hence, the proposal is illustrated with the more controversial imperative.

Comparison with an indeterminate pronoun

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Osamu Sawada
Keyword(s):  
Scale Structure ◽  
Dual Use ◽  
Discourse Context ◽  
Individual Comparison ◽  
Similarities And Differences ◽  
Striking Parallelism

Chapter 4 focuses on the dual-use phenomenon of comparison with an indeterminate pronoun in Japanese (and other languages) and considers the similarities and differences between at-issue comparative meaning (i.e. individual comparison) and a CI comparative meaning (i.e. noteworthy comparison). Although an individual comparison and a noteworthy comparison are compositionally and dimensionally different, there is a striking parallelism in terms of the scale structure. The chapter explains the similarities and differences between the two kinds of comparison in a systematic way. It also considers the role of scalarity and comparison in a discourse context and argues that they provide a way of signaling to what extent an at-issue utterance contributes to the goal of the conversation. The timing of signaling information on noteworthiness in a discourse and its pragmatic effect are also discussed.

Discourse, Context, and Coherence

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Una Stojnić
Keyword(s):  
Prima Facie ◽  
Context Sensitivity ◽  
Linguistic Meaning ◽  
Linguistic Features ◽  
Linguistic Feature ◽  
Discourse Context ◽  
Context Sensitive ◽  
Pure Indexicals

On the received view, the resolution of context-sensitivity is at least partly determined by non-linguistic features of utterance situation. If I say ‘He’s happy’, what ‘he’ picks out is underspecified by its linguistic meaning, and is only fixed through extra-linguistic supplementation: the speaker’s intention, and/or some objective, non-linguistic feature of the utterance situation. This underspecification is exhibited by most context-sensitive expressions, with the exception of pure indexicals, like ‘I.’ While this received view is prima facie appealing, I argue it is deeply mistaken. I defend an account according to which context-sensitivity resolution is governed by linguistic mechanisms determining prominence of candidate resolutions of context-sensitive items. Thus, on this account, the linguistic meaning of a context-sensitive expression fully specifies its resolution in a context, automatically selecting the resolution antecedently set by the prominence-governing linguistic mechanisms.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document