Advanced

Processing negation in a miniature artificial language

Farshchi, Sara LU ; Andersson, Richard LU ; van de Weijer, Joost LU and Paradis, Carita LU (2019) In Cognitive Science 43(3).
Abstract
In two miniature artificial language learning experiments, we compare the processing of narrow and broad negation, corresponding to prefixal negation (unhappy) and free-standing negation (not happy) respectively, with that of non-negation (happy). Three artificial prefixes were invented to express the three meanings above. The meaning scope expressed by the negation types was manipulated in the experiments, and the processing of the three forms was tested through a picture– word verification task. In Experiment 1, the scope expressed by prefixal negation was included in the scope expressed by free-standing negation, while in Experiment 2, there was no overlap between the two negation types and the scope of free-standing negation was... (More)
In two miniature artificial language learning experiments, we compare the processing of narrow and broad negation, corresponding to prefixal negation (unhappy) and free-standing negation (not happy) respectively, with that of non-negation (happy). Three artificial prefixes were invented to express the three meanings above. The meaning scope expressed by the negation types was manipulated in the experiments, and the processing of the three forms was tested through a picture– word verification task. In Experiment 1, the scope expressed by prefixal negation was included in the scope expressed by free-standing negation, while in Experiment 2, there was no overlap between the two negation types and the scope of free-standing negation was limited to the intermediate range of a scale. Experiment 1 showed that narrow negation is more difficult to process than the non-negated meanings, but not as difficult as broad negation. Experiment 2 showed that when the meaning scope of broad negation was restricted to the middle range, the processing difficulty found in Experiment 1 disappeared, as it did not take longer for participants to identify the middle range compared to the ends of the scale. We show that the chunking of the negated meanings relative to one another plays a role in the processing cost of these forms. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Gradability, Opposition, Scalar meanings, Prefixal negation, Picture‐word verification, Comprehension, Adjective, Antonymy
in
Cognitive Science
volume
43
issue
3
article number
e12720
publisher
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates
external identifiers
  • scopus:85063142075
  • pmid:30900290
ISSN
1551-6709
DOI
10.1111/cogs.12720
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
a919e05a-0f05-4d47-95b3-a8eb73bff275
date added to LUP
2019-01-22 14:57:57
date last changed
2020-08-05 05:07:07
@article{a919e05a-0f05-4d47-95b3-a8eb73bff275,
  abstract     = {In two miniature artificial language learning experiments, we compare the processing of narrow and broad negation, corresponding to prefixal negation (unhappy) and free-standing negation (not happy) respectively, with that of non-negation (happy). Three artificial prefixes were invented to express the three meanings above. The meaning scope expressed by the negation types was manipulated in the experiments, and the processing of the three forms was tested through a picture– word verification task. In Experiment 1, the scope expressed by prefixal negation was included in the scope expressed by free-standing negation, while in Experiment 2, there was no overlap between the two negation types and the scope of free-standing negation was limited to the intermediate range of a scale. Experiment 1 showed that narrow negation is more difficult to process than the non-negated meanings, but not as difficult as broad negation. Experiment 2 showed that when the meaning scope of broad negation was restricted to the middle range, the processing difficulty found in Experiment 1 disappeared, as it did not take longer for participants to identify the middle range compared to the ends of the scale. We show that the chunking of the negated meanings relative to one another plays a role in the processing cost of these forms.},
  author       = {Farshchi, Sara and Andersson, Richard and van de Weijer, Joost and Paradis, Carita},
  issn         = {1551-6709},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {3},
  publisher    = {Lawrence Erlbaum Associates},
  series       = {Cognitive Science},
  title        = {Processing negation in a miniature artificial language},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12720},
  doi          = {10.1111/cogs.12720},
  volume       = {43},
  year         = {2019},
}