Experimentelle Pragmatik

  • Petra B. Schumacher


Eine neue Entwicklung im Bereich der Pragmatikforschung stellt die experimentell ausgerichtete Pragmatik dar. Die Entwicklung und Nuancierung theoretischer Modelle wurde seit der Jahrtausendwende maßgeblich durch experimentelle Herangehensweisen vorangetrieben (vgl. z. B. Breheny/Katsos/Williams 2006; Cummins/Sauerland/Solt 2012; Noveck 2001). Ausgangspunkt war die theoretische Debatte über die Abgrenzung pragmatischer Operationen und die Semantik-Pragmatik Schnittstelle, die durch empirische Befunde unterstützt werden sollte (vgl. z. B. Huang/Snedeker 2009; Rubio Fernández 2007).


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Arnold, Jennifer E. (2010): How speakers refer: The role of accessibility. In: Language and Linguistics Compass 4/4, 187–203.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baron-Cohen, Simon/Leslie, Alan M./Frith, Uta (1985): Does the autistic child have a »theory of mind«? In: Cognition 21/1, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, Ina/Schumacher, Petra B. (2016): Towards a neurobiology of information structure. In: Caroline Féry/Shinichiro Ishihara (Hg.): The Oxford Handbook of Information Structure. Oxford, 581–598.Google Scholar
  4. Bergen, Leon/Grodner, Daniel J. (2012): Speaker knowledge influences the comprehension of pragmatic inferences. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 38/5, 1450–1460.Google Scholar
  5. Breheny, Richard/Katsos, Napoleon/Williams, John (2006): Are generalised scalar implicatures generated by default? An on-line investigation into the role of context in generating pragmatic inferences. In: Cognition 100/3, 434–463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Brennan, Susan E./Clark, Herbert H. (1996): Conceptual pacts and lexical choice in conversation. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 22, 1482–1493.Google Scholar
  7. Brown-Schmidt, Sarah/Hanna, Joy E. (2011): Talking in another person’s shoes: Incremental perspective-taking in language processing. In: Dialogue & Discourse 2/1, 11–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brunyé, Tad T./Ditman, Tali/Mahoney, Caroline R./Augustyn, Jason S./Taylor, Holly A. (2009): When you and I share perspectives: Pronouns modulate perspective taking during narrative comprehension. In: Psychological Science 20/1, 27–32.Google Scholar
  9. Cummins, Chris/Sauerland, Uli/Solt, Stephanie (2012): Granularity and scalar implicature in numerical expressions. In: Linguistics and Philosophy 35, 135–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cummings, Louise (2009): Clinical Pragmatics. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  11. Dale, Rick/Duran, Nicholas D. (2011): The cognitive dynamics of negated sentence verification. In: Cognitive Science 35/5, 983–996.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Filik, Ruth/Leuthold, Hartmut/Wallington, Katie/Page, Jemma (2014): Testing theories of irony processing using eye-tracking and ERPs. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 40/3, 811.Google Scholar
  13. Frisson, Steven/Pickering, Martin J. (1999): The processing of metonymy: Evidence from eye movements. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 25/6, 1366–1383.Google Scholar
  14. Gernsbacher, Morton Ann/Shroyer, Suzanne (1989): The cataphoric use of the indefinite this in spoken narratives. In: Memory and Cognition 17/5, 536–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gibbs, Raymond W./Colston, Herbert L. (2012): Interpreting Figurative Meaning. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  16. Glucksberg, Sam (2003): The psycholinguistics of metaphor. In: Trends in Cognitive Sciences 7/2, 92–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gundel, Jeanette K./Hedberg, Nancy/Zacharski, Ron (1993): Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. In: Language 69/2, 274–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Holtgraves, Thomas (1994): Communication in context: Effects of speaker status on the comprehension of indirect requests. In: Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 20/5, 1205–1218.Google Scholar
  19. Horn, Laurence (1972): On the Semantic Properties of Logical Operators in English. Ph.D. Thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  20. Huang, Yi Ting/Snedeker, Jesse (2009): Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: Insight into the semantics– pragmatics interface. In: Cognitive Psychology 58/3, 376–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Katsos, Napoleon/Bishop, Dorothy V. M. (2011): Pragmatic tolerance: Implications for the acquisition of informativeness and implicature. In: Cognition 120/1, 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaup, Barbara/Lüdtke, Jana/Zwaan, Rolf A. (2006): Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed? In: Journal of Pragmatics 38/7, 1033–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keysar, Boaz/Barr, Dale J./Balin, Jennifer A./Brauner, Jason S. (2000): Taking perspective in conversation: The role of mutual knowledge in comprehension. In: Psychological Science 11/1, 32–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kissine, Mikhail (2013): From Utterances to Speech Acts. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  25. Kulakova, Eugenia/Nieuwland, Mante S. (2016): A review of experimental evidence for the dual meaning of counterfactuals. In: Language and Linguistics Compass 10/2, 49–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Levinson, Stephen (2000): Presumptive Meanings. Cambridge.Google Scholar
  27. López, Belem G./Vaid, Jyotsna (2017): Psycholinguistic approaches to humor. In: Salvatore Attardo (Hg.): The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor. New York, 267–281.Google Scholar
  28. Moll, Henrike/Tomasello, Michael (2007): How 14-and 18-month-olds know what others have experienced. In: Developmental Psychology 43/2, 309–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Noveck, Ira A. (2001): When children are more logical than adults: Experimental investigations of scalar implicature. In: Cognition 78, 165–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Noveck, Ira A./Posada, Andres (2003): Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study. In: Brain and Language 85/2, 203–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Noveck, Ira/Reboul, Anne (2008): Experimental pragmatics: A Gricean turn in the study of language. In: Trends in Cognitive Science 12/11, 425–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rubio Fernández, Paula (2007): Suppression in metaphor interpretation: differences between meaning selection and meaning construction. In: Journal of Semantics 24/4, 345–371.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Schumacher, Petra B. (2013): When combinatorial processing results in reconceptualization: Towards a new approach of compositionality. In: Frontiers on Psychology 4, 677.Google Scholar
  34. Schumacher, Petra B. (2014): Content and context in incremental processing: »the ham sandwich« revisited. In: Philosophical Studies 168, 151–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Schumacher, Petra B. (2019): Metonymy. In: Chris Cummins/Napoleon Katsos (Hg.): The Oxford Handbook of Experimental Semantics and Pragmatics. Oxford.Google Scholar
  36. Schurz, Matthias/Radua, Joaquim/Aichhorn, Markus/Richlan, Fabio/Perner, Josef (2014): Fractionating theory of mind: a meta-analysis of functional brain imaging studies. In: Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 42, 9–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Searle, John R. (1979): Metaphor. In: Michael Reddy/Andrew Ortony (Hg.): Metaphor and Thought. Cambridge, 83–111.Google Scholar
  38. Sperber, Dan/Wilson, Deirdre (1986): Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Oxford.Google Scholar
  39. Spychalska, Maria/Kontinen, Jarmo/Werning, Markus (2016): Investigating scalar implicatures in a truth-value judgement task: evidence from event-related brain potentials. In: Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 31/6, 817–840.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tian, Ye/Ferguson, Heather/Breheny, Richard (2016): Processing negation without context – why and when we represent the positive argument. In: Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 31/5, 683–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tomasello, Michael (2009): Die Ursprünge der menschlichen Kommunikation. Frankfurt a. M.Google Scholar
  42. Weiland, Hanna/Bambini, Valentina/Schumacher, Petra B. (2014): The role of literal meaning in figurative language comprehension: evidence from masked priming ERP. In: Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8, 583.Google Scholar
  43. Wimmer, Heinz/Perner, Josef (1983): Beliefs about beliefs: Representation and constraining function of wrong beliefs in young children’s understanding of deception. In: Cognition 13/1, 103–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Deutschland, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Petra B. Schumacher
    • 1
  1. 1.Universität zu KölnKölnDeutschland

Personalised recommendations