Abstract
In this chapter, we will introduce the basic research questions spanning all chapters in this volume: How do we ‘encode’ complex thoughts into linguistic signals, how do we interpret such signals in appropriate ways, and to what extent is what we encode constrained at the outset by the particular language we grow up with? We will introduce recent developments of an experimental approach to linguistics and argue for the necessity of cross-linguistic experimental paradigms for linguistic research at the interface of syntax, semantics and pragmatics.
Formerly Barbara Schmiedtová
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
- 2.
For example, five recent issues of the journal Language and Cognitive Processes (Taylor & Francis) contain 13 papers on English and 9 on other languages (Chinese, Dutch, German, Hindi, Japanese, and Spanish).
- 3.
- 4.
References
Alonso-Ovalle, L., Fernández-Solera, S., Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (2002). Null vs. overt pronouns and the topic-focus articulation in Spanish. Italian Journal of Linguistics, 14, 151–170.
Ariel, M. (2001). Accessibility theory: An overview. In T. Sanders, J. Schliperoord, & W. Spooren (Eds.), Text representation (pp. 29–87). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Arnold, J. E. (2013). Information status relates to production, distribution, and comprehension. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00235
Au, T. (1986). A verb is worth a thousand words: The causes and consequences of interpersonal events implicit in language. Journal of Memory and Language, 25(1), 104–122.
Behrens, B., Fabricius-Hansen, C., & Solfjeld, K. (2012). Competing structures: The discourse perspective. In C. Fabricius-Hansen & D. T. T. Haug (Eds.), Big events, small clauses: The grammar of elaboration (pp. 179–225). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Blakemore, D. (2013). Voice and expressivity in free indirect thought representations: Imitation and representation. Mind and Language, 28(5), 579–605.
Blutner, R. (2000). Some aspects of optimality in natural language interpretation. Journal of Semantics, 17(3), 189–216.
Bornkessel, I., Schlesewsky, M., & Friederici, A. D. (2003). Contextual information modulates initial processes of syntactic integration: The role of inter- versus intrasentential predictions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(5), 871–882.
Bott, L., Frisson, S., & Murphy, G. L. (2009). Interpreting conjunction. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 62(4), 681–706.
Braginsky, P., & Rothstein, S. (2008). Vendlerian classes and the Russian aspectual system. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 16(1), 3–55.
Breheny, R., Ferguson, H. J., & Katsos, N. (2013). Taking the epistemic step: Toward a model of on-line access to conversational implicatures. Cognition, 126(3), 423–440.
Brennan, J., & Pylkkänen, L. (2008). Processing events: Behavioral and neuromagnetic correlates of Aspectual Coercion. Brain & Language, 106, 132–143.
Brown, R., & Fish, D. (1983). The psychological causality implicit in language. Cognition, 14, 237–273.
Carminati, M. N. (2002). The processing of Italian subject pronouns. PhD dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
Carston, R. (2002). Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Blackwell.
Carston, R., & Blakemore, D. (2005). Coordination: Syntax, semantics and pragmatics. Lingua, 115(4), 353–358.
Chemla, E., & Schlenker, P. (2012). Incremental vs. symmetric accounts of presupposition projection: An experimental approach. Natural Language Semantics, 20(2), 177–226.
Clark, H. H., & Murphy, G. L. (1982). Audience design in meaning and reference. In J.-F. LeNy & W. Kintsch (Eds.), Language and comprehension (pp. 287–299). Amsterdam: North-Holland.
Clifton, C., Jr., & Frazier, L. (2012). Discourse integration guided by the “Question Under Discussion.” Cognitive Psychology, 65(2), 352–379.
Colonna, S., Schimke, S., & Hemforth, B. (2012). Information structure effects on anaphora resolution in German and French: A crosslinguistic study of pronoun resolution. Linguistics, 50(5), 991–1013.
Cooper, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6(1), 86–107.
Cormack, A., & Smith, N. (2005). What is coordination? Lingua, 115, 395–418.
Cowles, H. W., Walenski, M., & Kluender, R. (2007). Linguistic and cognitive prominence in anaphor resolution: Topic, contrastive focus and pronouns. Topoi, 26, 3–18.
de la Fuente, I., & Hemforth, B. (2013). Topicalization and focusing effects on subject and object pronoun resolution in Spanish. In J. Cabrelli Amaro, G. Lord, A. de Prada Pérez, & J. E. Aaron (Eds.), Selected proceedings of the 16th Hispanic linguistics symposium (pp. 27–45). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Proceedings Project.
Dowty, D. (1979). Word meaning and Montague grammar. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Ellert, M. (2010). Ambiguous pronoun resolution in L1 and L2 German and Dutch (MPI series in psycholinguistics, Vol. 58). Wageningen: Ponsen & Looijen.
Fabricius-Hansen, C., & Ramm, W. (Eds.). (2008). ‘Subordination’ versus ‘coordination’ in sentence and text—a cross-linguistic perspective. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Fabricius-Hansen, C., & Sæbø, K. J. (2011). Behabitive reports. In E. Brendel, J. Meibauer, & M. Steinbach (Eds.), Understanding quotation (pp. 85–106). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Filiaci, F. (2011). Anaphoric preferences of null and overt subjects in Italian and Spanish: A cross-linguistic comparison. PhD dissertation, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.
Filip, H. (2011). Aspectual class and Aktionsart. In K. von Heusinger, C. Maienborn, & P. Portner (Eds.), Handbooks of linguistics and communication science (HSK): Vol. 33. Handbook of semantics (Vol. 2, pp. 1186–1217). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Garvey, C., & Caramazza, A. (1974). Implicit causality in verbs. Linguistic Inquiry, 5, 459–464.
Geber, D. (2006). Processing subject pronouns in relation to non-canonical (quirky) constructions. Cahiers Linguistiques d’Ottawa/Ottawa Papers in Linguistics, 34, 47–61.
Geurts, B. (2010). Quantity implicatures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Geurts, B., & Maier, E. (2013). Layered discourse representation theory. In A. Capone, F. Lo Piparo, & M. Carapezza (Eds.), Perspectives on linguistic pragmatics (pp. 311–327). Berlin/Heidelberg: Springer.
Gibson, E., Piantadosi, S., & Fedorenko, K. (2011). Using Mechanical Turk to obtain and analyze English acceptability judgments. Language and Linguistics Compass, 5(8), 509–524.
Ginzburg, J. (1996). Interrogatives: Questions, facts and dialogue. In S. Lappin (Ed.), Blackwell textbooks in linguistics: The handbook of contemporary semantic theory (pp. 385–422). Oxford: Blackwell.
Giora, R., Heruti, V., Metuki, N., & Fein, O. (2009). “When we say no we mean no”: Interpreting negation in vision and language. Journal of Pragmatics, 41, 2222–2239.
Givón, T. (1992). The grammar of referential coherence as mental processing instructions. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 30(1), 5–56.
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Speech acts (pp.41–58). New York: Academic.
Güldemann, T., & von Roncador, M. (Eds.). (2002). Reported discourse: A meeting ground for different linguistic domains. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Haspelmath, M. (Ed.). (2004). Coordinating constructions. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Hemforth, B. (2013). Experimental linguistics. In M. Aronoff (Ed.), Oxford online bibliographies (pp. 1–16). doi: 10.1093/OBO/9780199772810-0112.
Hemforth, B., & Konieczny, L. (Eds.). (2000). German sentence processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., Scheepers, C., Colonna, S., Schimke, S., Baumann, P., & Pynte, J. (2010). Language specific preferences in anaphor resolution: Exposure or Gricean maxims? In S. Ohlsson & R. Catrambone (Eds.), Proceedings of the 32nd annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society 2010, Portland, 11–14 August (pp. 2218–2223). Portland: Cognitive Science Society.
Hertwig, R., Benz, B., & Krauss, S. (2008). The conjunction fallacy and the many meanings of and. Cognition, 108, 740–753.
Johannessen, J. B. (1998). Coordination. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Joshi, A., Prasad, R., & Miltsakaki, E. (2005). Anaphora resolution: A centering approach. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. 223–230). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Kaiser, E. (2011). Focusing on pronouns: Consequences of subjecthood, pronominalisation, and contrastive focus. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(10), 1625–1666.
Kamp, H., & Reyle, U. (2011). Discourse representation theory. In C. Maienborn, K. von Heusinger, & P. Portner (Eds.), Handbooks of linguistics and communication science (HSK): Vol. 33. Handbook of semantics (Vol. 1, pp. 872–922). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Kaschak, M. P., & Glenberg, A. M. (2000). Constructing meaning: The role of affordances and grammatical constructions in language comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 508–529.
Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J., & 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.
Kehler, A., Kertz, L., Rohde, H., & Elman, J. (2007). Coherence and coreference revisited. Journal of Semantics, 25(1), 1–44.
Klein, W. (1994). Time in language. London: Routledge.
Lang, E. (1984). The semantics of coordination (Studies in language companion series, Vol. 9). Amsterdam: Benjamins.
Lascarides, A., & Asher, N. (2007). Segmented discourse representation theory: Dynamic semantics with discourse structure. In H. Bunt & R. Muskens (Eds.), Computing meaning (Vol. 3, pp.87–124). Berlin: Springer.
Lee, J., & Tonhauser, J. (2010). Temporal interpretation without tense: Korean and Japanese coordination constructions. Journal of Semantics, 27, 307–341.
Levinson, S. C. (2000). Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Maier, E. (2009). Japanese reported speech. Against a direct–indirect distinction. New Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 5447, 133–145.
Maier, E. (2010). Presupposing acquaintance: A unified semantics for de dicto, de re and de se belief reports. Linguistics and Philosophy, 32(5), 429–474. doi:10.1007/s10988-010-9065-2.
Maier, E. (in press). Japanese reported speech: Towards an account of perspective shift as mixed quotation. In E. McCready, K. Yabushita, & K. Yoshimoto (Eds.), Formal approaches to semantics and pragmatics. Berlin: Springer.
Mayol, L., & Clark, R. (2010). Pronouns in Catalan: Games of partial information and the use of linguistic resources. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(3), 781–799.
Miltsakaki, E. (2002). Toward an aposynthesis of topic continuity and intrasentential anaphora. Computational Linguistics, 28(3), 319–355.
Noveck, I. A., & Reboul, A. (2008). Experimental pragmatics: A Gricean turn in the study of language. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 12(11), 425–431.
Papadopoulou, D. (2006). Cross-linguistic variation in sentence processing. Evidence from RC attachment in Greek (Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics, Vol. 36). Dordrecht: Springer.
Pickering, M. J., McElree, B., Frisson, S., Chen, L., & Traxler, M. J. (2006). Underspecification and aspectual coercion. Discourse Processes, 42(2), 131–155.
Pylkkänen, L., & McElree, B. (2006). The syntax-semantics interface: On-line composition of sentence meaning. In M. Traxler & M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (2nd ed., pp. 537–577). New York: Academic.
Rayner, K., Juhasz, B. J., & Pollatsek, A. B. (2005). Eye movements during reading. In M. J. Snowling & C. Hulme (Eds.), The science of reading: A handbook (pp. 79–97). Oxford: Blackwell.
Recanati, F. (2000). Oratio obliqua, oratio recta: An essay on metarepresentation. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Roberts, C. (1996). Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. In J. H. Yoon & A. Kathol (Eds.), Paper in semantics: OSU working papers in linguistics (Vol. 49, pp. 91–136). Columbus: Department of Linguistics, Ohio State University.
Röhrig, S., Schlesewsky, M., Schumacher, P. B., & Meibauer, J. (2011, June). Und=∧?!. The role of context for the interpretation of the conjunction “und.” Poster presented at the experimental pragmatics conference. Universitat Popeu Fabra, Barcelona.
Romoli, J., & Sudo, Y. (2009). De re/de dicto ambiguity and presupposition projection. In A. Riester & T. Solstad (Eds.), Proceedings of Sinn und Bedeutung 13 (pp. 425–438). Stuttgart: University of Stuttgart.
Sæbø, K. J. (2012). Reports of specific indefinites. Journal of Semantics, Advance Access. doi:10.1093/jos/ffs015.
Sauerland, U., & Yatsushiro, K. (Eds.). (2008). Semantics and pragmatics: From experiment to theory. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.
Schmiedtová, B. (2004). At the same time: The expression of simultaneity in learner varieties. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Schmiedtová, B., & Flecken, M. (2008). Aspectual concepts across languages: Some considerations for second language learning. In S. de Knop & T. de Rycker (Eds.), Pedagogical grammar (pp. 357–384). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Schmiedtová, B., & Sahonenko, N. (2008). Die Rolle des grammatischen Aspekts in Ereignis-Enkodierung: Ein Vergleich zwischen Tschechischen und Russischen Lernern des Deutschen. In P. Gommes & M. Walter (Eds.), Fortgeschrittene Lernervarietäten: Korpuslinguistik und Zweitspracherwerbforschung (pp. 45–71). Tübingen: Max-Niemeyer-Verlag.
Schmiedtová, B., & Sahonenko, N. (2012). Acquisition of L2 narrative competence: Tense switching by Russian L2 speakers of German. Journal of Slavic Linguistics, 20(1), 35–70.
Shuval, N., & Hemforth, B. (2008). Accessibility of negated constituents in reading and spoken language comprehension. Intercultural Pragmatics, 5(4), 445–469.
Smith, C. S. (1997). The parameter of aspect. Dordrecht: Springer.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268(5217), 1632–1634.
Townsend, D. J. (2013). Aspectual coercion in eye movements. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 42(3), 281–306.
Txurruka, I. G. (2003). The natural language conjunction and. Linguistics and Philosophy, 26, 255–285.
van Rooij, R. (2006). Attitudes and changing contexts. Dordrecht: Springer.
Vendler, Z. (1957). Verbs and times. Philosophical Review, 56, 143–160 (Reprinted in 1967 in Z. Vendler (Ed.), Linguistics in philosophy (pp. 97–121). Ithaca: Cornell University).
von Heusinger, K. (2002). Specificity and definiteness in sentence and discourse structure. Journal of Semantics, 19, 245–274.
von Stutterheim, C., & Nüse, R. (2003). Processes of conceptualization in language production: Language-specific perspectives and event construal. Linguistics, 41, 851–882.
von Stutterheim, C., Andermann, M., Carroll, M., Flecken, M., & Schmiedtová, B. (2012). How grammaticized concepts shape event conceptualization in the early phases of language production: Insights from linguistic analysis, eye tracking data and memory performance. Linguistics, 50(4), 833–856.
Wolf, F., & Gibson, E. (2005). Representing discourse coherence: A corpus-based study. Computational Linguistics, 31(2), 249–287.
Yamashita, H., Hirose, Y., & Packard, J. L. (2011). Processing and producing head-final structures. Dordrecht: Springer.
Zamparelli, R. (2011). Coordination. In K. von Heusinger, C. Maienborn, & P. Portner (Eds.), Handbooks of linguistics and communication science (HSK): Vol. 33. Handbook of semantics (Vol. 2, pp. 1713–1741). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Zeevat, H. (2014). Language production and interpretation: Linguistics meets Cognition (= Current Research in the Semantics/Pragmatics Interface 30). Brill.
Zeevat, H., & Jasinskaja, K. (2007). And as an additive particle. In M. Aurnague Miguelgorry, K. Korta Carrión, & J. M. Antia (Eds.), Language, representation and reasoning. Memorial volume to Isabel Gómez Txurruka (pp. 315–340). University of the Basque Country Press.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2014 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hemforth, B., Mertins, B., Fabricius-Hansen, C. (2014). Introduction: Meaning Across Languages. In: Hemforth, B., Mertins, B., Fabricius-Hansen, C. (eds) Psycholinguistic Approaches to Meaning and Understanding across Languages. Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, vol 44. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05675-3_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-05675-3_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-05674-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-05675-3
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)