Literature DB >> 19900421

The communicative style of a speaker can affect language comprehension? ERP evidence from the comprehension of irony.

Stefanie Regel1, Seana Coulson, Thomas C Gunter.   

Abstract

An important issue in irony comprehension concerns when and how listeners integrate extra-linguistic and linguistic information to compute the speaker's intended meaning. To assess whether knowledge about the speaker's communicative style impacts the brain response to irony, ERPs were recorded as participants read short passages that ended either with literal or ironic statements made by one of two speakers. The experiment was carried out in two sessions in which each speaker's use of irony was manipulated. In Session 1, 70% of ironic statements were made by the ironic speaker, while the non-ironic speaker expressed 30% of them. For irony by the non-ironic speaker, an increased P600 was observed relative to literal utterances. By contrast, both ironic and literal statements made by the ironic speaker elicited similar P600 amplitudes. In Session 2, conducted 1 day later, both speakers' use of irony was balanced (i.e. 50% ironic, 50% literal). ERPs for Session 2 showed an irony-related P600 for the ironic speaker but not for the non-ironic speaker. Moreover, P200 amplitude was larger for sentences congruent with each speaker's communicative style (i.e. for irony made by the ironic speaker, and for literal statements made by the non-ironic speaker). These findings indicate that pragmatic knowledge about speakers can affect language comprehension 200 ms after the onset of a critical word, as well as neurocognitive processes underlying the later stages of comprehension (500-900 ms post-onset). Thus perceived speakers' characteristics dynamically impact the construction of appropriate interpretations of ironic utterances. Copyright 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19900421     DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2009.10.077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Brain Res        ISSN: 0006-8993            Impact factor:   3.252


  21 in total

1.  Immediate online use of prosody reveals the ironic intentions of a speaker: neurophysiological evidence.

Authors:  Maël Mauchand; Jonathan A Caballero; Xiaoming Jiang; Marc D Pell
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 3.282

2.  Tell me sweet little lies: An event-related potentials study on the processing of social lies.

Authors:  Eva M Moreno; Pilar Casado; Manuel Martín-Loeches
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 3.282

3.  A speaker's gesture style can affect language comprehension: ERP evidence from gesture-speech integration.

Authors:  Christian Obermeier; Spencer D Kelly; Thomas C Gunter
Journal:  Soc Cogn Affect Neurosci       Date:  2015-02-16       Impact factor: 3.436

4.  The interplay between respectfulness and lexical-semantic in reading Chinese: evidence from ERPs.

Authors:  Liyan Ji; Lin Cai
Journal:  Cogn Neurodyn       Date:  2021-08-04       Impact factor: 5.082

5.  Speaker-Specific Cues Influence Semantic Disambiguation.

Authors:  Catherine Davies; Vincent Porretta; Kremena Koleva; Ekaterini Klepousniotou
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2022-05-12

6.  Similar Neural Correlates for Language and Sequential Learning: Evidence from Event-Related Brain Potentials.

Authors:  Morten H Christiansen; Christopher M Conway; Luca Onnis
Journal:  Lang Cogn Process       Date:  2012-01-01

7.  What's behind a P600? Integration operations during irony processing.

Authors:  Nicola Spotorno; Anne Cheylus; Jean-Baptiste Van Der Henst; Ira A Noveck
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-06-24       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Modality Switching in a Property Verification Task: An ERP Study of What Happens When Candles Flicker after High Heels Click.

Authors:  Jennifer Collins; Diane Pecher; René Zeelenberg; Seana Coulson
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2011-02-08

9.  Gradients versus dichotomies: how strength of semantic context influences event-related potentials and lexical decision times.

Authors:  Barbara J Luka; Cyma Van Petten
Journal:  Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 3.526

10.  Listening to Puns Elicits the Co-Activation of Alternative Homophone Meanings during Language Production.

Authors:  Sebastian Benjamin Rose; Katharina Spalek; Rasha Abdel Rahman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-06-26       Impact factor: 3.240

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.