Processing Conditional Perfection in Promises and Threats: The Role of Negation, Clause Order and Incentive

Autor/inn/en	Zevakhina, Natalia; Prigorkina, Veronika
Titel	Processing Conditional Perfection in Promises and Threats: The Role of Negation, Clause Order and Incentive
Quelle	In: Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 50 (2021) 6, S.1557-1573 (17 Seiten) PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Zevakhina, Natalia)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0090-6905
DOI	10.1007/s10936-021-09794-z
Schlagwörter	Language Processing; Inferences; Task Analysis; Reaction Time; Form Classes (Languages); Phrase Structure; Morphemes; Language Research; Incentives; Comparative Analysis; Psycholinguistics + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Sprachverarbeitung; Inference; Inferenz; Aufgabenanalyse; Reaktionsvermögen; Analytischer Sprachbau; Phrasenstruktur; Morphem; Sprachforschung; Anreiz; Psycholinguistik
Abstract	The paper reports on two experiments that investigate whether polarity, clause order and incentive influence derivation of Conditional Perfection in two types of inducements (promises and threats). Both experiments are designed as inference tasks, additionally measuring reaction times to inferences. The paper shows that the derivation of Conditional Perfection is endorsed in both types of inducements. However, the negative consequent bias (i.e. higher rates of Conditional Perfection in conditionals with a negative consequent than in conditionals with an affirmative consequent) and the double negation effect (i.e. slowdown of reaction times to Conditional Perfection with a double negation in a consequent) hold for threats, but not for promises. The paper also reveals a parallel double negation effect (i.e. facilitation of Conditional Perfection in conditionals with negation in both clauses) in threats, but not in promises. Last but not least, the paper demonstrates that the effect of clause order and incentive on the derivation of Conditional Perfection is rather moderate. The paper supports the view that the derivation of Conditional Perfection is not effortful (Van Tiel and Schaeken in Cogn Sci 41:1119-1154, 2016) and has some indirect arguments for treating Conditional Perfection and scalar implicatures as separate phenomena. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01