The ambiguous nature of complex semantic types: an experimental investigation

IF 1.1 3区 心理学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS
Richard Huyghe, Lucie Barque, François Delafontaine, Justine Salvadori
{"title":"The ambiguous nature of complex semantic types: an experimental investigation","authors":"Richard Huyghe, Lucie Barque, François Delafontaine, Justine Salvadori","doi":"10.1017/langcog.2023.73","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Words with complex semantic types such as <span>book</span> are characterised by a multiplicity of interpretations that are not mutually exclusive (e.g., as a physical object and/or informational content). Their status with respect to lexical ambiguity is notoriously unclear, and it is debatable whether complex types are a particular form of polysemy (closely related to metonymy) or whether they belong to monosemy. In this study, we investigate the nature of complex types by conducting two experiments on ambiguous nouns in French. The first experiment collects speakers’ judgements about the sameness of meaning between different uses of complex-type, metonymic and monosemous words. The second experiment uses a priming paradigm and a sensicality task to investigate the online processing of complex-type words, as opposed to metonymic and monosemous words. Overall results indicate that, on a continuum of lexical ambiguity, complex types are closer to monosemy than to metonymy. The different interpretations of complex-type words are highly connected and fall under the same meaning, arguably in relation to a unique reference. These results suggest that complex types are associated with single underspecified entries in the mental lexicon. Moreover, they highlight the need for a model of lexical representations of ambiguous words that can account for the difference between complex types and metonymy.</p>","PeriodicalId":45880,"journal":{"name":"Language and Cognition","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2023.73","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Words with complex semantic types such as book are characterised by a multiplicity of interpretations that are not mutually exclusive (e.g., as a physical object and/or informational content). Their status with respect to lexical ambiguity is notoriously unclear, and it is debatable whether complex types are a particular form of polysemy (closely related to metonymy) or whether they belong to monosemy. In this study, we investigate the nature of complex types by conducting two experiments on ambiguous nouns in French. The first experiment collects speakers’ judgements about the sameness of meaning between different uses of complex-type, metonymic and monosemous words. The second experiment uses a priming paradigm and a sensicality task to investigate the online processing of complex-type words, as opposed to metonymic and monosemous words. Overall results indicate that, on a continuum of lexical ambiguity, complex types are closer to monosemy than to metonymy. The different interpretations of complex-type words are highly connected and fall under the same meaning, arguably in relation to a unique reference. These results suggest that complex types are associated with single underspecified entries in the mental lexicon. Moreover, they highlight the need for a model of lexical representations of ambiguous words that can account for the difference between complex types and metonymy.

复杂语义类型的模糊性:一项实验研究
像 "书 "这样具有复杂语义类型的词,其特点是有多种互不排斥的解释(如作为实物和/或信息内容)。它们在词汇歧义方面的地位并不明确,复杂类型究竟是多义词的一种特殊形式(与隐喻密切相关),还是属于单义词,目前还存在争议。在本研究中,我们通过对法语中的模糊名词进行两次实验来研究复合类型的性质。第一个实验收集说话者对复合类型词、隐喻词和单义词不同用法之间意义相同性的判断。第二个实验使用引物范式和感性任务来研究复杂类型词与隐喻词和单义词的在线处理。总体结果表明,在词汇模糊性的连续统一体中,复合类型词更接近于单义词,而不是近义词。复合类型词的不同解释具有高度关联性,属于同一含义,可以说与独特的参照物有关。这些结果表明,复合类型词与心理词典中单一的不明确词条有关。此外,这些结果还突显出需要一个能够解释复杂类型和隐喻之间区别的模棱两可词语的词汇表征模型。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信