{"title":"Deciphering the electrophysiological signature of discourse connectives","authors":"Cecile Larralde, Ira Noveck","doi":"10.1016/j.pragma.2025.03.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The discourse connectives <em>but</em> and <em>so</em> trigger specific kinds of inferences, which are characterizable as contrastive and causal, respectively. Inspired by Diane Blakemore’s notion of procedural meaning, we carry out two studies while relying on a paradigm we developed in previous work, in which 1) connectives are part of thematically bare sentences presented as a word-finding game, e.g. <em>There is a B but there is no T</em>, and; 2) these two connectives are compared to the less informative conjunction <em>and</em>. Experiment 1 instantiated our behavioral paradigm while imposing the kind of constraints one finds in an EEG study (e.g., the discourse connective is isolated and presented for a predetermined duration). The results from Experiment 1 replicated our previous behavioral findings, confirming the design's reliability. Experiment 2, an ERP study based on this modified paradigm, yielded three main findings. 1) relative to <em>and</em>, the discourse connectives <em>but</em> and <em>so</em> trigger a more pronounced P200 followed by Positive Slow Waves (PSW) of greater amplitude. These data point to extra inferential processing triggered by <em>but</em> and <em>so</em> relative to <em>and.</em> 2) the higher amplitude of the P3b component linked to negated segments following <em>but</em> indicates that these were anticipated more than those that follow <em>and</em> or <em>so</em>. 3) post-connective affirmative segments were, surprisingly, linked with a more pronounced P600-like component in <em>and</em>-trials relative to the <em>but</em>- and <em>so</em>-trials. Overall, this study allows one to more deeply appreciate the inferential processing linked to discourse connectives.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":16899,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pragmatics","volume":"241 ","pages":"Pages 144-163"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pragmatics","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378216625000694","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The discourse connectives but and so trigger specific kinds of inferences, which are characterizable as contrastive and causal, respectively. Inspired by Diane Blakemore’s notion of procedural meaning, we carry out two studies while relying on a paradigm we developed in previous work, in which 1) connectives are part of thematically bare sentences presented as a word-finding game, e.g. There is a B but there is no T, and; 2) these two connectives are compared to the less informative conjunction and. Experiment 1 instantiated our behavioral paradigm while imposing the kind of constraints one finds in an EEG study (e.g., the discourse connective is isolated and presented for a predetermined duration). The results from Experiment 1 replicated our previous behavioral findings, confirming the design's reliability. Experiment 2, an ERP study based on this modified paradigm, yielded three main findings. 1) relative to and, the discourse connectives but and so trigger a more pronounced P200 followed by Positive Slow Waves (PSW) of greater amplitude. These data point to extra inferential processing triggered by but and so relative to and. 2) the higher amplitude of the P3b component linked to negated segments following but indicates that these were anticipated more than those that follow and or so. 3) post-connective affirmative segments were, surprisingly, linked with a more pronounced P600-like component in and-trials relative to the but- and so-trials. Overall, this study allows one to more deeply appreciate the inferential processing linked to discourse connectives.
期刊介绍:
Since 1977, the Journal of Pragmatics has provided a forum for bringing together a wide range of research in pragmatics, including cognitive pragmatics, corpus pragmatics, experimental pragmatics, historical pragmatics, interpersonal pragmatics, multimodal pragmatics, sociopragmatics, theoretical pragmatics and related fields. Our aim is to publish innovative pragmatic scholarship from all perspectives, which contributes to theories of how speakers produce and interpret language in different contexts drawing on attested data from a wide range of languages/cultures in different parts of the world. The Journal of Pragmatics also encourages work that uses attested language data to explore the relationship between pragmatics and neighbouring research areas such as semantics, discourse analysis, conversation analysis and ethnomethodology, interactional linguistics, sociolinguistics, linguistic anthropology, media studies, psychology, sociology, and the philosophy of language. Alongside full-length articles, discussion notes and book reviews, the journal welcomes proposals for high quality special issues in all areas of pragmatics which make a significant contribution to a topical or developing area at the cutting-edge of research.