测试语旁反讽信号的影响。面对面和计算机媒介交际中言语反讽识别的实验研究

Q2 Arts and Humanities
R. Ellis
{"title":"测试语旁反讽信号的影响。面对面和计算机媒介交际中言语反讽识别的实验研究","authors":"R. Ellis","doi":"10.2478/plc-2022-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper reports the results of an experimental study with a between subject design (N = 122) whose aim was to compare irony comprehension rates in face-to-face (FTF) and computer-mediated communication (CMC), and examine the influence of paraverbal irony signals on irony identification rates. An irony comprehension test was intersemiotically translated to three conditions: FTF (n = 46), paraverbal signal-rich CMC (n = 30), and paraverbal signal-poor CMC (n = 46). The study adopted a relevance theoretic account of irony. There was a statistically significant difference between the signal-rich CMC and FTF conditions - irony identification rates were higher in the signal-rich CMC condition. The results are important since they suggest that paraverbal irony signals are not essential for correct irony identification if relevant contextual information is available, and the CMC medium is not only unlikely to be an obstacle in communicating the ironic intent, but with the addition of the medium-specific irony signals, may be significantly better.","PeriodicalId":20768,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Language and Communication","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Testing the impact of paraverbal irony signals. Experimental study on verbal irony identification in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication\",\"authors\":\"R. Ellis\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/plc-2022-0004\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This paper reports the results of an experimental study with a between subject design (N = 122) whose aim was to compare irony comprehension rates in face-to-face (FTF) and computer-mediated communication (CMC), and examine the influence of paraverbal irony signals on irony identification rates. An irony comprehension test was intersemiotically translated to three conditions: FTF (n = 46), paraverbal signal-rich CMC (n = 30), and paraverbal signal-poor CMC (n = 46). The study adopted a relevance theoretic account of irony. There was a statistically significant difference between the signal-rich CMC and FTF conditions - irony identification rates were higher in the signal-rich CMC condition. The results are important since they suggest that paraverbal irony signals are not essential for correct irony identification if relevant contextual information is available, and the CMC medium is not only unlikely to be an obstacle in communicating the ironic intent, but with the addition of the medium-specific irony signals, may be significantly better.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20768,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychology of Language and Communication\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychology of Language and Communication\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2022-0004\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Language and Communication","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/plc-2022-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要/ Abstract摘要:本研究采用双受试者设计(N = 122),比较了面对面交流(FTF)和计算机媒介交流(CMC)的反语理解率,并考察了言语旁反语信号对反语识别率的影响。反语理解测试被间歇翻译为三种条件:FTF (n = 46)、富含旁语信号的CMC (n = 30)和缺乏旁语信号的CMC (n = 46)。本研究采用关联理论解释反语。富信号CMC与FTF条件之间存在统计学差异,富信号CMC条件下的反语识别率更高。这一结果很重要,因为它们表明,如果相关的语境信息可用,语言旁的反讽信号对于正确的反讽识别不是必不可少的,CMC媒介不仅不太可能成为交流反讽意图的障碍,而且随着媒介特定的反讽信号的增加,可能会明显更好。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Testing the impact of paraverbal irony signals. Experimental study on verbal irony identification in face-to-face and computer-mediated communication
Abstract This paper reports the results of an experimental study with a between subject design (N = 122) whose aim was to compare irony comprehension rates in face-to-face (FTF) and computer-mediated communication (CMC), and examine the influence of paraverbal irony signals on irony identification rates. An irony comprehension test was intersemiotically translated to three conditions: FTF (n = 46), paraverbal signal-rich CMC (n = 30), and paraverbal signal-poor CMC (n = 46). The study adopted a relevance theoretic account of irony. There was a statistically significant difference between the signal-rich CMC and FTF conditions - irony identification rates were higher in the signal-rich CMC condition. The results are important since they suggest that paraverbal irony signals are not essential for correct irony identification if relevant contextual information is available, and the CMC medium is not only unlikely to be an obstacle in communicating the ironic intent, but with the addition of the medium-specific irony signals, may be significantly better.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Psychology of Language and Communication
Psychology of Language and Communication Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
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