请，请，告诉我:幽默欺骗的语言特征

Q1 Arts and Humanities

Dialogue and Discourse Pub Date : 2020-03-21 DOI:10.31219/osf.io/cafbh

S. Skalicky, Nicholas D. Duran, S. Crossley

{"title":"请，请，告诉我:幽默欺骗的语言特征","authors":"S. Skalicky, Nicholas D. Duran, S. Crossley","doi":"10.31219/osf.io/cafbh","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Prior research undertaken for the purpose of identifying deceptive language has focused on deception as it is used for nefarious ends, such as purposeful lying. However, despite the intent to mislead, not all examples of deception are carried out for malevolent ends. In this study, we describe the linguistic features of humorous deception. Specifically, we analyzed the linguistic features of 753 news stories, 1/3 of which were truthful and 2/3 of which we categorized as examples of humorous deception. The news stories we analyzed occurred naturally as part of a segment named Bluff the Listener on the popular American radio quiz show Wait, Wait…Don’t Tell Me!. Using a combination of supervised learning and predictive modeling, we identified 11 linguistic features accounting for approximately 18% of the variance between humorous deception and truthful news stories. These linguistic features suggested the deceptive news stories were more confident and descriptive but also less cohesive when compared to the truthful new stories. We suggest these findings reflect the dual communicative goal of this unique type of discourse to simultaneously deceive and be humorous.","PeriodicalId":37604,"journal":{"name":"Dialogue and Discourse","volume":"26 1","pages":"128-149"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Please, Please, Just Tell Me: The Linguistic Features of Humorous Deception\",\"authors\":\"S. Skalicky, Nicholas D. Duran, S. Crossley\",\"doi\":\"10.31219/osf.io/cafbh\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Prior research undertaken for the purpose of identifying deceptive language has focused on deception as it is used for nefarious ends, such as purposeful lying. However, despite the intent to mislead, not all examples of deception are carried out for malevolent ends. In this study, we describe the linguistic features of humorous deception. Specifically, we analyzed the linguistic features of 753 news stories, 1/3 of which were truthful and 2/3 of which we categorized as examples of humorous deception. The news stories we analyzed occurred naturally as part of a segment named Bluff the Listener on the popular American radio quiz show Wait, Wait…Don’t Tell Me!. Using a combination of supervised learning and predictive modeling, we identified 11 linguistic features accounting for approximately 18% of the variance between humorous deception and truthful news stories. These linguistic features suggested the deceptive news stories were more confident and descriptive but also less cohesive when compared to the truthful new stories. We suggest these findings reflect the dual communicative goal of this unique type of discourse to simultaneously deceive and be humorous.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37604,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"128-149\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-03-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Dialogue and Discourse\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/cafbh\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Arts and Humanities\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Dialogue and Discourse","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/cafbh","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

摘要

先前为识别欺骗性语言而进行的研究主要集中在欺骗上，因为它被用于邪恶的目的，比如有目的的撒谎。然而，尽管有误导的意图，并不是所有欺骗的例子都是为了恶意的目的。在本研究中，我们描述了幽默欺骗的语言特征。具体来说，我们分析了753个新闻故事的语言特征，其中1/3是真实的，2/3是幽默欺骗的例子。我们分析的新闻故事自然发生在美国流行的广播智力竞赛节目“等等，等等，别告诉我!”的“欺骗听众”部分。使用监督学习和预测建模的结合，我们确定了11个语言特征，约占幽默欺骗和真实新闻故事之间差异的18%。这些语言特征表明，与真实的新故事相比，欺骗性的新闻故事更自信、更具描述性，但也更缺乏凝聚力。我们认为这些发现反映了这种独特话语类型的双重交际目标，即欺骗和幽默。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Please, Please, Just Tell Me: The Linguistic Features of Humorous Deception

Prior research undertaken for the purpose of identifying deceptive language has focused on deception as it is used for nefarious ends, such as purposeful lying. However, despite the intent to mislead, not all examples of deception are carried out for malevolent ends. In this study, we describe the linguistic features of humorous deception. Specifically, we analyzed the linguistic features of 753 news stories, 1/3 of which were truthful and 2/3 of which we categorized as examples of humorous deception. The news stories we analyzed occurred naturally as part of a segment named Bluff the Listener on the popular American radio quiz show Wait, Wait…Don’t Tell Me!. Using a combination of supervised learning and predictive modeling, we identified 11 linguistic features accounting for approximately 18% of the variance between humorous deception and truthful news stories. These linguistic features suggested the deceptive news stories were more confident and descriptive but also less cohesive when compared to the truthful new stories. We suggest these findings reflect the dual communicative goal of this unique type of discourse to simultaneously deceive and be humorous.

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

Dialogue and Discourse Arts and Humanities-Language and Linguistics

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

0.00%

发文量

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： D&D seeks previously unpublished, high quality articles on the analysis of discourse and dialogue that contain -experimental and/or theoretical studies related to the construction, representation, and maintenance of (linguistic) context -linguistic analysis of phenomena characteristic of discourse and/or dialogue (including, but not limited to: reference and anaphora, presupposition and accommodation, topicality and salience, implicature, ---discourse structure and rhetorical relations, discourse markers and particles, the semantics and -pragmatics of dialogue acts, questions, imperatives, non-sentential utterances, intonation, and meta--communicative phenomena such as repair and grounding) -experimental and/or theoretical studies of agents'' information states and their dynamics in conversational interaction -new analytical frameworks that advance theoretical studies of discourse and dialogue -research on systems performing coreference resolution, discourse structure parsing, event and temporal -structure, and reference resolution in multimodal communication -experimental and/or theoretical results yielding new insight into non-linguistic interaction in -communication -work on natural language understanding (including spoken language understanding), dialogue management, -reasoning, and natural language generation (including text-to-speech) in dialogue systems -work related to the design and engineering of dialogue systems (including, but not limited to: -evaluation, usability design and testing, rapid application deployment, embodied agents, affect detection, -mixed-initiative, adaptation, and user modeling). -extremely well-written surveys of existing work. Highest priority is given to research reports that are specifically written for a multidisciplinary audience. The audience is primarily researchers on discourse and dialogue and its associated fields, including computer scientists, linguists, psychologists, philosophers, roboticists, sociologists.