The study investigates contextual effects on the processing of pre-verbal (preVf) and postverbal (postVf) focus sentences in an eye-tracking experiment. For comparison, lexically marked focus (only-f) sentences were also included. The test sentences were presented following two types of linguistic context: restrictive or non-restrictive. It was hypothesized that if preVf exhaustivity is purely structurally encoded, gaze will converge on the exhaustive target image at a similar rate in the two contexts, just as it does in the case of only-f. However, if context also has an effect on the emergence of exhaustivity in preVf, gaze should converge more slowly on the exhaustive target in the non-restrictive context than in the restrictive context as predicted in postVf. The results support the latter prediction: fixation patterns diverge in the case of both preVf and postVf sentences, while they do not in the case of the baseline only-f.
ProCite
RefWorks
Reference Manager
BibTeX
Zotero
EndNote
-
Allopenna, Paul, D. Magnuson, James S. and Tanenhaus, Michael K. 1998. Tracking the time course of spoken word recognition using eye movements: Evidence for continuous mapping models. Journal of Memory & Language 38. 419–439.
-
Babarczy, Anna and Andrea Balázs. 2016. A kognitív kontroll és a preverbális fókusz értelmezése [Cognitive control and the interpretation of the preverbal focus]. In Kas (2016, 151–163).
-
Barr, Dale J. 2008. Analyzing ‘visual world’ eyetracking data using multilevel logistic regression. Journal of Memory & Language 59. 457–474.
-
Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker and Steve Walker. 2015. Fitting linear mixedeffects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67. 1–48.
-
Bergen, Leon and Daniel J. Grodner. 2012. Speaker knowledge influences the comprehension of pragmatic inferences. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 38. 1450–1460.
-
Boersma, Paul and David Weenink. 2005. Praat: Doing phonetics by computer. (Version 6.0.35). (Computer program). Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/.
-
Bott, Lewis and Ira A. Noveck. 2004. Some utterances are underinformative: The onset and time course of scalar inferences. Journal of Memory and Language 51. 437–457.
-
Breheny, Richard, J. Ferguson, Heather and N. Katsos. 2013. Investigating the time course of accessing conversational implicatures during incremental sentence interpretation. Language and Cognitive Processes 28. 443–467.
-
De Neys, Wim and Walter Schaeken. 2007. When people are more logical under cognitive load: Dual task impact on scalar implicature. Experimental Psychology 54. 128–133.
-
Degen, Judith and K. Tanenhaus, Michael. 2011. Making inferences: The case of scalar implicature processing. Proceedings of the 33rd annual conference of Cognitive Science Society 33. 3299–3304.
-
Degen, Judith and Michael K. Tanenhaus. 2015. Processing scalar implicature: A constraintbased approach. Cognitive Science 39. 667–710.
-
É. Kiss, Katalin (ed.). 1995. Discourse configurational languages. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
-
É. Kiss, Katalin. 1998. Identificational focus versus information focus. Language 74. 245–273.
-
É. Kiss, Katalin. 2002. The syntax of Hungarian. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-
É. Kiss, Katalin. 2006. Érvek és ellenérvek a fókusz [+kimeríto] jegyével kapcsolatban [Arguments and counterarguments regarding the [+exhaustive] feature of the focus]. In L. Kálmán (ed.) KB 120: A titkos kötet. Nyelvészeti tanulmányok Bánréti Zoltán és Komlósy András tiszteletére [KB 120: The secret volume. Studies in linguistics in honour of Zoltán Bánréti and András Komlósy]. Budapest: MTA Nyelvtudományi Intézet & Tinta Könyvkiadó. 37–48.
-
É. Kiss, Katalin. 2008. Topic and focus: Two structural positions associated with logical functions in the left periphery of the Hungarian sentence. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 55. 287–296.
-
Edmonds, Joseph and Markéta Janebová (eds.). 2017. Language and linguistic structure. Proceedings of the Olomouc Linguistics Colloquium 2016 (Olomouc Modern Language Series vol. 5). Olomouc: Palacký University.
-
Farkas, Donka. 1986. The syntactic position of focus in Hungarian. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 4. 77–96.
-
Foppolo, Francesca and Maria Teresa Guasti. 2012. Scalar implicatures in child language: Give children a chance. Language Learning and Development 8. 365–394.
-
Foppolo, Francesca and Marco Marelli. 2017. No delay for some inferences. Journal of Semantics 34. 659–681.
-
Gazdar, Gerald. 1979. Pragmatics: Implicature, presupposition, and logical form. New York: Academic Press.
-
Genzel, Susanne, Shinichiro Ishihara and Balázs Surányi. 2015. The prosodic expression of focus, contrast and givenness: A production study of Hungarian. Lingua 165. 183–204.
-
Gerocs, Mátyás, Anna Babarczy and Balázs Surányi. 2014. Exhaustivity in focus: Experimental evidence from Hungarian. In J. Emonds and M. Janebová (eds.) Language use and linguistic structure. Olomouc: Palacký University. 181–194.
-
Geurts, Barts and Paula Rubio-Fernández. 2015. Pragmatics and processing. Ratio 28. 446–469.
-
Grice, H. Paul. 1957. Meaning. Philosophical Review 67. 377–388.
-
Grice, H. Paul. 1975. Logic and conversation. In P. Cole and J. L. Morgan (eds.) Syntax and semantics, vol. 3: Speech acts. New York: Academic Press. 41–58.
-
Grice, H. Paul. 1989. Studies in the way of words. Cambridge, MA:< Harvard University Press.
-
Grodner, Daniel J., Kathleen M. Klein, Natalie M. Carbary and K. Tanenhaus, Michael. 2010. “Some”, and possibly all, scalar inferences are not delayed: Evidence for immediate pragmatic enrichment. Cognition 116. 42–55.
-
Horn, Larry. 1972. On the semantic properties of logical operators in English. Doctoral dissertation. UCLA.
-
Horvath, Julia. 2010. “Discourse features”, syntactic displacement and the status of contrast. Lingua 120. 1346–1369.
-
Huang, Yi Ting and Jesse Snedeker. 2009. Online interpretation of scalar quantifiers: Insight into the semantics–pragmatics interface. Cognitive Psychology 58. 376–415.
-
Jaeger, Florian. 2008. Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards Logit Mixed Models. Journal of Memory and Language 59. 434–446.
-
Káldi, Tamás. 2016. A magyar pre-verbális fókusz interpretációjának tulajdonságai egészséges és Broca-afáziás személyeknél [The interpretational characteristics of the Hungarian pre-verbal focus in Broca-aphasic patients]. In Zs. Gécseg (ed.) LingDok 14. Nyelvész-doktoranduszok dolgozatai [Papers by doctoral students of linguistics]. Szeged: Szegedi Tudományegyetem Nyelvtudományi Doktori Iskola. 105–124.
-
Káldi, Tamás and Anna Babarczy. 2016. A magyar fókusz és a skaláris implikatúrák: egy szemmozgás-követéses kutatás eredményei [The Hungarian focus and scalar implicature: The results of an eye-tracking experiment]. In Kas (2016, 333–346).
-
Káldi, Tamás, Anna Babarczy and Ágnes Bende-Farkas. 2017. Hungarian focus: Presuppositional content and exhaustivity revisited. In Edmonds & Janebová (2017, 245–262).
-
Káldi, Tamás, Levente Madarász, and Anna Babarczy. in press. Contextual triggers of the pre-verbal focus word order –A guided production study. In Approaches to Hungarian. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
-
Kas, Bence (ed.). 2016. “Szavad ne feledd!” –Tanulmányok Bánréti Zoltán tiszteletére [Papers in honour of Zoltán Bánréti ]. Budapest: MTA Nyelvtudományi Intézet.
-
Kas, Bence and Ágnes Lukács. 2013. Focus sensitivity in Hungarian adults and children. Acta Linguistica Hungarica 60. 217–245.
-
Katsos, Napoleon and Dorothy V. M. Bishop. 2011. Pragmatic tolerance: Implications for the acquisition of informativeness and implicature. Cognition 20. 67–81.
-
Kenesei, István. 2005. Hungarian in focus (Review article). Journal of Linguistics 41. 409–35.
-
Kenesei, István. 2006. Focus as identification. In V. Molnár and S. Winkler (eds.) The architecture of focus (Studies in Generative Syntax 82). Berlin & New York: Mouton de Gruyter. 137–168.
-
Kenesei, István. 2009. Quantifiers, negation, and focus on the left periphery in Hungarian. Lingua 119. 564–591.
-
Kornai, András and László Kálmán. 1988. Hungarian sentence intonation. In H. van der Hulst and N. Smith (eds.) Autosegmental studies on pitch accent. Dotrecht: Foris. 183–195.
-
Levinson, Stephen C. 2000. Presumptive meanings: The theory of generalized conversational implicature. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
-
Mády, Katalin. 2015. Prosodic (non-)realisation of broad, narrow and contrastive focus in Hungarian: A production and perception study. In Interspeec. 2015. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the International Speech Communication Association. Dresden: ISCA. 948–952.
-
Marr, David. 1982. Vision: A computational investigation into the human representation and processing of visual information. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
-
Mirman, Daniel. 2017. Growth curve analysis and visualization using R. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.
-
Noveck, Ira A. 2001. When children are more logical than adults: Experimental investigations of scalar implicature. Cognition 78. 165–188.
-
Noveck, Ira A. and Andres Posada. 2003. Characterizing the time course of an implicature: An evoked potentials study. Brain and Language 85. 203–210.
-
Onea, Edgar and David Beaver. 2011. Hungarian focus is not exhausted. In S. Ito and E. Cormany (eds.) Semantics and Linguistic Theory (SALT) 19. Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications. 342–359.
-
Pintér, Lilla. 2018. The acquisition of asserted, presupposed, and pragmatically implied exhaustivity in Hungarian. Acta Linguistica Academica 65. 353–383.
-
R Development Core Team. 2017. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org
-
Skopeteas, Stavros and Gisbert Fanselow. 2011. Focus and the exclusion of alternatives: On the interaction of syntactic structure with pragmatic inference. Lingua 121. 1693–1706.
-
Sperber, Dan and Deirdre Wilson. 1995. Relevance: Communication and cognition. Second edition. Cambridge, MA & Oxford: Blackwell.
-
Stanley, Jason and Zoltán Gendler Szabó. 2000. On quantifier domain restriction. Mind and Language 15. 219–261.
-
Surányi, Balázs. 2011. A szintaktikailag jelöletlen fókusz pragmatikája [On the pragmatics of syntactically unmarked focus]. Általános Nyelvészeti Tanulmányok 23. 281–313.
-
Szabolcsi, Anna. 1980. Az aktuális mondattagolás szemantikájához [On the semantics of actual sentence segmentation]. Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 82. 59–82.
-
Szabolcsi, Anna. 1981. Compositionality in focus. Folia Linguistica 15. 141–161.
-
Szendroi, Kriszta. 2003. A stress-based approach to the syntax of Hungarian focus. The Linguistic Review 20. 37–78.
-
Tomlinson, John M., Todd M. Bailey and Lewis Bott. 2013. Possibly all of that and then some: Scalar implicatures are understood in two steps. Journal of Memory & Language 69. 18–35.
-
Tóth, Péter and Enikő, Csatár . 2017. Preverbal focus and syntactically unmarked focus: A comparison. In Edmonds & Janebová (2017, 227–244).
-
Wedgwood, Daniel. 2005. Shifting the focus. From static structures to the dynamics of interpretation. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
-
Wedgwood, Daniel, Gergely Pethő and Ronnie Cann. 2006. Hungarian ‘focus position’ and English it-clefts: Semantic underspecification of ‘focus’ readings. Ms. University of Edinburgh.
-
Wickham, Hadley. 2009. ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York: Springer.
The author instruction is available in PDF.
Please, download the file from HERE.
Acta Linguistica Academica
Address: Benczúr u. 33. HU–1068 Budapest, Hungary
Phone: (+36 1) 351 0413; (+36 1) 321 4830 ext. 154
Fax: (36 1) 322 9297
E-mail: ala@nytud.mta.hu
Indexing and Abstracting Services:
- Arts and Humanities Citation Index
- Bibliographie Linguistique/Linguistic Bibliography
- International Bibliographies IBZ and IBR
- Linguistics Abstracts
- Linguistics and Language Behaviour Abstracts
- MLA International Bibliography
- SCOPUS
- Social Science Citation Index
- LinguisList
|
2020 |
|
|
Total Cites |
219 |
|
WoS |
|
|
Journal |
0,523 |
|
Rank by |
Linguistics 150/193 (Q4) |
|
Impact Factor |
|
|
Impact Factor |
0,432 |
|
without |
|
|
Journal Self Cites |
|
|
5 Year |
0,500 |
|
Impact Factor |
|
|
Journal |
0,72 |
|
Citation Indicator |
|
|
Rank by Journal |
Linguistics 144/259 (Q3) |
|
Citation Indicator |
|
|
Citable |
19 |
|
Items |
|
|
Total |
19 |
|
Articles |
|
|
Total |
0 |
|
Reviews |
|
|
Scimago |
10 |
|
H-index |
|
|
Scimago |
0,295 |
|
Journal Rank |
|
|
Scimago |
Cultural Studies Q1 |
|
Quartile Score |
Language and Linguistics Q2 |
|
|
Linguistics and Language Q2 |
|
|
Literature and Literary Theory Q1 |
|
Scopus |
72/87=0,8 |
|
Scite Score |
|
|
Scopus |
Literature and Literary Theory 42/825 (Q1) |
|
Scite Score Rank |
Cultural Studies 247/1037 (Q1) |
|
Scopus |
1,022 |
|
SNIP |
|
|
Days from |
58 |
|
submission |
|
|
to acceptance |
|
|
Days from |
68 |
|
acceptance |
|
|
to publication |
|
|
Acceptance |
51% |
| Rate |
| 2019 | |
|---|---|
| Total Cites WoS |
155 |
| Impact Factor | 0,222 |
| Impact Factor without Journal Self Cites |
0,156 |
| 5 Year Impact Factor |
0,322 |
| Immediacy Index |
0,870 |
| Citable Items |
23 |
| Total Articles |
23 |
| Total Reviews |
0 |
| Cited Half-Life |
11,2 |
| Citing Half-Life |
16,6 |
| Eigenfactor Score |
0,00006 |
| Article Influence Score |
0,056 |
| % Articles in Citable Items |
100,00 |
| Normalized Eigenfactor |
0,00780 |
| Average IF Percentile |
9,358 |
| Scimago H-index |
9 |
| Scimago Journal Rank |
0,281 |
| Scopus Scite Score |
53/85=0,6 |
| Scopus Scite Score Rank |
Cultural Studies 293/1002 (Q2) Literature and Literary Theory 60/823(Q1) |
| Scopus SNIP |
0,768 |
| Acceptance Rate |
25% |
| Acta Linguistica Academica | |
|---|---|
| Publication Model | Hybrid |
| Submission Fee | none |
| Article Processing Charge | 900 EUR/article |
| Printed Color Illustrations | 40 EUR (or 10 000 HUF) + VAT / piece |
| Regional discounts on country of the funding agency | World Bank Lower-middle-income economies: 50% World Bank Low-income economies: 100% |
| Further Discounts | Editorial Board / Advisory Board members: 50% Corresponding authors, affiliated to an EISZ member institution subscribing to the journal package of Akadémiai Kiadó: 100% |
| Subscription fee 2022 | Online subsscription: 558 EUR / 696 USD Print + online subscription: 638 EUR / 796 USD |
| Subscription Information | Online subscribers are entitled access to all back issues published by Akadémiai Kiadó for each title for the duration of the subscription, as well as Online First content for the subscribed content. |
| Purchase per Title | Individual articles are sold on the displayed price. |
| Acta Linguistica Academica | |
|---|---|
| Language | English |
| Size | B5 |
| Year of Foundation |
2017 (1951) |
| Volumes per Year |
1 |
| Issues per Year |
4 |
| Founder | Magyar Tudományos Akadémia  |
| Founder's Address |
H-1051 Budapest, Hungary, Széchenyi István tér 9. |
| Publisher | Akadémiai Kiadó |
| Publisher's Address |
H-1117 Budapest, Hungary 1516 Budapest, PO Box 245. |
| Responsible Publisher |
Chief Executive Officer, Akadémiai Kiadó |
| ISSN | 2559-8201 (Print) |
| ISSN | 2560-1016 (Online) |
Monthly Content Usage
| Abstract Views | Full Text Views | PDF Downloads | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 2021 | 0 | 7 | 11 |
| Sep 2021 | 0 | 10 | 3 |
| Oct 2021 | 0 | 10 | 20 |
| Nov 2021 | 0 | 17 | 9 |
| Dec 2021 | 0 | 8 | 8 |
| Jan 2022 | 0 | 7 | 10 |
| Feb 2022 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
‘Family-culture’ and Chinese politeness
An emancipatory pragmatic account
Linguistic exhaustivity inference is context dependent
A visual-world eye-tracking study on Hungarian focus
Copyright Akadémiai Kiadó
AKJournals is the trademark of Akadémiai Kiadó's journal publishing business branch.
Copyright Akadémiai Kiadó AKJournals is the trademark of Akadémiai Kiadó's journal publishing business branch.
Powered by PubFactory