1887
Volume 30, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0929-0907
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9943
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This study explores the extent to which comprehending negated antonyms in Persian involves the mitigation effect, whereby a negated word means less than its antonym. In two mouse-tracking experiments, participants rated sentences containing negated/non-negated scalar (e.g., ) and complementary (e.g., ) antonymous adjectives on a continuous scale. Their reaction times and mouse movements were recorded by MouseTracker. The analysis of reaction times shows that negated adjectives are processed slower than their affirmative counterparts. Moreover, the analysis of mouse trajectories shows that complementary adjectives are rated further apart, closer to the endpoints of the scale than scalar adjectives. We also found that both complementary and scalar adjectives are mitigated under negation, but the mitigation effect is greater in scalar, rather than complementary, adjectives. The results speak in favor of a particular kind of mitigation effect, so-called negative strengthening, which causes negated antonyms to receive a strong pragmatic interpretation towards the opposite member of the pair.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/pc.23001.gol
2024-07-11
2025-02-19
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bates, Douglas, Martin Mächler, Ben Bolker & Steve Walker
    2015 Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software671. 1–48. 10.18637/jss.v067.i01
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01 [Google Scholar]
  2. Benz, Anton, Carla Bombi & Nicole Gotzner
    2018 Scalar diversity and negative strengthening. ZAS Papers in Linguistics601. 191–203. 10.21248/zaspil.60.2018.462
    https://doi.org/10.21248/zaspil.60.2018.462 [Google Scholar]
  3. Blochowiak, Joanna & Cristina Grisot
    2018 The pragmatics of descriptive and metalinguistic negation: Experimental data from French. Glossa: A journal of general linguistics31. 10.5334/gjgl.440
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.440 [Google Scholar]
  4. Burton-Roberts, Noel
    1989 On Horn’s dilemma: Presupposition and negation. Journal of Linguistics25(1). 95–125. 10.1017/S0022226700012111
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700012111 [Google Scholar]
  5. Carpenter, Patricia A. & Marcel A. Just
    1975 Sentence comprehension: A psycholinguistic processing model of verification. Psychological Review82(1). 45–73. 10.1037/h0076248
    https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076248 [Google Scholar]
  6. Carston, Robyn
    1996 Metalinguistic negation and echoic use. Journal of Pragmatics25(3). 309–330. 10.1016/0378‑2166(94)00109‑X
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(94)00109-X [Google Scholar]
  7. 2002Thoughts and utterances: The pragmatics of explicit communication. Oxford: Blackwell. 10.1002/9780470754603
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470754603 [Google Scholar]
  8. Clark, Herbert H. & William G. Chase
    1972 On the process of comparing sentences against pictures. Cognitive Psychology3(3). 472–517. 10.1016/0010‑0285(72)90019‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(72)90019-9 [Google Scholar]
  9. Colston, Herbert L.
    1999 “Not good” is “bad,” but “not bad” is not “good”: An analysis of three accounts of negation asymmetry. Discourse Processes28(3). 237–256. 10.1080/01638539909545083
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638539909545083 [Google Scholar]
  10. Cruse, David A.
    1986Lexical semantics. Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Dale, Rick & Nicholas D. Duran
    2011 The cognitive dynamics of negated sentence verification. Cognitive Science35(5). 983–996. 10.1111/j.1551‑6709.2010.01164.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01164.x [Google Scholar]
  12. Fraenkel, Tamar & Yaacov Schul
    2008 The meaning of negated adjectives. Intercultural Pragmatics5(4). 10.1515/IPRG.2008.025
    https://doi.org/10.1515/IPRG.2008.025 [Google Scholar]
  13. Frazier, Lyn, Charles Clifton & Britta Stolterfoht
    2008 Scale structure: Processing minimum standard and maximum standard scalar adjectives. Cognition106(1). 299–324. 10.1016/j.cognition.2007.02.004
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.02.004 [Google Scholar]
  14. Freeman, Jonathan B. & Nalini Ambady
    2010 MouseTracker: Software for studying real-time mental processing using a computer mouse-tracking method. Behavior Research Methods42(1). 226–241. 10.3758/BRM.42.1.226
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.1.226 [Google Scholar]
  15. Giora, Rachel
    2006 Anything negatives can do affirmatives can do just as well, except for some metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics38(7). 981–1014. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.12.006
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.12.006 [Google Scholar]
  16. Giora, Rachel, Noga Balaban, Ofer Fein & Inbar Alkabets
    2005 Explicit negation as positivity in disguise. InHerbert L. Colston & Albert N. Katz (eds.), Figurative language comprehension: Social and cultural influences, 233–258. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Giora, Rachel, Ofer Fein, Keren Aschkenazi & Inbar Alkabets
    2007 Negation in context: A functional approach to suppression. Discourse Processes43(2). 153–172. 10.1080/01638530709336896
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01638530709336896 [Google Scholar]
  18. Giora, Rachel, Ofer Fein, Jonathan Ganzi, Natalie Alkeslassy Levi & Hadas Sabah
    2005 On negation as mitigation: The case of negative irony. Discourse Processes39(1). 81–100. 10.1207/s15326950dp3901_3
    https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326950dp3901_3 [Google Scholar]
  19. Givón, Thomas
    1978 Negation in language: Pragmatics, function, ontology. On understanding grammar181. 59–116. 10.1163/9789004368873_005
    https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004368873_005 [Google Scholar]
  20. Glenberg, Arthur M., David A. Robertson, Jennifer L. Jansen & Mina C. Johnson-Glenberg
    1999 Not propositions. Cognitive Systems Research1(1). 19–33. 10.1016/S1389‑0417(99)00004‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1389-0417(99)00004-2 [Google Scholar]
  21. Golshaie, Ramin & Sara Incera
    2021 Grammatical aspect and mental activation of implied instruments: A mouse-tracking study in Persian. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research50(4). 737–755. 10.1007/s10936‑020‑09742‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-020-09742-3 [Google Scholar]
  22. Gotzner, Nicole & Diana Mazzarella
    2021 Face management and negative strengthening: The role of power Relations, social Distance, and gender. Frontiers in Psychology121. 602977. 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.602977
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.602977 [Google Scholar]
  23. Gotzner, Nicole, Stephanie Solt & Anton Benz
    2018 Scalar diversity, negative strengthening, and adjectival semantics. Frontiers in Psychology91. 1659. 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01659
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01659 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hasson, Uri & Sam Glucksberg
    2006 Does understanding negation entail affirmation?: An examination of negated metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics (Special Issue: Processes and Products of Negation) 38(7). 1015–1032. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.12.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  25. Horn, Laurence R.
    1989A natural history of negation (The David Hume Series). Chicago: Chicago University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Horn, Laurence R. & Yasuhiko Kato
    2000 Introduction: Negation and polarity at the millennium. InL. Horn & Y. Kato (eds.), Negation and polarity: Syntactic and semantic perspectives, 1–19. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oso/9780198238744.003.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198238744.003.0001 [Google Scholar]
  27. Incera, Sara, Conor T. McLennan, Lisa M. Stronsick & Emily E. Zetzer
    2019 Is tuba masculine or feminine? The timing of grammatical gender. Mind & Language34(5). 667–680. 10.1111/mila.12223
    https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12223 [Google Scholar]
  28. Jones, Steven
    2002Antonymy: A corpus-based perspective. London: Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/Antonymy-A-Corpus-Based-Perspective/Jones/p/book/9781138963634. (21 June, 2023). 10.4324/9780203166253_chapter_11
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203166253_chapter_11 [Google Scholar]
  29. Jones, Steven, M. Lynne Murphy, Carita Paradis & Caroline Willners
    2012Antonyms in English: Construals, constructions and canonicity (Studies in English Language). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139032384
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139032384 [Google Scholar]
  30. Kaup, Barabara, Jana Ludtke & Rolf A. Zwaan
    2005 Effects of negation, truth value, and delay on picture recognition after reading affirmative and negative sentences. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society27(27). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/19s068vb. (18 October, 2021).
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Kaup, Barbara, Richard H. Yaxley, Carol J. Madden, Rolf A. Zwaan & Jana Lüdtke
    2007 Experiential simulations of negated text information. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology60(7). 976–990. 10.1080/17470210600823512
    https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210600823512 [Google Scholar]
  32. Kennedy, Christopher
    2007 Vagueness and grammar: The semantics of relative and absolute gradable adjectives. Linguistics and Philosophy30(1). 1–45. 10.1007/s10988‑006‑9008‑0
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-006-9008-0 [Google Scholar]
  33. Kennedy, Christopher & Louise McNally
    2005 Scale structure, degree modification, and the semantics of gradable predicates. Language81(2). 345–381. 10.1353/lan.2005.0071
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2005.0071 [Google Scholar]
  34. Khodaparasti, Farajollah
    1997Persian comprehensive dictionary of synonyms and antonyms [In Persian]. Shiraz: Daneshnameh Fars.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. König, Ekkehard & Elizabeth C. Traugott
    2011 Pragmatic strengthening and semantic change: The conventionalizing of conversational implicature. InWerner Hüllen & Rainer Schulze (eds.), Understanding the lexicon: Meaning, sense and world knowledge in lexical semantics, 110–124. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. 10.1515/9783111355191.110
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9783111355191.110 [Google Scholar]
  36. Kostić, Nataša
    2017 Adjectival antonyms in discourse: A corpus study of scalar and complementary antonyms. Folia Linguistica51(3). 587–610. 10.1515/flin‑2017‑0022
    https://doi.org/10.1515/flin-2017-0022 [Google Scholar]
  37. Krifka, Manfred
    2007 Negated antonyms: Creating and filling the gap. InUli Sauerland & Penka Stateva (eds.), Presupposition and implicature in compositional semantics, 163–177. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Lehrer, Adrienne & Keith Lehrer
    1982 Antonymy. Linguistics and Philosophy5(4). 483–501. 10.1007/BF00355584
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00355584 [Google Scholar]
  39. Loebner, Sebastian
    2013Understanding semantics (2nd ed.). London: Routledge. 10.4324/9780203528334
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203528334 [Google Scholar]
  40. Lozano, Luis M., Eduardo García-Cueto & José Muñiz
    2008 Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales. Methodology4(2). 73–79. 10.1027/1614‑2241.4.2.73
    https://doi.org/10.1027/1614-2241.4.2.73 [Google Scholar]
  41. Lüdtke, Jana & Barbara Kaup
    2006 Context effects when reading negative and affirmative sentences. InProceedings of the 28th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 1735–1740.
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Lyons, John
    1977Semantics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Maciuszek, Jozef
    2008 Processing negation in the context of adjectival antonymy. Psychology of Language and Communication121. 17–43. 10.2478/v10057‑008‑0007‑9
    https://doi.org/10.2478/v10057-008-0007-9 [Google Scholar]
  44. Mayo, Ruth, Yaacov Schul & Eugene Burnstein
    2004 “I am not guilty” vs “I am innocent”: Successful negation may depend on the schema used for its encoding. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology40(4). 433–449. 10.1016/j.jesp.2003.07.008
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2003.07.008 [Google Scholar]
  45. Mazzarella, Diana & Nicole Gotzner
    2021 The polarity asymmetry of negative strengthening: Dissociating adjectival polarity from face-threatening potential. Glossa: A journal of general linguistics6(1). 10.5334/gjgl.1342
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.1342 [Google Scholar]
  46. Murphy, M. Lynne
    2003Semantic relations and the lexicon: Antonymy, synonymy and other paradigms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511486494
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486494 [Google Scholar]
  47. Noh, Eun-Ju, Hyeree Choo & Sungryong Koh
    2013 Processing metalinguistic negation: Evidence from eye-tracking experiments. Journal of Pragmatics571. 1–18. 10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2013.07.005 [Google Scholar]
  48. Paradis, Carita
    2001 Adjectives and boundedness. Cognitive Linguistics12(1). 47–65. 10.1515/cogl.12.1.47
    https://doi.org/10.1515/cogl.12.1.47 [Google Scholar]
  49. Paradis, Carita & Caroline Willners
    2006 Antonymy and negation: The boundedness hypothesis. Journal of Pragmatics38(7). 1051–1080. 10.1016/j.pragma.2005.11.009
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2005.11.009 [Google Scholar]
  50. R Core Team
    R Core Team 2021R: A language and environment for statistical computing (4.1.1) [Computer software]. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://www.R-project.org
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Rivera-Garrido, Noelia, M. P. Ramos-Sosa, Michela Accerenzi & Pablo Brañas-Garza
    2022 Continuous and binary sets of responses differ in the field. Scientific Reports12(1). 14376. 10.1038/s41598‑022‑17907‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-17907-4 [Google Scholar]
  52. Rotstein, Carmen & Yoad Winter
    2004 Total adjectives vs. partial adjectives: Scale structure and higher-order modifiers. Natural Language Semantics12(3). 259–288. 10.1023/B:NALS.0000034517.56898.9a
    https://doi.org/10.1023/B:NALS.0000034517.56898.9a [Google Scholar]
  53. Ruytenbeek, Nicolas, Steven Verheyen & Benjamin Spector
    2017 Asymmetric inference towards the antonym: Experiments into the polarity and morphology of negated adjectives. Glossa: A journal of general linguistics. 2(1). 10.5334/gjgl.151
    https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.151 [Google Scholar]
  54. Solt, Stephanie
    2019 Adjective meaning and scales. InChris Cummins & Napoleon Katsos (eds.), The Oxford handbook of experimental semantics and pragmatics, 263–282. Oxford University Press. 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.013.27
    https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198791768.013.27 [Google Scholar]
  55. Spivey, Michael J., Marc Grosjean & Günther Knoblich
    2005 Continuous attraction toward phonological competitors. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America102(29). 10393–10398. 10.1073/pnas.0503903102
    https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0503903102 [Google Scholar]
  56. Syrett, Kristen, Evan Bradley, Christopher Kennedy & Jeffrey Lidz
    2006 Shifting standards: Children’s understanding of gradable adjectives. InKamil Ud Deen, Jun Nomura, Barbara Schulz & Bonnie D. Schwarz (eds.), Proceedings of the Inaugural Conference on Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition – North America (GALANA), 353–364. Cambridge, Mass.
    [Google Scholar]
  57. Tian, Ye & Richard Breheny
    2018 Pragmatics and negative sentence processing. InChris Cummins & Napoleon Katsos (eds.), The Oxford handbook of experimental pragmatics, 195–207. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  58. Traugott, Elizabeth C.
    2012 Pragmatics and language change. InKeith Allan & Kasia Jaszczolt (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of pragmatics, 549–565. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139022453.030
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139022453.030 [Google Scholar]
  59. Van Tiel, Bob, Emiel Van Miltenburg, Natalia Zevakhina & Bart Geurts
    2016 Scalar diversity. Journal of Semantics33(1). 137–175. 10.1093/jos/ffu017
    https://doi.org/10.1093/jos/ffu017 [Google Scholar]
  60. Wason, P. C.
    1961 Response to affirmative and negative binary statements. British Journal of Psychology521. 133–142. 10.1111/j.2044‑8295.1961.tb00775.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1961.tb00775.x [Google Scholar]
  61. Weicker, Merle & Petra Schulz
    2018 Is clean the same as not dirty? On the understanding of absolute gradable adjectives. InAnne B. Bertonini & Maxwell J. Kaplan (eds.), Proceedings of the 42nd annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 790–802. Somerville, MA.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.23001.gol
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/pc.23001.gol
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error