When some triggers a scalar inference out of the blue. An electrophysiological study of a Stroop-like conflict elicited by single words

Rashid S, Nimehchisalem V, Geok Imm L, Price J, Ronderos CR. What second-language speakers can tell us about pragmatic processing

Upon hearing the phrase Some cats meow, a listener might pragmatically infer that 'Some but not all cats meow'. This is known as a scalar implicature and it often arises when a speaker produces a weak linguistic expression instead of a stronger one. Several L2 studies claim that pragmatic inferences are generated by default and their comprehension presents no challenges to L2 learners. However, the evidence obtained from these studies largely stems from offline-based tasks that provide limited information about how scalar implicatures are processed. This study investigated scalar implicature processing among L2 speakers of English and the degree to which differences in L2 proficiency and Theory of Mind abilities would modulate pragmatic responding. The experiment used an online sentence verification paradigm that required participants to judge, among multiple control items, the veracity of under-informative sentences, such as Some cats are mammals, and to respond as quickly as possible. A true response to this item is indicative of a logical some and perhaps all reading and a false response to a pragmatic some but not all reading. Our results showed evidence that scalar inferences are not generated by default. The answer linked to the pragmatic reading some but not all took significantly longer to make relative to the answer that relies on the logical interpretation some and perhaps all. This processing slowdown was also significantly larger among participants with lower English proficiency. Further exploratory analyses of participants' Theory of Mind, as measured by the Social Skill subscale in the Autism Spectrum Quotient, revealed that socially inclined participants are more likely than the socially disinclined to derive a scalar inference. These results together provide new empirical insights into how L2 learners process scalar implicatures and thus implications for processing theories in experimental pragmatics and second language acquisition.

Scalar implicature is not a default process: An ERP study of the scalar implicature processing under the effect of focus factor

This study explored the processing mechanism of scalar implicatures under different focus conditions by the picture-sentence verification paradigm. Through the guidance of different types of incorrect sentences, scalar terms were controlled to adjust whether they were at the focus position and divided the focused and non-focused conditions. The behavioural results showed that when the content of the picture was "all squares have…", more participants under the focused condition could judge that the underinformative sentence "some squares have…" was not appropriate. Moreover, according to whether participants could stably determine that the underinformative sentences were inappropriate, they were divided into pragmatic and semantic responders. The ERP results showed that pragmatic responders evoked a P200 effect, an N400 effect and a sustained negativity effect according to the scalar terms, and a P200 effect and a sustained positivity effect according to the sentence-final words. In contrast, semantic responders did not elicit any ERP effect. These results indicate that the generation of scalar implicatures is not completely determined by the scalar terms and that the focus factor plays an important role in the scalar implicatures inference.

Complex Inferential Processes Are Needed for Implicature Comprehension, but Not for Implicature Production

Upon hearing “Some of Michelangelo’s sculptures are in Rome,” adults can easily generate a scalar implicature and infer that the intended meaning of the utterance corresponds to “Some but not all Michelangelo’s sculptures are in Rome.” Comprehension experiments show that preschoolers struggle with this kind of inference until at least 5 years of age. Surprisingly, the few studies having investigated children’s production of scalar expressions like some and all suggest that production is adult-like already in their third year of life. Thus, children’s production of implicatures seems to develop at least 2 years before their comprehension of implicatures. In this paper, we present a novel account of scalar implicature generation in the framework of Bidirectional Optimality Theory: the Asymmetry Account. We show that the production–comprehension asymmetry is predicted to emerge because the comprehension of some requires the hearer to consider the speaker’s perspective, but the production of some does not require the speaker to consider the hearer’s perspective. Hence, children’s comprehension of scalar expressions, but not their production of scalar expressions, is predicted to be related to their theory of mind development. Not possessing fully developed theory of mind abilities yet, children thus have difficulty in comprehending scalar expressions such as some in an adult-like way. Our account also explains why variable performance is found in experimental studies testing children’s ability to generate scalar implicatures; moreover, it describes the differences between children’s and adults’ implicature generation in terms of their ability to recursively apply theory of mind; finally, it sheds new light on the question why the interpretation of numerals does not require implicature generation.

RETRACTED: Neurophysiological mechanisms underlying the modulation of cognitive control by simultaneous conflicts

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/article-withdrawal) This article has been retracted at the request of the Editor-in-Chief with the agreement of the authors. In a previous version of the paper reviewed in another journal, the reviewer suggested changing the filter settings because the setting used (reported hp 0.5) can produce serious artifactual effects on the ERP components (N200, N400 and P300) that the authors were interested in. In this published version of the article a different filter (0.2Hz HP) setting is reported in the methods. However, the results sections are identical. A change in filter setting should have led to different results. There is reasonable doubt that the reported filter settings were indeed applied on the reported data. However, there is consensus that this was due to an error, acknowledged by the authors who fully co-operated with the investigation and agreed with the decision. There is no indication of any fraudulent motivation.

Stimulus Feature Conflicts Enhance Motor Inhibitory Control Processes in the Lateral Prefrontal Cortex

The ability to inhibit prepotent responses is a central facet of cognitive control. However, the role of perceptual factors in response inhibition processes is still poorly understood and an underrepresented field of research. In the current study, we focus on the role of conflicts between perceptual stimulus features (so-called S-S conflicts) for response inhibition. We introduce a novel semantic Stroop Condition task and analyze EEG data using source localization and temporal EEG signal decomposition methods to delineate the neural mechanisms how semantic S-S conflicts modulate response inhibition. We show that semantic conflicts enhance response inhibition performance by modulating neural processes relating to conflict resolution mechanisms in the middle and inferior frontal cortex, as well as the ACC. Opposed to that, Stroop-like (S-S) conflicts compromise response execution by affecting decision processes in inferior parietal cortices. The data suggest that when action control processes and their neurophysiological correlates depend on regions specialized in the processing of semantic conflicts, there is an improvement in response inhibition. The results show that Stroop-like semantic conflicts have opposite effects depending on whether a response has to be executed or inhibited. These opposing effects are then also associated with different functional-neuroanatomical structures. The results of the study show mechanisms by which stimulus-related processes influence mechanisms of response control.