Causality: relations between world knowledge and linguistic knowledge
Additional Files
DOI
https://doi.org/10.25267/Pragmalinguistica.2012.i20.09Info
Authors
- Gabriela Mariel Zunino (AR) Facultad de Filosofía y Letras - Universidad de Buenos Aires CONICET (Argentina)
- Valeria Abusamra (AR) Facultad de Filosofía y Letras - Universidad de Buenos Aires
- Alejandro Raiter (AR) Facultad de Filosofía y Letras - Universidad de Buenos Aires
Abstract
The aim of this article is to study the articulation between world knowledge and linguistic
(semantic) knowledge during the comprehension process of casual relations. Our initial hypothesis: the order of presentation of the casual relation has consequences on the
effort required to process the relation. Our specific objective: to verify this hypothesis in four conditions, for two texts types. In order to do this, it was evaluated the comprehension of bisentential texts two types (“everyday texts” and “scientific texts”), manipulating two variables in each group: a) cause-effect order vs. effect cause order and b) absence vs.
presence of specific connective. The results show, at least, two things: a) texts with causal relations in effect-cause order, without connective, require more effort to be
comprehended than those with the relation in cause-effect order; b) in “scientific texts” with causal relation in effect-cause order, the presence of the connective (semantic clue) is
essential to construct and comprehend the relation.
Keywords
Downloads
Supporting Agencies
How to Cite
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Pragmalingüística
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
ANSCOMBRE, J. C. & DUCROT, O. (1994): La argumentación en la lengua, Madrid: Gredos.
CARON, J., MICKO, H. C., & THURING, M. (1988): "Conjunctions and the recall of composite sentences", Journal of Memory and Language, 27, pp. 309-323.
FLETCHER, C. R. (1989): “A Process Model of Casual reasoning in Comprehension”, Reading Psychology 10 (1), pp. 45-66. Publicación electrónica: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0270 271890100104 (Fecha consulta: 27/04/2011)
GALÁN RODRÍGUEZ, C. (1999): “La subordinación causal y final”, Bosque I., Demonte V., (Dirs.).
Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española. Madrid: Espasa Calpe, cap. 56.
GOLDMAN S., GRAESSER, A., VAN DEN BROEK, P. (1999): Narrative Comprehension, Causality, and Coherence. Essays in Honor of Tom Trabasso, Lawrence Erlbaum. Londres:
GOLDVA, E & JOHNSONLAIRD P. N. (2001): “Naive causality: a mental model theory of causal meaning and
reasoning”, Cognitive Science 25, 565-610. Publicación electrónica: http://mentalmodels.princeton.
edu/papers/2001causality.pdf (Fecha de consulta: 13/11/2010).
HABERLANDT, K. (1982): "Reader expectations in text comprehension.", J. F. Le Ny, & W. Kintsch (Eds.). Language and Comprehension. Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 239-250.
KODA, N. (2008): "Connective Interference and Facilitation: Do Connectives Really Facilitate the Understanding of Discourse?", The Annual Reports of Graduate School of Arts and Letters, Tohoku University, 56, pp. 29-42.
LEÓN, J. & PEÑALBA, G. (2009): "Understanding Causality an Temporal Sequence in Scientific Discourse.", José Otero, J. A. León, and A.C. Graesser (Eds), The Psychology of Science Text Comprehension, Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, pp. 155-178.
LOUWERSE, M. M. (2002): "An analytic and cognitive parameterization of coherence relations.", Cognitive Linguistics, 12, pp. 291-315. Publicación electrónica: http://madresearchlab.org"Selected_Publications_files/Louwerse2002.pdf (Fecha de consulta: 10/04/2010).
MARTÍN ZORRAQUINO& PORTOLÉS, J. (1999): “Los marcadores del discurso”, I. Bosque y V. Demonte (dirs.).
Gramática descriptiva de la lengua española, Madrid: Espasa Calpe, capítulo 63.
MILLIS, K. & JUST, M. (1994): “The influence of connectives in sentence comprehension”, Journal of Memory
Language, 33, pp. 128-147.
MILLIS, K. K., GOLDING, J. M. & BARKER, G. (1995): “Causal connectives increase inference generation.”, Discourse Processes, 20, pp. 29-49.
MURRAY, J. D. (1997): “Connectives and narrative text: The role of continuity.”, Memory & Cognition, 25(2), pp. 227-236.
MYERS, J. L., SHINJO, M., DUFFY, S. A. (1987): “Degree relatedness Journal and of of causal memory.”, Memory and Language, 26, pp. 453-465.
PORTOLÉS, J. (1998): Marcadores del discurso, Barcelona: Ariel.
SORIA, C. (2005): "Constraint on the Use of Connectives in Discourse", Istituto di Linguistica Computazionale del CNR, Pisa. Publicación electrónica: http://w3.erss.univtlse2.fr/sem05/proceedings-final/l5-Soria.pdf (Fecha de consulta: 10/04/2010)
SPERBER, D. & WILSON, D. (1995): Relevance. Communication and cognition, Oxford:Blackell.
TRABASSO, T., SECCO, T. & VAN DEN BROEK, P. (1984): “Causal cohesion and story coherence.”, H. Mandl, N. L. Stein, y T. Trabasso (Eds.): Learning and comprehension of text, Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, pp.83-111.
TRABASSO, T. & VAN DEN BROEK, P. (1985): “Causal thinking and the representation of narrative events.”, Journal of Memory and Language, 24, pp.612-630.
TRAXLER, M., BYBEE, M., PICKERING, M. (1997): “Influence of Connectives on language comprehension: Eye tracking Evidence for Incremental Interpretation.”, The quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 50 A (3), pp. 481-497. Publicación electrónica: http://www.psy.ed.ac.uk/people /martinp/pdf/16-Influence-of connectives.pdf (Fecha de consulta: 13/05/2011)
VAN DEN BROEK, P. (1990): "The causal inference maker: towards a process of inference generation in text comprehension", D.A. Balota, G.B. Flores d'Arcais, and K. Rayner: Comprehension Processes in Reading Hillsdale, NY: Erlbaum, pp. 423-445.
ZWANN, R., RADWANSKY, G. (1998): "Situation Models in Language Comprehension and Memory", Psychological bulletin, 123, pp. 162-185.