汉语“只有”与“是”字焦点结构加工差异——来自眼动追踪与指数高斯分布分析的证据
Processing Differences between “Zhiyou” and “Shi” Focus Constructions in Chinese —Evidence from Eye-Tracking and Ex-Gaussian Distributional Analyses
DOI: 10.12677/ass.2026.1510855, PDF,   
作者: 刘 菲:福建师范大学心理学院,福建 福州;尹士航:福建师范大学社会历史学院,福建 福州
关键词: 语言焦点;强调;指数高斯分布;眼动追踪;Linguistic Focus; Emphasis; Ex-Gaussian Distribution; Eye Movements
摘要: 语言理解涉及对语音、词汇、句法以及说话者语用意图等多层次信息的快速动态整合,这些信息通常依托特定的语法结构进行传递。语用信息是指说话者或作者未明确陈述但隐含在话语中的意图。焦点副词与焦点结构常用于构建语义对比并传递此类隐含意图。本研究结合眼动追踪技术与指数高斯分布分析方法,系统考察汉语读者在加工焦点副词“只有”和“是”字焦点句时的认知加工差异,旨在探讨不同强调形式的加工机制,进而揭示语用加工过程的复杂性。
Abstract: Language comprehension involves the rapid and dynamic integration of multiple levels of information, including phonological, lexical, syntactic, and pragmatic information, namely, the speaker’s pragmatic intentions. Such information is typically conveyed through specific grammatical structures. Pragmatic information refers to the intentions of the speaker or writer that are not explicitly stated but implied in the utterance. Focus adverbs and focus constructions are often used to construct semantic contrasts and convey such implicit intentions. The present study combined eye-tracking with ex-Gaussian distribution analysis to systematically examine differences in Chinese readers’ cognitive processing of the focus adverb “Zhiyou” and “Shi” focus construction. It aimed to explore the processing mechanisms of different emphatic forms and thereby reveal the complexity of pragmatic processing.
文章引用:刘菲, 尹士航. 汉语“只有”与“是”字焦点结构加工差异——来自眼动追踪与指数高斯分布分析的证据[J]. 社会科学前沿, 2026, 15(10): 418-426. https://doi.org/10.12677/ass.2026.1510855

参考文献

[1] Gotzner, N., Spalek, K. and Wartenburger, I. (2013) How Pitch Accents and Focus Particles Affect the Recognition of Contextual Alternatives. Proceedings of the 35th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Austin, 31 July-3 August 2013, 2434-2440.
[2] Fraundorf, S.H., Watson, D.G. and Benjamin, A.S. (2010) Recognition Memory Reveals Just How Contrastive Accenting Really Is. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 367-386.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.06.004
[3] Chen, L. and Yang, Y. (2015) Emphasizing the Only Character: Emphasis, Attention and Contrast. Cognition, 136, 222-227.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2014.11.015
[4] Hoeks, M., Toosarvandani, M. and Rysling, A. (2023) Processing of Linguistic Focus Depends on Contrastive Alternatives. Journal of Memory and Language, 132, Article 104444.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2023.104444
[5] Hsu, Y.Y. (2019) Associations between Focus Constructions and Levels of Exhaustivity: An Experimental Investigation of Chinese. PLOS ONE, 14, e0223502.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223502
[6] Xue, J. and Onea, E. (2011) Correlation between Presupposition Projection and At-Issueness: An Empirical Study. Proceedings of the ESSLLI 2011 Workshop on Projective Meaning, Ljubljana, 1-5 August 2011, 171-184.
[7] Büring, D. and Križ, M. (2013) It’s That, and That’s It! Exhaustivity and Homogeneity Presuppositions in Clefts (and Definites). Semantics and Pragmatics, 6, 1-29.
https://doi.org/10.3765/sp.6.6
[8] Drenhaus, H., Zimmermann, M. and Vasishth, S. (2011) Exhaustiveness Effects in Clefts Are Not Truth-Functional. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 24, 320-337.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2010.10.004
[9] Staub, A., White, S.J., Drieghe, D., Hollway, E.C. and Rayner, K. (2010) Distributional Effects of Word Frequency on Eye Fixation Durations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 36, 1280-1293.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016896
[10] Drieghe, D., Rayner, K. and Pollatsek, A. (2008) Mislocated Fixations Can Account for Parafoveal-on-Foveal Effects in Eye Movements during Reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 1239-1249.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210701467953
[11] White, S.J. (2008) Eye Movement Control during Reading: Effects of Word Frequency and Orthographic Familiarity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 34, 205-223.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.34.1.205
[12] Ma, G. and Zhuang, X. (2018) Distributional Analyses of Word Frequency Effects in Chinese Sentence Reading and Lexical Decision Tasks: Distributional Analyses in Reading Chinese Texts. Journal of Research in Reading, 41, 187-203.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9817.12259
[13] Rayner, K. and Pollatsek, A. (1989) The Psychology of Reading. Prentice Hall.
[14] R Core Team (2016) R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
https://www.r-project.org/
[15] Barr, D.J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C. and Tily, H.J. (2013) Random Effects Structure for Confirmatory Hypothesis Testing: Keep It Maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 255-278.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
[16] Andrews, S. and Heathcote, A. (2001) Distinguishing Common and Task-Specific Processes in Word Identification: A Matter of Some Moment? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27, 514-544.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.2.514
[17] Balota, D.A., Yap, M.J., Cortese, M.J. and Watson, J.M. (2008) Beyond Mean Response Latency: Response Time Distributional Analyses of Semantic Priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 495-523.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.10.004
[18] Ratcliff, R. (1979) Group Reaction Time Distributions and an Analysis of Distribution Statistics. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 446-461.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.446
[19] Birch, S. and Rayner, K. (2010) Effects of Syntactic Prominence on Eye Movements during Reading. Memory & Cognition, 38, 740-752.
https://doi.org/10.3758/mc.38.6.740