对比焦点标记词“只有”在语言理解中的作用
The Role of the Contrastive Focus Marker “Only” in Language Comprehension
DOI: 10.12677/AP.2022.129361, PDF,    科研立项经费支持
作者: 林 莲：浙江师范大学应用心理学系，浙江 金华
关键词: 对比焦点；只有；心理语言学；Contrastive Focus； Only； Psycholinguistics
摘要: 对比焦点是焦点问题研究中的一个重要分支。焦点标记词则是引起对比焦点的主要方式。本文主要介绍了近年来关于对比焦点标记词“只有”在阅读中的影响，包括在语言理解中的作用和其对备选项的影响。研究表明标记词的存在可以促进语言理解，在引起语境冲突时产生加工困难。并且，标记词会使得备选项产生更大的竞争效应和记忆表征。
Abstract: Contrastive focus is an important branch in the study of focus problems. The focus marker is the main way to cause contrastive focus. This paper focuses on the impact of the contrastive focus marker “only” in reading in recent years, including its role in language comprehension and its ef-fect on alternatives. Research has shown that the presence of markers can facilitate language comprehension and create processing difficulties when contextual conflict is induced. Moreover, markers lead to greater competition effects and memory representations for alternatives.
文章引用：林莲 (2022). 对比焦点标记词“只有”在语言理解中的作用. 心理学进展, 12(9), 3003-3008. https://doi.org/10.12677/AP.2022.129361

参考文献

[1] Birch, S., & Rayner, K. (2010). Effects of Syntactic Prominence on Eye Movements during Reading. Memory & Cognition, 38, 740-752.[CrossRef] 
[2] Carlson, K. (2013). The Role of Only in Contrasts in and out of Context. Discourse Process, 50, 249-275.[CrossRef] 
[3] Chen, L., & Yang, Y. (2015). Emphasizing the Only Character: Emphasis, Attention and Contrast. Cognition, 136, 222-227.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Chen, L., Li, X., & Yang, Y. (2012). Focus, Newness and Their Combination: Processing of Information Structure in Discourse. PLOS ONE, 7, e42533.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Chen, L., Paterson, K. B., Li, X., Li, L., & Yang, Y. (2019). Pragmatic Influences on Sentence Integration: Evidence from Eye Movements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (Hove), 72, 2742-2751.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Chen, S., Tang, Y., Lv, X., Paterson, K. B., & Chen, L. (2021). Similarity between Referents Constrains the Processing of Contrastive Focus during Reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (Hove), 74, 45-53.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] Drenhaus, H., Zimmermann, M., & Vasishth, S. (2011). Exhaustiveness Effects in Clefts Are Not Truth-Functional. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 24, 320-337.[CrossRef] 
[8] Filik, R., Paterson, K. B., & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Parsing with Focus Particles in Context: Eye Movements during the Processing of Relative Clause Ambiguities. Journal of Memory and Language, 53, 473-495.[CrossRef] 
[9] Filik, R., Paterson, K. B., & Liversedge, S. P. (2009). The Influence of Only and Even on Online Semantic Interpretation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 16, 678-683.[CrossRef] 
[10] Gotzner, N., & Spalek, K. (2016). Role of Contrastive and Noncontrastive Associates in the Interpretation of Focus Particles. Discourse Processes, 54, 638-654.[CrossRef] 
[11] Gotzner, N., & Spalek, K. (2019). The Life and Times of Focus Alternatives: Tracing the Activation of Alternatives to a Focused Constituent in Language Comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 13, e12310.[CrossRef] 
[12] Gotzner, N., Wartenburger, I., & Spalek, K. (2016). The Impact of Focus Particles on the Recognition and Rejection of Contrastive Alternatives. Language and Cognition, 8, 59-95.[CrossRef] 
[13] Guenther, C., Maienborn, C., & Schopp, A. (1999). The Processing of Information Structure (pp. 18-42).
[14] Hsu, Y. Y. (2019). Associations between Focus Constructions and Levels of Exhaustivity: An Experimental Investigation of Chinese. PLOS ONE, 14, e0223502.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[15] Kim, C. S., Gunlogson, C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Runner, J. T. (2015). Context-Driven Expectations about Focus Alternatives. Cognition, 139, 28-49.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Kiss, K. E. (1998). Identificational Focus versus Information Focus. Language, 74, 245.[CrossRef] 
[17] Liu, M. (2016). Varieties of Alternatives: Mandarin Focus Particles. Linguistics and Philosophy, 40, 61-95.[CrossRef] 
[18] Liversedge, S. P., Paterson, K. B., & Clayes, E. L. (2002). The Influence of Only on Syntactic Processing of “Long” Relative Clause Sentences. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 55, 225-240.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Ni, W. (1996). Sidestepping Garden Paths: Assessing the Contributions of Syntax, Semantics and Plausibility in Resolving Ambiguities. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 283-334.[CrossRef] 
[20] Norberg, K. A., & Fraundorf, S. H. (2021). Memory Benefits from Contrastive Focus Truly Require Focus: Evidence from Clefts and Connectives. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 36, 1010-1037.[CrossRef] 
[21] Paterson, K. B., Liversedge, S. P., Filik, R., Juhasz, B. J., White, S. J., & Rayner, K. (2007). Focus Identification during Sentence Comprehension: Evidence from Eye Movements. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology (Hove), 60, 1423-1445.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[22] Price, J. M., & Sanford, A. J. (2012). Reading in Healthy Ageing: The Influence of Information Structuring in Sentences. Psychology and Aging, 27, 529-540.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[23] Rooth, M. (1992). A Theory of Focus Interpretation. Natural Language Semantics, 1, 75-116.[CrossRef] 
[24] Spalek, K., Gotzner, N., & Wartenburger, I. (2014). Not Only the Apples: Focus Sensitive Particles Improve Memory for Information-Structural Alternatives. Journal of Memory and Language, 70, 68-84.[CrossRef] 
[25] Stolterfoht, B., Friederici, A. D., Alter, K., & Steube, A. (2007). Processing Focus Structure and Implicit Prosody during Reading: Differential ERP Effects. Cognition, 104, 565-590.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[26] Sturt, P., Sanford, A. J., Stewart, A., & Dawydiak, E. (2004). Linguistic Focus and Good-Enough Representations: An Application of the Change-Detection Paradigm. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 882-888.[CrossRef] 
[27] van der Wal, J. (2011). Focus Excluding Alternatives: Conjoint/Disjoint Marking in Makhuwa. Lingua, 121, 1734-1750.[CrossRef] 
[28] Wang, L., Hagoort, P., & Yang, Y. (2009). Semantic Illusion Depends on Information Structure: ERP Evidence. Brain Research, 1282, 50-56.[CrossRef] [PubMed]