Processing negation without context – why and when we represent the positive argument

References

• Altmann , G., & Kamide, Y. (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73(3), 247–264. doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(99)00059-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altmann, G., & Kamide, Y. (2007). The real-time mediation of visual attention by language and world knowledge: Linking anticipatory (and other) eye movements to linguistic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 57(4), 502–518. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2006.12.004
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altmann, G., & Kamide, Y. (2009). Discourse-mediation of the mapping between language and the visual world: Eye movements and mental representation. Cognition, 111(1), 55–71. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.12.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Altmann, G., & Steedman, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30(3), 191–238. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(88)90020-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnold, J.E., Eisenband, J., Brown-Schmidt, S., & Trueswell, J.C. (2000). The rapid use of gender information: Evidence of the time course of pronoun resolution from eyetracking. Cognition, 76, B13–B26. doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(00)00073-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arroyo, F. (1982). Negatives in context. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 21(1), 118–126. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(88)90020-0
   Google Scholar
• Barr, D. J. (2008). Pragmatic expectations and linguistic evidence: Listeners anticipate but do not integrate common ground. Cognition, 109(1), 18–40. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.07.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2013). Praat: Doing Phonetics by Computer (Version 5.3. 49). doi:10.1097/aud.0b013e31821473f7
   Google Scholar
• Breheny, R., Ferguson, H. J., & Katsos, N. (2012). Investigating the timecourse of accessing conversational implicatures during incremental sentence interpretation. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(4), 443–467. doi:10.1080/01690965.2011.649040
   Google Scholar
• Breheny, R., Ferguson, H. J., & Katsos, N. (2013). Taking the epistemic step: Toward a model of on-line access to conversational implicatures. Cognition, 126(3), 423–440. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2012.11.012
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown-Schmidt, S., Gunlogson, C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). Addressees distinguish shared from private information when interpreting questions during interactive conversation. Cognition, 107(3), 1122–1134. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.11.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1975). Sentence comprehension: A psycholinguistic processing model of verification. Psychological Review, 82(1), 45–73. doi:10.1037/h0076248
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark, H. (1996). Using language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/s0022226798217361
   Google Scholar
• Clark, H. H., & Chase, W. G. (1972). On the process of comparing sentences against pictures. Cognitive Psychology, 3(3), 472–517. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(72)90019-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper, R. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology, 6, 84–107. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(74)90005-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dale, R., & Duran, N. D. (2011). The cognitive dynamics of negated sentence verification. Cognitive Science, 35(5), 983–996. doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2010.01164.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson, H. J., & Breheny, R. (2011). Eye movements reveal the time-course of anticipating behaviour based on complex, conflicting desires. Cognition, 119(2), 179–196. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2011.01.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson, H. J., & Breheny, R. (2012). Listeners’ eyes reveal spontaneous sensitivity to others’ perspectives. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 257–263. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferguson, H. J., Scheepers, C., & Sanford, A. J. (2010). Expectations in counterfactual and theory of mind reasoning. Language & Cognitive Processes, 25(3), 297–346. doi:10.1080/01690960903041174
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischler, I., Bloom, P. A., Childers, D. G., Roucos, S. E., & Perry, N. W. (1983). Brain potentials related to stages of sentence verification. Psychophysiology, 20(4), 400–409. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.1983.tb00920.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geurts, B. (2010). Quantity implicature. Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/cbo9780511975158
   Google Scholar
• Ginzburg, J. (2012). The interactive stance. CSLI: Center. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199697922.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Grice, H. P. (1989). Logic and conversation. In Studies in the way of words (pp. 22–40). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. doi:10.2307/2219730
   Google Scholar
• Grodner, D., Klein, N. M., Carbary, K. M., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2010). “Some,” and possibly all, scalar inferences are not delayed: Evidence for immediate pragmatic enrichment. Cognition, 116(1), 42–55. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2010.03.014
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hallett, P. E. (1986). Eye movements. In K. B. Boff, L. Kaufman, & J. P. Thomas (Eds.), Handbook of perception and human performance I: Sensory processes and perception (pp. 10–102). New York: Wiley. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2010.03.014
   Google Scholar
• Hasson, U., & Glucksberg, S. (2006). Does understanding negation entail affirmation? An examination of negated metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics, 38(7), 1015–1032. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.12.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heldner, M., & Edlund, J. (2010). Pauses, gaps and overlaps in conversations. Journal of Phonetics, 38(4), 555–568. doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2010.08.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heller, D., Grodner, D., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2008). The role of perspective in identifying domains of reference. Cognition, 108(3), 831–836. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.04.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaup, B., Yaxley, R. H., Madden, C. J., Zwaan, R., & Lüdtke, J. (2007). Experiential simulations of negated text information. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 976–990. doi:10.1080/17470210600823512
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J., & Zwaan, R. (2006). Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed? Journal of Pragmatics, 38, 1033–1050. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.012
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaup, B., Zwaan, R., & Lüdtke, J. (2007). The experiential view of language comprehension: How is negated text information represented? In F. Schmalhofer & C. A. Perfetti (Eds.), Higher level language processes in the brain: Inference and comprehension processes (pp. 255–288). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. doi:10.4324/9780203936443
   Google Scholar
• Lüdtke, J., Friedrich, C. K., De Filippis, M., & Kaup, B. (2008). Event-related potential correlates of negation in a sentence-picture verification paradigm. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(8), 1355–1370. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20093
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lüdtke, J., & Kaup, B. (2006). Context effects when reading negative and affirmative sentences. In R. Sun & N. Miyake (Eds.), Proceedings of the 28th annual conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 1735–1740). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
   Google Scholar
• Nieuwland, M. S., & Kuperberg, G. R. (2008). When the truth is not too hard to handle: An event-related potential study on the pragmatics of negation. Psychological Science : A Journal of the American Psychological Society, 19(12), 1213–1218. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02226.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. doi:10.4324/9780203357798
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, C. (2012). Information structure in discourse: Towards an integrated formal theory of pragmatics. Semantics and Pragmatics, 5(6), 1–69. doi:10.3765/sp.5.6
   Google Scholar
• Smithson, M., & Verkuilen, J. (2006). A better lemon squeezer? Maximum-likelihood regression with beta-distributed dependent variables. Psychological Methods, 11(1), 54–71. doi:10.1037/1082-989x.11.1.54
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1986). Relevance: Communication and cognition. Oxford: Blackwell. doi:10.1017/s004740450001318x
   Google Scholar
• Stalnaker, R. C. (1978). Assertion. In Cole, P. (Ed.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 9, pp. 315–332). New York: Academic Press. doi:10.1002/9780470758335.ch5
   Google Scholar
• Stivers, T., Enfield, N. J., Brown, P., Englert, C., Hayashi, M., Heinemann, T., … Levinson, S. C. (2009). Universals and cultural variation in turn-taking in conversation. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 106(26), 10587–10592. doi:10.1073/pnas.0903616106
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M., Eberhard, K., & Sedivy, J. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268(5217), 1632–1634. doi:10.1126/science.7777863
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tettamanti, M., Manenti, R., Della Rosa, P. A., Falini, A., Perani, D., Cappa, S. F., & Moro, A. (2008). Negation in the brain: Modulating action representations. Neuroimage, 43(2), 358–367. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2008.08.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tian, Y., & Breheny, R. (2015). Dynamic pragmatic view of negation processing. Negation and Polarity: Experimental Perspectives, 21–43. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-17464-8_2
   Google Scholar
• Tian, Y., Breheny, R., & Ferguson, H. J. (2010). Why we simulate negated information: A dynamic pragmatic account. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(12), 2305–2312. doi:10.1080/17470218.2010.525712
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomasino, B., Weiss, P. H., & Fink, G. R. (2010). To move or not to move: Imperatives modulate action-related verb processing in the motor system. Neuroscience, 169(1), 246–258. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2010.04.039
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tomlinson, J. M., Bailey, T. M., & Bott, L. (2013). Possibly all of that and then some: Scalar implicatures are understood in two steps. Journal of Memory and Language, 69(1), 18–35. doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2010.04.039
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tottie, G. (1991). Negation in English speech and writing: A study in variation. San Diego: Academic Press. doi:10.2307/416702
   Google Scholar
• Trabasso, T., & Rollins, H. (1971). Storage and verification stages in processing concepts. Cognitive Psychology, 2(3), 239–289. doi:10.1016/0010-0285(71)90014-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Berkum, J., van den Brink, D., Tesink, C. M. J. Y., Kos, M., & Hagoort, P. (2008). The neural integration of speaker and message. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(4), 580–591. doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20054
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wason, P. (1965). The contexts of plausible denial. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 4(1), 7–11. doi:10.1016/s0022-5371(65)80060-3
   Google Scholar