A comparative study of evidentiality auditory comprehension of Persian, Turkish, and English

Document Type : Research Paper

Author

fine art collage, tehran University

Abstract

This study investigates processing of sentences containing evidentials by the cross-modal decision method. The main question of this inquiry is the psycholinguistic reality of evidentiality hierarchy. The theoretical framework is mainly based on episodic processing. As for the results, they show that a) morpho-syntactic evidential encodings have no direct influence on the processing time and cognitive load, b) both in Persian and Turkish in evidentiality hierarchy, sentences containing direct witnessed evidentials are processed later and longer than the second- hand inferred evidentials , and c) direct and indirect reported speech are processed differently, in such a way that participants showed superior and faster memory for the exact wording of direct than indirect speech.

Keywords

References

-  امیدواری، آرزو و گلفام، ارسلان (1396). «بررسی گواه‌نمایی در زبان فارسی: رویکردی رده شناختی»، جستارهای زبانی، دوره 8، ش 1 (پیاپی 36): 99-79.
-  مهرابی، معصومه (1389). بازنمود ذهنی فعل فارسی به هنگام ادراک شنیداری جمله، رساله برای دریافت درجه دکتری زبانشناسی، تهران: دانشگاه علامه طباطبایی.
-  Aksu-Koc, A. (1988). The Acquisition of Aspect and Modality: the case of past reference in Turkish, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
-  Alexander, J. D., and Nygaard, L. C. (2008). “Reading Voices and Hearing Text: talker specific auditory imagery in reading”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, Human Perception and Performance, 34: 446-459.
-  Arslan, S., D. D. Kok, and Bastiaanse, R. (2015). “Processing Grammatical Evidentiality and Time Reference in Turkish Heritage and Monolingual Speakers”, Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 20(3): 457-472.
-  Arslan, S., R. Bastiaanse, and Felser, C. (2015). “Looking at the Evidence in Visual World: eye- movements reveal how bilingual and monolingual Turkish speakers process grammatical evidentiality”, Frontiers in Psychology. V. 6: 1-13.
-  Cele- Murcia, M. Brintons, and Snow, M. A. (2014). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language, Boston: National Geographic Learning.
-  Eerland, A., J. A. A. Engelen, and Zwaan R. A. (2013). “The Influence of Direct and Indirect Speech on Mental Representation”, Plos one online journal. V. 8. Issue 6: 13-27.
-  Kurby, C., J. P. Magliano, and Rapp, D. N. (2009). “Those Voices in Your Head:Activation of Auditory Images during Reading”, Cognition, 112: 457- 461.
-  Raney, G. E. (1993). “Monitoring Changes in Cognitive Load During Reading: An Event-Related Brain Potential and Reaction Time Analysis”, Journal of Experimental Psychology, Learning, Memory, and Cognition. V. 19. No.10: 51-69.
-  Rost, M. (2011). Teaching and researching Listening, London: Longman.
-  Thompson, G. (1996). “Voices in The Text: Discourse perspectives on Language Reports”, Applied linguistics, Vol. 17.No 4: 501-530.
-  Wainer, H. (1977). “Speed vs. Reaction Time as a Measure of Cognitive Performance”, Memory and Cognition, v.5(2): 278-280.
-  Willett,T.(1988). “A Cross-linguistic Survey of the grammaticization of evidentiality” , Studies in Languages,12: 51-97.
-  Yao, B. and Scheepers, C. (2011). “Contextual Modulation of Reading Rate for Direct vs. Indirect Speech Quotations”, Cognition, 121: 447-453.
-  Yao, B. and Scheepers, C. (2015). “Inner Voice Experience during Processing of Direct vs. Indirect Speech”, Studies in theoretical Psycholinguistics, 46: 287- 307.
-  Yao, B., P. Belin, and Scheepers, C. (2011). “Silent Reading of Direct vs. Indirect Speech Activates Voices-Selective areas in Auditory Cortex”, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23: 3146-3152.
-  Yao, B., P. Belin, and Scheepers, C. (2012). “Brain Talks over Boring Quotes: topdown activation of voice-selective areas while listening to monotonous direct speech quotation”, Neuroimage, 60: 1832-1842.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics