CAJ | 학술논문

通过眼动实验考察了语篇背景对不同类型句子语义整合过程的影响。句子类型有3个水平：（1）宾语违反了动词的选择性限制;（2）宾语符合选择性限制,但是违反了世界知识;（3）无违反。语篇背景有2个水平：（1）中性背景;（2）校正背景。在中性语篇背景下,句子（1）（2）是不合适的;而在校正背景下,三种句子都是合理的。24名大学生被试自然阅读的眼动数据表明,违反动词选择性限制的目标词上的首次注视时间、回视路径时间和总注视时间,在中性背景下比在校正背景下长,注视点个数也更多;而在非选择性限制违反条件下,语篇背景的效应只在总注视时间和注视点个数两个指标上显著。这些结果表明,当句子中的宾语违反了动词的选择性限制时,语篇背景影响了宾语的早期和晚期加工。而当宾语只违反世界知识时,语篇背景的作用体现在晚期阶段。语篇背景对当前信息的整合是动态的过程,并不是只能在固定某个阶段起作用。
통과안동실험고찰료어편배경대불동류형구자어의정합과정적영향。구자류형유3개수평：（1）빈어위반료동사적선택성한제;（2）빈어부합선택성한제,단시위반료세계지식;（3）무위반。어편배경유2개수평：（1）중성배경;（2）교정배경。재중성어편배경하,구자（1）（2）시불합괄적;이재교정배경하,삼충구자도시합리적。24명대학생피시자연열독적안동수거표명,위반동사선택성한제적목표사상적수차주시시간、회시로경시간화총주시시간,재중성배경하비재교정배경하장,주시점개수야경다;이재비선택성한제위반조건하,어편배경적효응지재총주시시간화주시점개수량개지표상현저。저사결과표명,당구자중적빈어위반료동사적선택성한제시,어편배경영향료빈어적조기화만기가공。이당빈어지위반세계지식시,어편배경적작용체현재만기계단。어편배경대당전신식적정합시동태적과정,병불시지능재고정모개계단기작용。
How do readers integrate incoming words into the local and global discourse context is a central issue in discourse comprehension. Some researchers have suggested that the integration of incoming information with local, proximal context is an automatic and default process. However, the integration of incoming information with the global discourse context employs more attention and may be delayed. On the other hand, some researchers have suggested that incoming information is immediately integrated into the global discourse context. Previous studies also obtained discrepant results concerning the time course of contextual modulation, which might be due to the fact that different types of knowledge violations were used in different studies. Two kinds of knowledge violations were used in previous studies： selectional restriction violations and world knowledge violations. Selectional restriction refers to the semantic constraints on verb＇s arguments, which are considered as lexical information. Previous studies have shown that the processing of selectional restriction takes precedence over that of world knowledge. However, it is still unclear whether the precedence of selectional restriction would affect the modulation of global context. Therefore, the current study set out to explore how different kinds of knowledge violations affect global integration in discourse context in an eye-tracking experiment. We constructed discourses consisting of three sentences. The first and second sentences made up a non-fictional or a fictional discourse context. The third sentence was either in（1） selectional restriction violation,（2） world knowledge violation or（3） congruent conditions. In the non-fictional context, sentences in both the selectional restriction and world knowledge violation conditions were incongruent while only the congruent sentences were sensible. However, in the fictional context, all the three kinds of sentences were congruent. 26 university students participated in the experiment. Two were removed due to excessive track losses. Data from 24（12 males, Mean age = 22.92） participants were used in the statistical analysis. Results showed that for selectional restriction violations, the effect of context was significant in first fixation time, go-past time, total time and number of fixations on the target word as well as first fixation time, total time, number of fixations and regression out count on the post-target region. However, for world knowledge violations, the effect of context was only found in total time and number of fixations on the target region as well as on the post-target region. Participants read the target words and post-target words longer, more frequently in fictional context than in non-fictional context. These results revealed that when object nouns violated selectional restriction, discourse context affected both the early and later stages of word processing. When object nouns violated world knowledge, contextual modulation was only observed on the later time measures. The present study demonstrated that discourse context could override local anomalies, irrespective of the kinds of knowledge that are violated. However, the time course of the integration process was modulated by the kinds of knowledge that are violated. These results establish kinds of knowledge as an important factor for semantic integration in discourse context.