Two measures are better than one: combining iconicity ratings and guessing experiments for a more nuanced picture of iconicity in the lexicon

IF 1.1 3区 心理学 0 LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS Language and Cognition Pub Date : 2023-04-11 DOI:10.1017/langcog.2023.9
Bonnie McLean, Michael Dunn, Mark Dingemanse
{"title":"Two measures are better than one: combining iconicity ratings and guessing experiments for a more nuanced picture of iconicity in the lexicon","authors":"Bonnie McLean, Michael Dunn, Mark Dingemanse","doi":"10.1017/langcog.2023.9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Iconicity in language is receiving increased attention from many fields, but our understanding of iconicity is only as good as the measures we use to quantify it. We collected iconicity measures for 304 Japanese words from English-speaking participants, using rating and guessing tasks. The words included ideophones (structurally marked depictive words) along with regular lexical items from similar semantic domains (e.g., fuwafuwa ‘fluffy’, jawarakai ‘soft’). The two measures correlated, speaking to their validity. However, ideophones received consistently higher iconicity ratings than other items, even when guessed at the same accuracies, suggesting the rating task is more sensitive to cues like structural markedness that frame words as iconic. These cues did not always guide participants to the meanings of ideophones in the guessing task, but they did make them more confident in their guesses, even when they were wrong. Consistently poor guessing results reflect the role different experiences play in shaping construals of iconicity. Using multiple measures in tandem allows us to explore the interplay between iconicity and these external factors. To facilitate this, we introduce a reproducible workflow for creating rating and guessing tasks from standardised wordlists, while also making improvements to the robustness, sensitivity and discriminability of previous approaches.","PeriodicalId":45880,"journal":{"name":"Language and Cognition","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/langcog.2023.9","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"LANGUAGE & LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Iconicity in language is receiving increased attention from many fields, but our understanding of iconicity is only as good as the measures we use to quantify it. We collected iconicity measures for 304 Japanese words from English-speaking participants, using rating and guessing tasks. The words included ideophones (structurally marked depictive words) along with regular lexical items from similar semantic domains (e.g., fuwafuwa ‘fluffy’, jawarakai ‘soft’). The two measures correlated, speaking to their validity. However, ideophones received consistently higher iconicity ratings than other items, even when guessed at the same accuracies, suggesting the rating task is more sensitive to cues like structural markedness that frame words as iconic. These cues did not always guide participants to the meanings of ideophones in the guessing task, but they did make them more confident in their guesses, even when they were wrong. Consistently poor guessing results reflect the role different experiences play in shaping construals of iconicity. Using multiple measures in tandem allows us to explore the interplay between iconicity and these external factors. To facilitate this, we introduce a reproducible workflow for creating rating and guessing tasks from standardised wordlists, while also making improvements to the robustness, sensitivity and discriminability of previous approaches.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
两种方法比一种更好:结合象似性评级和猜测实验,以更细致地了解词汇中的象似性
语言中的象似性正受到许多领域的关注,但我们对象似性的理解取决于我们量化象似性的方法。我们从说英语的参与者那里收集了304个日语单词的象似性测量,使用评级和猜测任务。这些单词包括表意词(结构上标记的描述性单词)以及来自类似语义域的常规词汇(例如,fuwafuwa“蓬松”,jawarakai“柔软”)。这两项措施相互关联,说明了它们的有效性。然而,表意词获得的象似性评分始终高于其他物品,即使猜测的准确率相同,这表明评级任务对结构标记等线索更为敏感,这些线索将单词定义为象似性。在猜测任务中,这些线索并不总能引导参与者了解意指音的含义,但它们确实使他们对自己的猜测更有信心,即使他们猜错了。持续较差的猜测结果反映了不同的经历在塑造象似性识解中所起的作用。同时使用多种测量方法可以让我们探索象似性与这些外部因素之间的相互作用。为了促进这一点,我们引入了一个可重复的工作流程,用于从标准化词表中创建评级和猜测任务,同时也改进了以前方法的鲁棒性、灵敏度和可辨别性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Multimodal training on L2 Japanese pitch accent: learning outcomes, neural correlates and subjective assessments Head metonymies and metaphors in Jordanian and Tunisian Arabic: an extended conceptual metaphor theory perspective Facial expressions in different communication settings: A case of whispering and speaking with a face mask in Farsi The effect of emotional prosody and referent characteristics on novel noun learning Inherent linguistic preference outcompetes incidental alignment in cooperative partner choice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1