Seçkin Arslan, Elif Tutku Tunali, Yağmur Çetin, Özgür Aydın
{"title":"Eyes do not lie but words do","authors":"Seçkin Arslan, Elif Tutku Tunali, Yağmur Çetin, Özgür Aydın","doi":"10.1075/fol.22061.ars","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Evidentiality encodes how a speaker has access to the information contained in his/her proposition. It has been\n shown that some ‘evidential language’ speakers make a deliberate choice of evidentials while telling lies (Aikhenvald 2004). In this study, we recruited 40 native speakers of Turkish, an ‘evidential language’, to\n judge statements with evidentials using an eye-movement-monitoring-during-reading study with an end-of-sentence deception\n detection task. The participants read sentences with four conditions, containing a direct or indirect evidential form either\n compatible or incompatible with the given information source. Our results show that the indirect evidential condition was detected\n as a lie more often than the direct evidential condition. Readers had the tendency to judge stimulus material with\n source-evidentiality mismatch to be untruthful. These findings were mirrored in the eye-movement data, as we found gaze duration\n to be longer at the critical verb region for indirect evidential and mismatch conditions.","PeriodicalId":502755,"journal":{"name":"Functions of Language","volume":"103 35","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Functions of Language","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/fol.22061.ars","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Evidentiality encodes how a speaker has access to the information contained in his/her proposition. It has been
shown that some ‘evidential language’ speakers make a deliberate choice of evidentials while telling lies (Aikhenvald 2004). In this study, we recruited 40 native speakers of Turkish, an ‘evidential language’, to
judge statements with evidentials using an eye-movement-monitoring-during-reading study with an end-of-sentence deception
detection task. The participants read sentences with four conditions, containing a direct or indirect evidential form either
compatible or incompatible with the given information source. Our results show that the indirect evidential condition was detected
as a lie more often than the direct evidential condition. Readers had the tendency to judge stimulus material with
source-evidentiality mismatch to be untruthful. These findings were mirrored in the eye-movement data, as we found gaze duration
to be longer at the critical verb region for indirect evidential and mismatch conditions.