Cross-Linguistic Recognition of Irony Through Visual and Acoustic Cues.

IF 1.6 2区 文学 Q1 LINGUISTICS Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Pub Date : 2024-11-15 DOI:10.1007/s10936-024-10111-7
Giulia Bettelli, Beatrice Giustolisi, Francesca Panzeri
{"title":"Cross-Linguistic Recognition of Irony Through Visual and Acoustic Cues.","authors":"Giulia Bettelli, Beatrice Giustolisi, Francesca Panzeri","doi":"10.1007/s10936-024-10111-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>To avoid misunderstandings, ironic speakers may accompany their ironic remarks with a particular intonation and specific facial expressions that signal that the message should not be taken at face value. The acoustic realization of the ironic tone of voice differs from language to language, whereas the ironic face manifests the speaker's negative stance and might thus have a universal basis. We conducted a study on 574 participants speaking 6 different languages (French, German, Dutch, English, Mandarin, and Italian-the control group) to verify whether they could recognize ironic remarks uttered in Italian in three different modalities: watching muted videos, listening to audio tracks, and when both cues were present. We found that speakers of other languages could overall recognize irony uttered in Italian when all the markers were present, and they relied mostly on visual cues: In all these language groups, accuracy in the audio-only modality was always lower than accuracy in the video-only modality, although this trend was significant only for Chinese and Dutch participants. Moreover, the rate of recognition in the audio-visual modality was always significantly higher compared to the audio-only, while the difference between the audio-visual and the video-only modality was significant only for the English group. Overall, these results speak in favor of the hypothesis of a common basis for the visual expression of irony, whereas the acoustic markers alone do not constitute a reliable cue for the cross-linguistic recognition of irony.</p>","PeriodicalId":47689,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Psycholinguistic Research","volume":"53 6","pages":"73"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Psycholinguistic Research","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-024-10111-7","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LINGUISTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

To avoid misunderstandings, ironic speakers may accompany their ironic remarks with a particular intonation and specific facial expressions that signal that the message should not be taken at face value. The acoustic realization of the ironic tone of voice differs from language to language, whereas the ironic face manifests the speaker's negative stance and might thus have a universal basis. We conducted a study on 574 participants speaking 6 different languages (French, German, Dutch, English, Mandarin, and Italian-the control group) to verify whether they could recognize ironic remarks uttered in Italian in three different modalities: watching muted videos, listening to audio tracks, and when both cues were present. We found that speakers of other languages could overall recognize irony uttered in Italian when all the markers were present, and they relied mostly on visual cues: In all these language groups, accuracy in the audio-only modality was always lower than accuracy in the video-only modality, although this trend was significant only for Chinese and Dutch participants. Moreover, the rate of recognition in the audio-visual modality was always significantly higher compared to the audio-only, while the difference between the audio-visual and the video-only modality was significant only for the English group. Overall, these results speak in favor of the hypothesis of a common basis for the visual expression of irony, whereas the acoustic markers alone do not constitute a reliable cue for the cross-linguistic recognition of irony.

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
通过视觉和听觉线索进行反讽的跨语言识别
为了避免误解,说反话的人可能会在说反话时配以特定的语调和特定的面部表情,以示信息不能照单全收。反讽语调的声学实现因语言而异,而反讽表情则体现了说话者的消极立场,因此可能具有普遍性。我们对使用 6 种不同语言(法语、德语、荷兰语、英语、普通话和意大利语--对照组)的 574 名参与者进行了一项研究,以验证他们是否能识别在三种不同模式下用意大利语说出的讽刺性话语:观看静音视频、聆听音轨以及同时出现两种线索时。我们发现,在所有标记都存在的情况下,讲其他语言的人总体上可以识别出意大利语中的讽刺性话语,而且他们主要依赖于视觉线索:在所有这些语言组中,纯音频模式下的识别准确率总是低于纯视频模式下的识别准确率,尽管这种趋势只对中国和荷兰的参与者有显著影响。此外,视听模式的识别率总是明显高于纯音频模式,而视听模式和纯视频模式之间的差异仅在英语组中显著。总之,这些结果支持反讽的视觉表达具有共同基础的假设,而声音标记本身并不构成跨语言识别反讽的可靠线索。
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
3.00
自引率
5.00%
发文量
92
期刊介绍: Journal of Psycholinguistic Research publishes carefully selected papers from the several disciplines engaged in psycholinguistic research, providing a single, recognized medium for communications among linguists, psychologists, biologists, sociologists, and others. The journal covers a broad range of approaches to the study of the communicative process, including: the social and anthropological bases of communication; development of speech and language; semantics (problems in linguistic meaning); and biological foundations. Papers dealing with the psychopathology of language and cognition, and the neuropsychology of language and cognition, are also included.
期刊最新文献
Cross-Linguistic Recognition of Irony Through Visual and Acoustic Cues. Some Contributions from Embodied Cognition to Psychonarratology. Chinese Folk Songs Can Facilitate Chinese Language Learning - A Pilot Study. Inhibitory Control Partially Mediates the Relationship between Metalinguistic Awareness and Perspective-Taking. The Effect of Metacognitive Intervention on the Listening Performance and Metacognitive Awareness of High- and Low-Working Memory Capacity EFL Learners.
×
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