How defaultness shapes our language production
A usage-based study of discoursal resonance with default
interpretations of metaphor and sarcasm
The paper focuses on discourse production.
It shows that language production unfolds via resonating (Du Bois, 2014) with default
interpretations. Default interpretations are defined as automatic
responses. However, for an automatic response to be considered a
default, it has to be (i) novel; (ii) free of semantic an omaly
(Beardsley, 1958) and
internal incongruity (Partington, 2011); and (iii) free of contextual
information, intonation, discourse markers, etc. Results show that
constructions, shown to be interpreted sarcastically or
metaphorically when in isolation, were processed faster than
nondefault counterparts when in discourse. As a result, corpus-based
studies, displaying default interpretations, show that speakers’
discourse is unfolding via utterances’ default rather than
nondefault interpretations. This applies here to Hebrew but also to
English, German, and Russian.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 1.1Conditions for interpretations’ defaultness: Which kind of responses would be definable as default
outputs
- 1.2The defaultness hypothesis – predictions
- 2.On the speed superiority of default over nondefault
interpretations
- 2.1The speed superiority of default metaphorical interpretations
of negative constructions over their nondefault literal
counterparts
- 2.2The speed superiority of default sarcastic interpretations of
negative constructions over their nondefault literal
counterparts
- 2.3The speed superiority of default literal interpretations of
affirmative sarcasm over their nondefault literal
counterparts
- 2.4The speed superiority of default literal interpretations of
affirmative metaphors over their nondefault literal
counterparts
- 2.5The speed superiority of default over nondefault counterparts
is insensitive to degree of figurativeness
- 3.Resonating with default interpretations
- 3.1Resonating with default metaphorical interpretations of
negative constructions
- 3.1.1Study 1: Distribution of default negative metaphoricity and
default affirmative literalness
- 3.1.2Study 2: Distribution of type of resonance with default
metaphorical interpretations of negative
constructions
- 3.2Resonating with default sarcastic interpretations of negative
constructions
- 3.2.1Study 3: Distribution of default negative sarcasm and default
affirmative literalness of the form X s/he is not
- 3.2.2Study 4: Distribution of type of resonance with default
sarcastic interpretations of negative constructions of the
form X s/he is not
- 3.2.3Study 5: Distribution of default negative sarcasm and default
affirmative literalness of the form X is not her/his
forte/best attribute
- 3.2.4Study 6: Distribution of type of resonance with default
sarcastic interpretations of negative constructions of the
form X is not her/his forte/ best attribute
- 3.2.5Study 7: Distribution of default negative sarcasm and default
affirmative literalness of the form X is not the most
Y
- 3.2.6Study 8: Distribution of type of resonance with default
sarcastic interpretations of negative constructions of the
form X is not the most Y
- 3.3Resonating with default literal interpretations of
affirmative metaphor and sarcasm
- 3.3.1Study 9: Distribution of type of resonance with default literal
interpretations of affirmative sarcasm
- 3.3.2Study 10: Distribution of type of resonance with default literal
interpretations of affirmative metaphors
- 4.Conclusions
-
Acknowledgments
-
Notes
-
References