Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-54vk6 Total loading time: 0.406 Render date: 2022-08-13T18:48:24.176Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Pragmatic inferences in context: learning to interpret contrastive prosody*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 May 2016

CHIGUSA KURUMADA*
Affiliation:
University of Rochester, USA
EVE V. CLARK
Affiliation:
Stanford University, USA
*
Address for correspondence: Chigusa Kurumada, Department of Brain and Cognitive Sciences, 304 Meliora Hall, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY 14627-0268. e-mail: ckuruma2@ur.rochester.edu

Abstract

Can preschoolers make pragmatic inferences based on the intonation of an utterance? Previous work has found that young children appear to ignore intonational meanings and come to understand contrastive intonation contours only after age six. We show that four-year-olds succeed in interpreting an English utterance, such as “It LOOKS like a zebra”, to derive a conversational implicature, namely [but it isn't one], as long as they can access a semantically stronger alternative, in this case “It's a zebra”. We propose that children arrive at the implicature by comparing such contextually provided alternatives. Contextually leveraged inferences generalize across speakers and contexts, and thus drive the acquisition of intonational meanings. Our findings show that four-year-olds and adults are able to bootstrap their interpretation of the contrast-marking intonation by taking into account alternative utterances produced in the same context.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

[*]

Thanks to Sarah Bibyk, T. Florian Jaeger, Michael K. Tanenhaus, the HLP and Kurumada-Tanenhaus Labs for helpful feedback and advice; to Olga Nikolayeva, the Bing Nursery School at Stanford University, the Rochester Baby Lab, and the Children's School at University of Rochester Medical Center for help in subject testing. This research was funded by a Stanford Graduate Fellowship and a JSPS Post Doctoral Research Fellowship awarded to CK, and by an award from the National Institutes of Health (NIH R01 #HD27206) to Michael K. Tanenhaus (University of Rochester).

References

Aguert, M., Laval, V., Le Bigot, L. & Bernicot, J. (2010). Understanding expressive speech acts: the role of prosody and situational context in French-speaking 5- to 9-year-olds. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 53, 1629–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armstrong, M. E. (2014). Child comprehension of intonationally-encoded disbelief. In Orman, W. & Valleau, M. J. (eds), Proceedings of the 38th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 2538. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Arnold, J. (2008). THE BACON not the bacon: how children and adults understand accented and unaccented noun phrases. Cognition 108, 6999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barner, D., Brooks, N. & Bale, A. (2011). Accessing the unsaid: the role of scalar alternatives in children's pragmatic inference. Cognition 118, 8493.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beckman, M. E. & Ayers, G. E. (1997). Guidelines for ToBI labelling, version 3.0. Manuscript and accompanying speech materials, Ohio State University. Online: <http://www.ling.ohio-state.edu/research/phonetics/E_ToBI/>..>Google Scholar
Beckman, M. E., Hirschberg, J. & Shattuck-Hufnagel, S. (2005). The original ToBI system and the evolution of the ToBI framework. In Jun, S.-A. (ed.), Prosodic typology: the phonology of intonation and phrasing, 954. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Büring, D. & Gutiérrez-Bravo, R. (2001). Focus-related constituent order variation without the NSR: a prosody-based crosslinguistic analysis. In McCloskey, J. (ed.), SASC 3: Syntax and Semantics at Santa Cruz (pp. 4158). Santa Cruz, CA: Linguistics Research Center, University of California, Santa Cruz.Google Scholar
Capelli, C. A., Nakagawa, N. & Madden, C. M. (1990). How children understand sarcasm: the role of context and intonation. Child Development 61, 1824–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carey, S. (1978). The child as word learner. In Halle, M., Bresnan, J. & Miller, G. A. (eds), Linguistic theory and psychological reality, 264–93. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Carey, S. & Bartlett, E. (1978). Acquiring a single new word. Papers and Reports on Child Language Development 15, 1729.Google Scholar
Casillas, M. & Amaral, P. (2011). Learning cues to category membership: patterns in children's acquisition of hedges. In Cathcart, C., Chen, I.-H., Finley, G., Kang, S., Sandy, C. S. & Stickles, E. (Eds.), Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society 37th Annual Meeting 37(1), 3345. Available from Linguistic Society of America, eLanguage platform. Online: <http://journals.linguisticsociety.org/proceedings/index.php/BLS/article/view/836>.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chierchia, G., Crain, S., Guasti, M. T., Gualmini, A. & Meroni, L. (2006). The acquisition of disjunction: evidence for a grammatical view of scalar implicatures. In Do, A. H.-J., Dominguez, L.. & Johansen, A. (eds), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 157–68. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1990). On the pragmatics of contrast. Journal of Child Language 17, 417–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clark, E. V. & Wong, A. (2002). Pragmatic directions about language use: words and word meanings. Language in Society 31, 181212.Google Scholar
Cruttenden, A. (1985). Intonation comprehension in ten-year-olds. Journal of Child Language 12, 643–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cutler, A. & Swinney, D. A. (1987). Prosody and the development of comprehension. Journal of Child Language 14, 145–67.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dennison, H. Y. (2010). Processing implied meaning through contrastive prosody. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of Hawaii, Manoa.Google Scholar
Dennison, H. Y. & Schafer, A. J. (2010). Online construction of implicature through contrastive prosody. Proceedings of Speech Prosody 2010. Online: <http://speechprosody2010.illinois.edu/papers/100338.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Fernald, A. (1985). Four-month-old infants prefer to listen to motherese. Infant Behavior and Development 8, 181–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, A. & Hill, J. (2006). Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, J. C., McDonough, L. & Brown, N. B. (1998). The role of semantic context and memory in the acquisition of novel nouns. Child Development 69, 1330–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graham, S. A., Sedivy, J. & Khu, M. (2013). That's not what you said earlier: preschoolers expect partners to be referentially consistent. Journal of Child Language 41, 117.Google Scholar
Grassmann, S. & Tomasello, M. (2007). Two-year-olds use primary sentence accent to learn new words. Journal of Child Language 34, 677–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Grassmann, S. & Tomasello, M. (2010). Prosodic stress on a word directs 24-month-olds’ attention to a contextually new referent. Journal of Pragmatics 42, 3098–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grice, P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In Cole, P. & Morgan, J. (eds), Syntax and semantics, vol.3, 4158. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hansen, M. B. & Markman, E. M. (2005). Appearance questions can be misleading: a discourse-based account of the appearance–reality problem. Cognitive Psychology 50, 233–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heeren, W. F., Bibyk, S. A., Gunlogson, C. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2015). Asking or telling: real-time processing of prosodically distinguished questions and statements. Language and Speech 58(4), 474501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornby, P. A. & Hass, W. A. (1970). Use of contrastive stress by preschool children. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 13(2), 395–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horowitz, A. & Frank, M. C. (2012). Learning from speaker word choice by assuming adjectives are informative. In Miyake, N., Peebles, D. & Cooper, R. P. (eds), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 473–8. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Horowitz, A. & Frank, M. C. (2014). Preschoolers infer contrast from adjectives if they can access lexical alternatives. In Bello, P., Guarini, M., McShane, M. & Scassellati, B. (eds), Proceedings of the 36th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 625–30. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Horst, J. S. & Samuelson, L. (2008). Fast mapping but poor retention in 24-month-old infants. Infancy 13, 128–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ito, K. (2014). Children's pragmatic use of prosodic prominence. In Matthews, D. (ed.), Pragmatic development in first language acquisition, 199218. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Ito, K., Bibyk, S. A., Wagner, L. & Speer, S. R. (2012). Interpretation of contrastive pitch accent in six- to eleven-year-old English-speaking children (and adults). Journal of Child Language 41, 127.Google Scholar
Ito, K., Jincho, N., Minai, U., Yamane, N. & Mazuka, R. (2012). Intonation facilitates contrast resolution: evidence from Japanese adults and 6-year-olds. Journal of Memory and Language 66, 265–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jun, S.-A. (2005). Prosodic typology: the phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jun, S.-A. (2014) Prosodic typology II: the phonology of intonation and phrasing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kurumada, C., Brown, M., Bibyk, S., Pontillo, D. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2014). Is it or isn't it: listeners make rapid use of prosody to infer speaker meanings. Cognition 133, 335–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kurumada, C., Brown, M. & Tanenhaus, M. K. (2012). Pragmatic interpretation of contrastive prosody: it looks like speech adaptation. In Miyake, N., Peebles, D. & Cooper, R. P. (eds), Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 647–52. Austin, TX: Cognitive Science Society.Google Scholar
Ladd, D. R. (2008). Intonational phonology, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Markman, E. M. & Wachtel, G. F. (1988). Children's use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meanings of words. Cognitive Psychology 20, 121–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Matthews, D., Lieven, E. & Tomasello, M. (2010). What's in a manner of speaking? Children's sensitivity to partner-specific referential precedents. Developmental Psychology 46, 749–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mervis, C. B. & Bertrand, J. (1994). Acquisition of the novel name/nameless category (N3C) principle. Child Development 65, 1646–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morgan, J. & Demuth, K. (1996). Signal to syntax: bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
Morton, J. B. & Trehub, S. E. (2001). Children's understanding of emotion in speech. Child Development 72, 834–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musolino, J. (2006). On the semantics of the subset principle. Language Learning and Development 2, 195218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Musolino, J. & Lidz, J. (2006). Why children aren't universally successful with quantification. Linguistics 44, 817–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Noveck, I. (2001). When children are more logical than adults. Cognition 78, 165–88.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papafragou, A. (2006). From scalar semantics to implicature: children's interpretation of aspectuals. Journal of Child Language 33, 721–57.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Papafragou, A. & Musolino, J. (2003). Scalar implicatures: experiments at the semantics–pragmatics interface. Cognition, 86 253282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papafragou, A. & Tantalou, N. (2004). Children's computation of implicatures. Language Acquisition 12, 7182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierrehumbert, J. & Hirschberg, J. (1990). The meaning of intonational contours in the interpretation of discourse. In Cohen, P. R., Morgan, J. & Pollack, M. E. (eds), Intentions in communication, 271311. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Quam, C. & Swingley, D. (2012). Development in children's interpretation of pitch cues to emotions. Child Development 83, 236–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sakkalou, E. & Gattis, M. L. (2012). Infants infer intentions from prosody. Cognitive Development 27, 116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sekerina, I. A. & Trueswell, J. C. (2012). Interactive processing of contrastive expressions by Russian children. First Language 32, 6387.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silverman, K., Beckman, M., Pitrelli, J., Ostendorf, M., Wightman, C., Price, P., Pierrehumbert, J., and Hirschberg, J. (1992). TOBI: a Standard for labeling English prosody. Proceedings of the 1992 International Conference on Spoken Language Processing, Vol. 2, 867–70. Banff, Canada.Google Scholar
Snedeker, J. & Trueswell, J. C. (2004). The developing constraints on parsing decisions: the role of lexical-biases and referential scenes in child and adult sentence processing. Cognitive Psychology 49, 238–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Solan, L. (1980). Contrastive stress and children's interpretation of pronouns. Journal of Speech and Hearing Research 23, 688–98.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Speer, S. R. & Ito, K. (2009). Prosody in first language acquisition: acquiring intonation as a tool to organize information in conversation. Language and Linguistics Compass 3, 90110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stiller, A., Goodman, N. D. & Frank, M. C. (2015). Ad-hoc implicature in preschool children. Language, Learning, and Development 11, 176–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thorson, J. C. & Morgan, J. L. (2015). Acoustic correlates of information structure in child and adult speech. In Grillo, E. & Jepson, K. (eds), Proceedings of the 39th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 411–23. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.Google Scholar
Vallduví, E. (1992). The informational component. New York: Garland Press.Google Scholar
Van Der Meulen, S., Janssen, P. & Den Os, E. (1997). Prosodic abilities in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Communication Disorders 30(3), 155–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wells, B., Peppe, S. & Goulandris, N. (2004). Intonation development from five to thirteen. Journal of Child Language 31, 749–78.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wieman, L. A. (1976). Stress patterns of early child language. Journal of Child Language 3, 283–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilkinson, K. M. & Mazzitelli, K. (2003). The effect of ‘missing’ information on children's retention of fast-mapped labels. Journal of Child Language 30, 4773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Winner, E. & Leekam, S. (1991). Distinguishing irony from deception: understanding the speaker's second-order intention. British Journal of Developmental Psychology 9(2), 257–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Pragmatic inferences in context: learning to interpret contrastive prosody*
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Pragmatic inferences in context: learning to interpret contrastive prosody*
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Pragmatic inferences in context: learning to interpret contrastive prosody*
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *