ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2024
Scope of Negation, Gestures, and Prosody: The English Negative Quantifier as a Case in Point.
Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Assessment and Improvement of Avatar-Based Learning System: From Linguistic Structure Alignment to Sentiment-Driven Expressions.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present paper examines how English native speakers produce scopally ambiguous sentences and how they make use of gestures and prosody for disambiguation. As a case in point, the participants in the present study produced the English negative quantifiers. They appear in two different positions as (1) The election of no candidate was a surprise (a: 'for those elected, none of them was a surprise'; b: 'no candidate was elected, and that was a surprise') and (2) no candidate's election was a surprise (a: 'for those elected, none of them was a surprise'; b: # 'no candidate was elected, and that was a surprise.' We were able to investigate the gesture production and the prosodic patterns of the positional effects (i.e., a-interpretation is available at two different positions in 1 and 2) and the interpretation effects (i.e., two different interpretations are available in the same position in 1). We discovered that the participants tended to launch more head shakes in the (a) interpretation despites the different positions, but more head nod/beat in the (b) interpretation. While there is not a difference in prosody of no in (a) and (b) interpretation in (1), there are pitch and durational differences between (a) interpretations in (1) and (2). This study points out the abstract similarities across languages such as Catalan and Spanish (Prieto et al. in Lingua 131:136-150, 2013. 10.1016/j.lingua.2013.02.008; Tubau et al. in Linguist Rev 32(1):115-142, 2015. 10.1515/tlr-2014-0016) in the gestural movements, and the meaning is crucial for gesture patterns. We emphasize that gesture patterns disambiguate ambiguous interpretation when prosody cannot do so.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38926243What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.