Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contexto
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Tipo de documento: | Tese |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
Texto Completo: | http://hdl.handle.net/1843/MGSS-9W7LZK |
Resumo: | The present PhD dissertation presents an analysis of eye motion behavior during readings of polysemic and homonymous words, using eye-tracking. The design of such analysis is composed by two experiments: in the first one, polysemic and homonymous words were preceded by contexts that either restricted interpretation to one specific sense or were neutral; the second one brought a tendentious context in which we incorporated a polysemic or homonymous word or a word of the same semantic domain, but one that violated the expectations created by the preceding context. Authors such as Swinney (1979) and Tanenhaus et. al. (1979) defend the position known as Multiple Access Hypothesis according to which context affects lexical access of ambiguous words only tardily. Tabossi e Zardon (1993) and Simpson (1994), on the other hand, defend the Selective Access Hypothesis, which states that only the contextually specified sense of an ambiguous word is accessed during reading. The results of this experiment indicated that polysemic and homonymous words are read more rapidly in contexts that tend to subordinate or dominant senses than in neutral contexts. More, in some of the tested conditions, reading time in cases that involved dominant senses was shorter than when subordinate senses were involved. As for the second experiment, linguists like Klein and Murphy (2001, 2002) oppose the idea that there is some difference in reading time between homonymous and polysemic words. On the other hand, Klepousniotou and Baum (2007) or Beretta, Fiorentino and Poeppel (2005) defend the advantage of the related senses effect or polysemy effect. According to advocates of such view, the reading time of polysemic words is shorter than the reading time of homonymous words in constrained contexts, what would suggest that the way these words are organized in our mental lexicon is fairly distinct, with a temporal advantage for words whose senses are shared by a semantic core. Our results corroborate this second theoretical position, since they show that polysemic words are read more rapidly than homonymous words in contexts that are strongly restrictive to one of the senses of such words. The findings of the first experiment suggest that readers do predictions and that contexts play an important role in the anticipatory processes; data from both the first and the second experiments present evidence that supports the related sense advantage or polysemic advantage hypothesis, since they show that there is a difference between polysemic words and homonymous words regarding linguistic processing in reading. |
id |
UFMG_1edc85a99cf794c40077a69d35811bb3 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.ufmg.br:1843/MGSS-9W7LZK |
network_acronym_str |
UFMG |
network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contextoantecipaçãopolissemiahomonímiarastreamento ocularcontextoLíngua portuguesa SemânticaLingüísticaLeituraPolissemiaContexto (Linguistica)The present PhD dissertation presents an analysis of eye motion behavior during readings of polysemic and homonymous words, using eye-tracking. The design of such analysis is composed by two experiments: in the first one, polysemic and homonymous words were preceded by contexts that either restricted interpretation to one specific sense or were neutral; the second one brought a tendentious context in which we incorporated a polysemic or homonymous word or a word of the same semantic domain, but one that violated the expectations created by the preceding context. Authors such as Swinney (1979) and Tanenhaus et. al. (1979) defend the position known as Multiple Access Hypothesis according to which context affects lexical access of ambiguous words only tardily. Tabossi e Zardon (1993) and Simpson (1994), on the other hand, defend the Selective Access Hypothesis, which states that only the contextually specified sense of an ambiguous word is accessed during reading. The results of this experiment indicated that polysemic and homonymous words are read more rapidly in contexts that tend to subordinate or dominant senses than in neutral contexts. More, in some of the tested conditions, reading time in cases that involved dominant senses was shorter than when subordinate senses were involved. As for the second experiment, linguists like Klein and Murphy (2001, 2002) oppose the idea that there is some difference in reading time between homonymous and polysemic words. On the other hand, Klepousniotou and Baum (2007) or Beretta, Fiorentino and Poeppel (2005) defend the advantage of the related senses effect or polysemy effect. According to advocates of such view, the reading time of polysemic words is shorter than the reading time of homonymous words in constrained contexts, what would suggest that the way these words are organized in our mental lexicon is fairly distinct, with a temporal advantage for words whose senses are shared by a semantic core. Our results corroborate this second theoretical position, since they show that polysemic words are read more rapidly than homonymous words in contexts that are strongly restrictive to one of the senses of such words. The findings of the first experiment suggest that readers do predictions and that contexts play an important role in the anticipatory processes; data from both the first and the second experiments present evidence that supports the related sense advantage or polysemic advantage hypothesis, since they show that there is a difference between polysemic words and homonymous words regarding linguistic processing in reading.A presente tese utilizou monitoramento ocular para analisar o comportamento dos olhos durante a leitura de palavras polissêmicas e homônimas. A análise apresentou um design composto por dois experimentos: no primeiro, as palavras polissêmicas e homônimas foram precedidas por contextos restritos a um de seus significados ou por contextos neutros; no segundo, foi criado um contexto tendencioso no qual incorporou-se a palavra polissêmica ou homônima ou uma palavra do mesmo campo semântico, mas que violava a expectativa criada pelo contexto precedente. Autores como Swinney (1979) e Tanenhaus et. al. (1979) defendem a posição, conhecida como hipótese do acesso múltiplo, de que o contexto age apenas tardiamente no acesso lexical de palavras ambíguas. Já Tabossi e Zardon (1993) e Simpson (1994) defendem a hipótese do acesso seletivo, segundo a qual apenas o sentido especificado pelo contexto é acessado na leitura de uma palavra ambígua. Os resultados desse experimento indicam que as palavras polissêmicas e homônimas são lidas mais rapidamente em contextos que tendem para o sentido subordinado ou dominante que em contextos neutros. Ainda, o tempo de leitura para o sentido dominante foi menor que o do subordinado em algumas das condições testadas. No que concerne ao segundo experimento, estudiosos como Klein e Murphy (2001, 2002) são contrários à ideia de que exista alguma distinção no tempo de leitura entre palavras homônimas e polissêmicas. Já Klepousniotou e Baum (2007) ou Beretta, Fiorentino e Poeppel (2005) defendem o efeito de vantagem dos sentidos relacionados ou efeito da polissemia. De acordo com tal visão o tempo de leitura de palavras polissêmicas é menor que o tempo de leitura de palavras homônimas em contextos tendenciosos o que sugeriria que a forma de organização dessas palavras no nosso léxico mental é distinta com uma vantagem temporal para palavras cujos sentidos compartilham um núcleo ou cerne semântico. Nossos resultados corroboram esta segunda visão teórica por evidenciarem que palavras polissêmicas são lidas mais rapidamente que palavras homônimas em contextos fortemente restritos a um dos sentidos destas palavras. Os achados do primeiro experimento sugerem que há previsão durante a leitura e o contexto tem papel importante nos processos antecipatórios; dados tanto do primeiro quanto do segundo experimento apresentam evidências para a vantagem da polissemia por denotarem diferença no processamento de palavras polissêmicas e homônimas durante a leitura.Universidade Federal de Minas GeraisUFMGMaria Luiza Goncalves Aragao da Cunha LimaMailce Borges Mota FortkampRicardo Augusto de SouzaElisangela Nogueira TeixeiraMarcia Maria Cancado LimaBruna Rodrigues do Amaral2019-08-10T03:45:48Z2019-08-10T03:45:48Z2015-03-09info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesisapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/1843/MGSS-9W7LZKinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessporreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFMGinstname:Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)instacron:UFMG2019-11-14T10:13:37Zoai:repositorio.ufmg.br:1843/MGSS-9W7LZKRepositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://repositorio.ufmg.br/oairepositorio@ufmg.bropendoar:2019-11-14T10:13:37Repositório Institucional da UFMG - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contexto |
title |
Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contexto |
spellingShingle |
Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contexto Bruna Rodrigues do Amaral antecipação polissemia homonímia rastreamento ocular contexto Língua portuguesa Semântica Lingüística Leitura Polissemia Contexto (Linguistica) |
title_short |
Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contexto |
title_full |
Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contexto |
title_fullStr |
Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contexto |
title_full_unstemmed |
Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contexto |
title_sort |
Polissemia e homonímia: uma avaliação da correlação entre acesso lexical e contexto |
author |
Bruna Rodrigues do Amaral |
author_facet |
Bruna Rodrigues do Amaral |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Maria Luiza Goncalves Aragao da Cunha Lima Mailce Borges Mota Fortkamp Ricardo Augusto de Souza Elisangela Nogueira Teixeira Marcia Maria Cancado Lima |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Bruna Rodrigues do Amaral |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
antecipação polissemia homonímia rastreamento ocular contexto Língua portuguesa Semântica Lingüística Leitura Polissemia Contexto (Linguistica) |
topic |
antecipação polissemia homonímia rastreamento ocular contexto Língua portuguesa Semântica Lingüística Leitura Polissemia Contexto (Linguistica) |
description |
The present PhD dissertation presents an analysis of eye motion behavior during readings of polysemic and homonymous words, using eye-tracking. The design of such analysis is composed by two experiments: in the first one, polysemic and homonymous words were preceded by contexts that either restricted interpretation to one specific sense or were neutral; the second one brought a tendentious context in which we incorporated a polysemic or homonymous word or a word of the same semantic domain, but one that violated the expectations created by the preceding context. Authors such as Swinney (1979) and Tanenhaus et. al. (1979) defend the position known as Multiple Access Hypothesis according to which context affects lexical access of ambiguous words only tardily. Tabossi e Zardon (1993) and Simpson (1994), on the other hand, defend the Selective Access Hypothesis, which states that only the contextually specified sense of an ambiguous word is accessed during reading. The results of this experiment indicated that polysemic and homonymous words are read more rapidly in contexts that tend to subordinate or dominant senses than in neutral contexts. More, in some of the tested conditions, reading time in cases that involved dominant senses was shorter than when subordinate senses were involved. As for the second experiment, linguists like Klein and Murphy (2001, 2002) oppose the idea that there is some difference in reading time between homonymous and polysemic words. On the other hand, Klepousniotou and Baum (2007) or Beretta, Fiorentino and Poeppel (2005) defend the advantage of the related senses effect or polysemy effect. According to advocates of such view, the reading time of polysemic words is shorter than the reading time of homonymous words in constrained contexts, what would suggest that the way these words are organized in our mental lexicon is fairly distinct, with a temporal advantage for words whose senses are shared by a semantic core. Our results corroborate this second theoretical position, since they show that polysemic words are read more rapidly than homonymous words in contexts that are strongly restrictive to one of the senses of such words. The findings of the first experiment suggest that readers do predictions and that contexts play an important role in the anticipatory processes; data from both the first and the second experiments present evidence that supports the related sense advantage or polysemic advantage hypothesis, since they show that there is a difference between polysemic words and homonymous words regarding linguistic processing in reading. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-03-09 2019-08-10T03:45:48Z 2019-08-10T03:45:48Z |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/doctoralThesis |
format |
doctoralThesis |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/1843/MGSS-9W7LZK |
url |
http://hdl.handle.net/1843/MGSS-9W7LZK |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais UFMG |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais UFMG |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFMG instname:Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) instacron:UFMG |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) |
instacron_str |
UFMG |
institution |
UFMG |
reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
repositorio@ufmg.br |
_version_ |
1816829920981024768 |