Why do speakers mix perspectives?

نویسندگان

  • Barbara Tversky
  • Paul U. Lee
  • Scott D. Mainwaring
چکیده

Although considerations of discourse coherence and cognitive processing suggest that communicators should adopt consistent perspectives when describing spatial scenes, in many cases they switch perspectives. Ongoing research examining cognitive costs indicates that these are small and exacted in establishing a mental model of a scene but not in retrieving information from a well-known scene. A perspective entails a point of view, a referent object, and terms of reference. These may change within a perspective, exacting cognitive costs, so that the costs of switching perspective may not be greater than the costs of maintaining the same perspective. Another project investigating perspective choice for self and other demonstrates effects of salience of referent object and ease of terms of reference. Perspective is mixed not just in verbal communications but also in pictorial ones, suggesting that at times, switching perspective is more effective than maintaining a consistent one.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

How General are our Generalizations? What Speakers Actually Know and What They Actually Do

In this paper I bring several perspectives from languagechange and diachronic linguistics more generally to bear on thequestion of how broad linguists’ generalizations about speakers’linguistic behavior should be, and the extent to which they correspondto what speakers actually do themselves. Examples are drawn from thedevelopment of Greek, of English, and of Slavic, and fro...

متن کامل

How can we explain the emergence of a language which benefits the hearer but not the speaker?

Language requires the co-evolution of both speakers and hearers. i.e., the co-evolution of both the ability to emit signals that systematically co-vary with specific features of the external or internal environment (language production) and the ability to respond appropriately to these signals (language understanding). If speakers do not produce the appropriate signals in the appropriate circum...

متن کامل

Tracking the what and why of speakers' choices: prosodic boundaries and the length of constituents.

The rational speaker hypothesis (Clifton, Carlson, & Frazier, 2002) claims that speakers are self-consistent, employing intonation in a manner consistent with their intended message. Preceding a constituent by a prosodic boundary that is not required by the grammar often signals that this constituent is not part of the immediately preceding phrase. However, speakers tend to place prosodic bound...

متن کامل

Speakin' and Spokin' in Jamaica:

Given the material and social rewards attached to speaking standard language, why do some speakers prefer non-standard varieties? One explanation sees the standard as a commodity (Gal 1989). Although the supply of symbolic resources is not limited in the same ways that material ones are-one can easily imagine all speakers in a community using the standard-access to standard language is controll...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Spatial Cognition & Computation

دوره 1  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 1999