Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10397/81607
PIRA download icon_1.1View/Download Full Text
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributorDepartment of Chinese and Bilingual Studies-
dc.creatorHsu, YY-
dc.date.accessioned2020-01-21T08:49:08Z-
dc.date.available2020-01-21T08:49:08Z-
dc.identifier.issn1932-6203-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10397/81607-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherPublic Library of Scienceen_US
dc.rights© 2019 Yu-Yin Hsu. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.en_US
dc.rightsThe following publication Hsu Y-Y (2019) Associations between focus constructions and levels of exhaustivity: An experimental investigation of Chinese. PLoS ONE 14(10): e0223502, is available at https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223502en_US
dc.titleAssociations between focus constructions and levels of exhaustivity : an experimental investigation of Chineseen_US
dc.typeJournal/Magazine Articleen_US
dc.identifier.volume14-
dc.identifier.issue10-
dc.identifier.doi10.1371/journal.pone.0223502-
dcterms.abstractHow various types of focus differ with respect to exhaustivity has been a topic of enduring interest in language studies. However, most of the theoretical work explicating such associations has done so cross-linguistically, and little research has been done on how people process and respond to them during language comprehension. This study therefore investigates the associations between the concept of exhaustivity and three focus types in Chinese (wh, cleft, and only foci) using a trichotomous-response design in two experiments: a forced-choice judgment and a self-paced reading experiment, both with adult native speakers. Its results show that, whether engaged in conscious decision-making or an implicit comprehension process, the participants distinguished only-focus and cleft-focus from wh-focus clearly, and also that there are specific differences between only-focus and cleft-focus in conscious decision-making. This implies that, in terms of the relationship between exhaustivity and the focus types under investigation, cleft-focus and only-focus behave very similarly during language comprehension despite the existence of some fine distinctions between them. In other words, the potential linguistic levels that exhaustivity encodes in Chinese cleft-focus render it more similar to only-focus than to wh-focus. These results are broadly in line with the semantic account that distinguishes cleft from only-focus, i.e., that cleft encodes exhaustivity in not-at-issue presupposition and only-focus encodes exhaustivity in at-issue assertion, while both express semantically encoded exhaustivity, triggering robust language-processing patterns that differ from patterns of wh-focus in Chinese. © 2019 Yu-Yin Hsu. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.-
dcterms.accessRightsopen accessen_US
dcterms.bibliographicCitationPLoS one, 2019, v. 14, no. 10, e0223502-
dcterms.isPartOfPLoS one-
dcterms.issued2019-
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-85073073559-
dc.identifier.pmid31596888-
dc.identifier.eissn1932-6203-
dc.identifier.artne0223502-
dc.description.validate202001 bcma-
dc.description.oaVersion of Recorden_US
dc.identifier.FolderNumberOA_Scopus/WOSen_US
dc.description.pubStatusPublisheden_US
dc.description.oaCategoryCCen_US
Appears in Collections:Journal/Magazine Article
Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
Hsu_Associations_focus_constructions.pdf1.08 MBAdobe PDFView/Open
Open Access Information
Status open access
File Version Version of Record
Access
View full-text via PolyU eLinks SFX Query
Show simple item record

Page views

111
Last Week
1
Last month
Citations as of Sep 22, 2024

Downloads

80
Citations as of Sep 22, 2024

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

4
Citations as of Sep 26, 2024

WEB OF SCIENCETM
Citations

4
Citations as of Sep 26, 2024

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.