4.3 Article

When we say no we mean no: Interpreting negation in vision and language

Journal

JOURNAL OF PRAGMATICS
Volume 41, Issue 11, Pages 2222-2239

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.pragma.2008.09.041

Keywords

Visual negation; Suppression; Retention; Opposite; Contrast; Context

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study looks into visual negation. It tests the assumption that visual negation operates along the same lines proposed for linguistic negation (Giora, 2006, 2007). Specifically, it assumes that, like linguistic negation, visually negated information is not unconditionally discarded. Instead, it is sensitive to discourse goals and requirements and will therefore allow information within its scope to remain accessible to comprehenders, should the circumstances require it. This must be true not only of highly restricting contexts that can tolerate no intricate inferencing (e.g. road signs) but also of contexts inviting complex inferential processes that could afford suppression and replacement with alternatives (e.g. works of art). On the basis of interpretations of straightforward and complex visual stimuli as well as empirical data collected from raters, we show that, as predicted, when communicators visually communicate not X interpreters often take them to mean not X, retaining X in memory rather than replacing it by an alternative opposite ('Y'). (C) 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available