Reinterpretation processes and humour understanding in English-speaking young adults with dyslexia


Abstract


The aim of this study is to assess whether and how lexical and syntactic ambiguity are resolved in jokes by readers with and without dyslexia. This research focuses specifically on an important phenomenon of language comprehension, i.e., the ability to access word meaning quickly and effortlessly in sentences which, in this specific work, are made more challenging by the presence of “lexical and syntactic ambiguity”. The present study addresses the ambiguity in punchlines from a semantic perspective with the aim of showing how different types of ambiguity are perceived by readers and how they reanalyse jokes by considering their ambiguous forms. This work focuses on homonymy in jokes where the humorous effect is triggered by words whose disambiguation does not involve a change of word class (i.e., “bat” has two meanings that belong to the same word class, both are nouns) and words whose disambiguation instead requires a change in word class (i.e., “seal” has two meanings that belong to two different word classes, noun and verb).

DOI Code: 10.1285/i22390359v54p111

Keywords: dyslexia; language comprehension; ambiguity; figurative language; humour

References


Adlof S.M., Catts H.W. and Little T.D. 2006, Should the Simple View of Reading Include a Fluency Component?, in “Reading and Writing” 19 [9], pp. 933–958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145- 006-9024-z

Alloway T.P. and Alloway R.G 2010, Investigating the Predictive Roles of Working Memory and IQ in Academic Attainment, in “Journal of Experimental Child Psychology” 106, pp. 20-29.

Alloway T.P. and Alloway R.G. 2014, The Working Memory Advantage: Train Your Brain to Function Stronger, Smarter, Faster, Simon & Schuster, New York, London, Toronto, Sidney, New Delhi.

Anwyl-Irvine A.L., Massonnié J., Flitton A., Kirkham N. and Evershed, J.K. 2020, Gorilla in our midst: An online behavioral experiment builder, in “Behavior research methods” 52 [1], pp. 388–407. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-019-01237-x

Ashby J., Rayner K. and Clifton C. 2005, Eye Movements of Highly Skilled and Average Readers: Differential Effects of Frequency and Predictability, in “The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A” 58 [6], pp. 1065–1086. https://doi.org/10.1080/02724980443000476

Bates D., Maechler M., Bolker B. and Walker S. 2015, Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 in “Journal of Statistical Software” 67 [1], pp. 1-48. https://doi.org/ 10.18637/jss.v067.i01

Blott L.M., Rodd J.M., Ferreira F. and Warren J.E. 2021, Recovery from misinterpretations during online sentence processing in “Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition” 47 [6], pp. 968-997. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000936

Braze D., Tabor W., Shankweiler D.P. and Mencl W.E. 2007, Speaking Up for Vocabulary: Reading Skill Differences in Young Adults, in “Journal of Learning Disabilities” 40 [3], pp. 226–243. https://doi.org/10.1177/00222194070400030401

Camia M., Benassi E., Giovagnoli S. and Scorza M. 2022, Specific learning disorders in young adults: Investigating pragmatic abilities and their relationship with theory of mind, executive functions and quality of life, in “Research in developmental disabilities” 126, pp. 204-253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2022.104253

Cappelli G. 2019, Pragmatic and lexical skills of learners with dyslexia and EFL learning, in Coppola M. M., Di Blasio F. and Francesconi S. (eds), Contact Zones: Cultural, Linguistic and Literary Connections in English, Trento University Press., Trento, pp. 55-74

Cappelli G. and Noccetti S. 2016, Teaching specialized vocabulary to dyslexic adult second language learners: A proposal for multimodal lexical input enhancement, in Bonsignori V. and Crawford Camiciottoli B. (eds), Multimodality across Communicative Settings, Discourse Domains and Genres, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle upon Tyne, pp. 37-64.

Cappelli G., Noccetti S., Arcara G. and Bambini V. 2018, Pragmatic competence and its relationship with the linguistic and cognitive profile of young adults with dyslexia, in “Dyslexia” 24 [3], pp. 294-306.

Cardillo R., Basso Garcia R., Mammarella I.C. and Cornoldi, C. 2018, Pragmatics of language and theory of mind in children with dyslexia with associated language difficulties or non-verbal learning disabilities, in Applied Neuropsychology: Child 7 [3], pp. 245-256.

Chiaro D. 1992, The Language of Jokes: Analysing Verbal Play, Routledge, London.

Daneman M. and Carpenter P.A. 1983, Individual differences in integrating information between and within sentences, in “Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition” 9 [4], pp. 561-584. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.9.4.561

Duffy S.A., Morris R.K. and Rayner, K. 1988, Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading, in “Journal of Memory and Language” 27 [4], pp. 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749- 596X(88)90066-6

Ferrara M., Camia M., Cecere V., Villata V., Vivenzio N., Scorza M. and Padovani R. 2020, Language and Pragmatics Across Neurodevelopmental Disorders: An Investigation Using the Italian Version of CCC-2, in “Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders” 50, pp. 1295-1309.

Frazie L. and Rayner K. 1987, Resolution of syntactic category ambiguities: Eye movements in parsing lexically ambiguous sentences, in “Journal of Memory and Language” 26 [5], pp. 505–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(87)90137-9

Griffiths C. B. 2007, Pragmatic abilities in adults with and without dyslexia: A pilot study in “Dyslexia” 13, pp. 276-296.

Hu S., Zhou P., Foppolo F., Vender M. and Delfitto D. 2019, Scalar Implicatures in Chinese Children with Reading Difficulties in “First Language” 35 [5], pp. 479-507.

Lam K.-H. and Ho C.S.-H. 2014, Pragmatic skills in Chinese dyslexic children: Evidence from a parental checklist, in “Asia Pacific Journal of Developmental Differences” 1, pp. 4-19.

Kasirer A. and Mashal N. 2017, Comprehension and Generation of Metaphoric Language in Children, Adolescents and Adults with Dyslexia, in “Dyslexia” 23, pp. 99-118.

MacDonald M., Pearlmutter C. and Seidenberg M.S. 1994, The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution in “Psychological review” 101 [4], pp. 676-703. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033- 295X.101.4.676

Mainz N., Shao Z., Brysbaert M. and Meyer A.S. 2017, Vocabulary Knowledge Predicts Lexical Processing: Evidence from a Group of Participants with Diverse Educational Backgrounds, in “Frontiers in Psychology” 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01164

Payne B.R., Gao X., Noh S. R., Anderson C. J. and Stine-Morrow E.A.L. 2012, The effects of print exposure on sentence processing and memory in older adults: Evidence for efficiency and reserve, in “Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition” 19 [1–2], pp. 122–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2011.628376

Perfetti C. 2007, Reading Ability: Lexical Quality to Comprehension, in “Scientific Studies of Reading” 11 [4], pp. 357–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430701530730

Perfetti C., and Stafura J. 2014, Word Knowledge in a Theory of Reading Comprehension, in “Scientific Studies of Reading” 18 [1], pp. 22–37. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.827687

Prat C.S. and Just M.A. 2011, Exploring the Neural Dynamics Underpinning Individual Differences in Sentence Comprehension, in “Cerebral Cortex” 21 [8], pp. 1747–1760. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhq241

Rayner K., Pacht J.M. and Duffy S.A. 1994, Effects of prior encounter and global discourse bias on the processing of lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye fixations, in “Journal of memory and language” 33 [4], pp. 527-544.

Richter T., Isberner M.-B., Naumann J. and Neeb Y. 2013, Lexical quality and reading comprehension in primary school children, in “Scientific Studies of Reading” 17 [6], pp. 415–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.764879

Rodd J., Gaskell G. and Marslen-Wilson W. 2002, Making Sense of Semantic Ambiguity: Semantic Competition in Lexical Access, in “Journal of Memory and Language” 46 [2], pp. 245–266. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2810

Rodd J.M., Cai Z.G., Betts H.N., Hanby B., Hutchinson C. and Adler A. 2016, The impact of recent and long-term experience on access to word meanings: Evidence from large-scale internet-based experiments, in “Journal of Memory and Language” 87, pp. 16–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.10.006

Rodd J.M., Lopez Cutrin B., Kirsch H., Millar A. and Davis M.H. 2013, Long-term priming of the meanings of ambiguous words, in “Journal of Memory and Language” 68 [2], pp. 180–198. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.08.002

RStudio Team 2015, RStudio: Integrated Development for R, RStudio, Inc., Boston, MA. URL http://www.rstudio.com/

Schvaneveldt R.W., Meyer D.E. and Becker C.A. 1976, Lexical ambiguity, semantic context and visual word recognition, in “Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance” 2 [2], pp. 243-256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.2.2.243

Seidenberg M.S., Tanenhaus M.K., Leiman J.M. and Bienkowski M. 1982, Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based processing in “Cognitive Psychology” 14 [4], pp. 489–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010- 0285(82)90017-2

Sereno S.C., Pacht J.M. and Rayner K. 1992, The Effect of Meaning Frequency on Processing Lexically Ambiguous Words: Evidence from Eye Fixations, in “Psychological Science” 3 [5], pp. 296–301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1992.tb00676.x

Simi N. 2018, APACS and BLED Santa Lucia, two tests for analyzing the perception of Italian humorous jokes in subjects with and without dyslexia, “Book of Abstracts - XPRAG.it2018” Frontiers in Psychology. doi: 10.3389/conf.fpsyg.2018.73.00026.

Simi N. 2021, Developmental Dyslexia and Anaphora Resolution in English L1/L2: The Effect of Referent Abstractness, Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle-Upon-Tyne. ISBN13: 978-1-5275-7052-8

Simi N., Mackenzie I.G., Janczyk M., Leuthold H. and Dudschig C. 2022, Cognitive Control Mechanisms in Language Processing. Are there both within- and across- task conflict adaptation effects?, in “The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology”

Simpson G.B. and Krueger M.A., 1991, Selective access of homograph meanings in sentence context, in “Journal of Memory and Language” 30 [6], pp. 627–643. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749- 596X(91)90029-J

Smith-Spark J.H., Henry L.A., Messer D.J., Edvardsdottir E. and Zięcik A.P. 2016, Executive functions in adults with developmental dyslexia, in “Research in Developmental Disabilities” 53, pp. 323-341.

Sona Systems (n.d.). Sona Systems: Cloud-based Participant Management Software [Computer software]. Sona Systems, Ltd. https://www.sona-systems.com/

Tabossi P. 1988, Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of sentential contexts in “Journal of memory and language” 27 [3], pp. 324-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90058-7

Taylor J.N. and Perfetti C.A. 2016, Eye movements reveal readers’ lexical quality and reading experience, in “Reading and Writing” 29 [6], pp. 1069-1103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-015- 9616-6

Twilley L.C. and Dixon P. 2000, Meaning resolution processes for words: A parallel independent model in “Psychonomic Bulletin & Review” 7 [1], pp. 49–82. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF0321

Ullman M.T. 2004, Contributions of Memory Circuits to Language: The Declarative/Procedural Model, in “Cognition” 92, pp. 231-270.

Ullman M.T. and Pierpont E.I. 2005, Specific Language Impairment Is Not Specific to Language: The Procedural Deficit Hypothesis, in “Cortex” 41 [3], pp. 399-433.


Full Text: PDF

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.
کاغذ a4

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 3.0 Italia License.