Implicit causality and consequentiality of action verbs

4Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Investigating Implicit Causality (I-Caus) and Implicit Consequentiality (I-Cons) biases associated with action verbs (e.g., Peter praised/healed Mary because/and so …), this paper sheds light on the nature of the coreference and coherence biases associated with Implicit Causality verbs. We provide evidence in support of the Two-Mechanism Account, according to which I-Caus and I-Cons are driven by two different mechanisms: While I-Caus derives from empty explanatory slots for explanations in verb semantics, I-Cons follows from the general discourse principle of Discourse Contiguity. Evidence is provided by three production experiments in German investigating the coreference and coherence properties of agent-evocator and causative agent-patient verbs (e.g., praise vs. heal), which differ with regard to the availability of explanatory slots for I-Caus. Experiment 1 established I-Caus and I-Cons coreference biases for the two verb classes, while Experiment 2 investigated their corresponding coherence biases, showing that they pattern as predicted on the Two-Mechanism Account. Finally, Experiment 3 provided empirical evidence on the fine-grained types of causal relations associated with I-Caus and I-Cons for the two verb types.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Solstad, T., & Bott, O. (2023). Implicit causality and consequentiality of action verbs. Frontiers in Language Sciences, 2. https://doi.org/10.3389/flang.2023.1143214

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free