Cognition 11 (1):29-46 (1982)

Authors
Alan Garnham
University of Sussex
Peder Johnson
University of New Mexico
Abstract
Two experiments were carried out to investigate the role of referential continuity in understanding discourse. In experiment 1, a group of university students listened to stories and descriptive passages presented in three different versions: the original passages, versions in which the sentences occured in a random order, and randomised versions in which referential continuity had been restored primarily by replacing pronouns and other terms with fuller and more appropriate noun phrases. The original stories were remembered better, and rated as more comprehensible, than the random versions, but the restoration of referential continuity ameliorated the effects of randomisation. The descriptive passages had little referential continuity from one sentence to the next, and as expected the effects of randomisation on comprehensibility and memory were negligible. In experiment 2, a group of skilled comprehenders and a group of less skilled comprehenders were selected from a population of 7–8-year-old children. The difference between the groups was known to be largely their inferential ability in reading texts. Both groups read a series of short stories presented in the same three versions as used in the previous experiment. As predicted, the ameliorating effects on memory of restoring referential continuity in a randomised story were confined to the skilled group. The results are discussed in relation to the theories of story grammar, text microstructure, and mental models of discourse.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/0010-0277(82)90003-8
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,864
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Logic and Conversation.H. Paul Grice - 1975 - In Maite Ezcurdia & Robert J. Stainton (eds.), The Semantics-Pragmatics Boundary in Philosophy. Broadview Press. pp. 47.
Syntactic Structures.J. F. Staal - 1966 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 31 (2):245-251.
Logic and Conversation.Herbert Paul Grice - 1967 - In Paul Grice (ed.), Studies in the Way of Words. Harvard University Press. pp. 41-58.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Story Grammars Versus Story Points.Robert Wilensky - 1983 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6 (4):579.
What's Wrong with Story Grammars.Alan Garnham - 1983 - Cognition 15 (1-3):145-154.
What a Story Is.Jean M. Mandler - 1983 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6 (4):603.
What' the Point?Nancy L. Stein - 1983 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6 (4):611.
Form, Content, and Affect in the Theory of Stories.William F. Brewer - 1983 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 6 (4):595.

View all 28 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Ellipsis and Discourse Coherence.Lyn Frazier & Charles Clifton - 2006 - Linguistics and Philosophy 29 (3):315-346.
Pragmatic Enrichment as Coherence Raising.Peter Pagin - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 168 (1):59-100.
Referent Ontology and Centering in Discourse.A. Maes - 1997 - Journal of Semantics 14 (3):207-235.
Descriptions and Discourse Models.P. N. Johnson-Laird & A. Garnham - 1979 - Linguistics and Philosophy 3 (3):371 - 393.
Les langues de bois journalistique et politique se nourrissent l'une l'autre.Thomas Legrand - 2010 - Hermès: La Revue Cognition, communication, politique 58 (3).
Explaining Referential Stability of Physics Concepts: The Semantic Embedding Approach. [REVIEW]Andreas Bartels - 2010 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 41 (2):267 - 281.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2014-01-20

Total views
17 ( #600,788 of 2,433,069 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #294,010 of 2,433,069 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes