Abstract
The study asked whether there are age-related differences in the Implicit Causality values (IC-values) of transitive verbs in younger and older adults. The results are expected to support either linguistic accounts or world-knowledge accounts of the origin of Implicit Causality. Using the traditional sentence-completion task (John VERBs Mary, because …) 124 verbs were investigated in a group of students around age 23 and in a group of older people around age 81. Compared to the students, the older people produced higher proportions of Object-reference with verbs showing Subject-reference in general and higher Subject-reference with verbs showing Object-reference in general. Verb-class analysis in terms of semantic role patterns showed that the IC-values of SE-verbs and ES-verbs were less different in the two groups than those of SE-AP-verbs, AP-verbs, and APpres-verbs. The differences in the two latter classes are significant. The relatively broad similarity in the IC-values of the two age groups supports linguistic accounts of the origin of IC-values. The observed differences, however, point to variation in the perspective on interpersonal events in younger and older adults. It is hypothesized that the latter observation reflects an impact of world knowledge on IC-values in that the social life situations of younger and older adults shape expectations regarding who is causing an interpersonal event somewhat differently in the two age groups.
Funding source: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF)
Award Identifier / Grant number: 01UG1411
Funding statement: Thanks are due to many students who helped in collecting the data, to Jeruen Dery for joint work on IC over the course of several years, Torgrim Solstad for discussions, Luke Tudge for statistical analysis, two anonymous reviewers for fruitful comments, and, last but not least, to the two editors of this volume for their helpful suggestions and patience. Financial support for the presented research was given by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Grant 01UG1411.
References
Au, Terry K. 1986. A verb is worth a thousand words: The causes and consequences of interpersonal events implicit in language. Journal of Memory and Language 25(1). 104–122.10.1016/0749-596X(86)90024-0Search in Google Scholar
Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Benjamin M. Bolker & Steven C. Wolker. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1). 1–48.10.18637/jss.v067.i01Search in Google Scholar
Bittner, Dagmar. 2017. Effects of type of because-clause on German 5- and 6-year-olds comprehension of Implicit Causality. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Mono- and Bilingual Speech Development (ISMBS 2017), Chania (Greece), 4.-7.9.Search in Google Scholar
Bott, Oliver & Torgrim Solstad. 2014. From verbs to discourse: A novel account of implicit causality. In Barbara Hemforth, Barbara Mertins & Cathrine Fabricius-Hansen (eds.), Psycholinguistic Approaches to Meaning and Understanding across Languages, 219–251. Cham: Springer.10.1007/978-3-319-05675-3_9Search in Google Scholar
Brown, Nicolas A. & John F. Rauthmann. 2016. Situation characteristics are age graded. Mean-level patterns of the situational eight DIAMONDS across the life span. Social Psychology and Personality Science 7(7). 667–679.10.1177/1948550616652207Search in Google Scholar
Brown, Roger & Deborah Fish. 1983. The psychological causality implicit in language. Cognition 14(3). 237–273.10.1016/0010-0277(83)90006-9Search in Google Scholar
Cohen, Leslie B. & Geoffrey Amsel. 1998. Precursors to infants’ perception of the causality of a simple event. Infant Behavior and Development 21(4). 713–732.10.1016/S0163-6383(98)90040-6Search in Google Scholar
Dery, Jeruen & Dagmar Bittner. 2016. Time and causation in discourse: Temporal proximity, implicit causality, and re-mention biases. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 45(4). 883–899.10.1007/s10936-015-9382-2Search in Google Scholar
Garvey, Catherine & Alfonso Caramazza. 1974. Implicit causality in verbs. Linguistic Inquiry 5(3). 459–464.Search in Google Scholar
Hartshorne, Joshua K. 2014. What is implicit causality? Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 29(7). 804–824.10.1080/01690965.2013.796396Search in Google Scholar
Hartshorne, Joshua K. & Jesse Snedeker. 2013. Verb argument structure predicts Implicit Causality: The advantages of finer-grained semantics. Language and Cognitive Processes 28(10). 1474–1508.10.1080/01690965.2012.689305Search in Google Scholar
Hartshorne, Joshua K., Yasutada Sudo, & Miki Uruwashi. 2013. Are implicit causality pronoun resolution biases consistent across languages and cultures? Experimental Psychology 60(3). 179–196.10.1027/1618-3169/a000187Search in Google Scholar
Hartshorne, Joshua K., Amanda Pogue & Jesse Snedeker. 2015. Love is hard to understand: the relationship between transitivity and caused events in the acquisition of emotion verbs. Journal of Child Language 42(3). 467–504.10.1017/S0305000914000178Search in Google Scholar
Kehler, Andrew, Laura Kertz, Hannah Rohde, & Jeffrey L. Elman. 2008. Coherence and coreference revisited. Journal of Semantics 25(1). 1–44.10.1093/jos/ffm018Search in Google Scholar
Kipper-Schuler, Karin. 2006. VerbNet: A broad-coverage, comprehensive verb lexicon. Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania dissertation.Search in Google Scholar
Koornneef, Arnout W., & Jos J. A. van Berkum. 2006. On the use of verb-based implicit causality in sentence comprehension: Evidence from self-paced reading and eye tracking. Journal of Memory and Language 54(4). 445–465.10.1016/j.jml.2005.12.003Search in Google Scholar
MacWhinney, Brian. 2000. The CHILDES Project. Tools for Analyzing Talk, 3 rd ed. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Search in Google Scholar
Mandler, Jean M. 1984. Stories, scripts, and scenes: Aspects of schema theory. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Search in Google Scholar
Mandler, Jean M. 1988. How to build a baby: On the development of an accessible representational system. Cognitive Development 3(2). 113–136.10.1016/0885-2014(88)90015-9Search in Google Scholar
Pickering, Martin J. & Asifa Majid. 2007. What are implicit causality and implicit consequentiality? Language and Cognitive Processes 22(5). 780–788.10.1080/01690960601119876Search in Google Scholar
R Core Team. 2015. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria. URL http://www.R-project.org/.Search in Google Scholar
Rudolph, Udo & Friedrich Forsterling. 1997. The psychological causality implicit in verbs: A review. Psychological Bulletin 121(2). 192–218.10.1037/0033-2909.121.2.192Search in Google Scholar
Rumelhart, David E. 1980. Schemata: The building blocks of cognition. In Rand J. Spiro, Bertram C Bruce & William F. Brewer (eds), Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension, 33–58. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.10.4324/9781315107493-4Search in Google Scholar
Solstad, Torgrim. 2010. Some new observations on ‘because (of)’. In Maria Aloni, Harald Bastiaanse, Tikitu de Jager & Katrin Schulz (eds.), Logic, Language and Meaning: 17th Amsterdam Colloquium, 436–445. Berlin: Springer.10.1007/978-3-642-14287-1_44Search in Google Scholar
Appendix
Note that the IC-values in columns 3 and 4 are given in % of S-reference.
| Verb in German | Semantic role pattern | Students: IC-value (%) | Older adults: IC-value (%) | Signif. p-values | Verb in English |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| antworten | AP | 0.077 | 0.321 | 0.0045 | answer |
| ärgern | SE | 0.478 | 0.296 | annoy | |
| beachten | SE-AP | 0.159 | 0.172 | consider | |
| begrüssen | AP | 0.471 | 0.5 | greet | |
| beissen | AP | 0.625 | 0.538 | bite | |
| beleidigen | SE-AP | 0.5 | 0.615 | affront | |
| belohnen | APpres | 0.059 | 0.179 | reward | |
| belügen | AP | 0.833 | 0.633 | 0.038 | telling. a lie |
| beneiden | ES | 0.029 | 0.107 | envy | |
| beruhigen | SE-AP | 0.129 | 0.130 | calm | |
| berühren | SE-AP | 0.828 | 0.75 | touch | |
| beschimpfen | APpres | 0.211 | 0.233 | opprobriate | |
| beschützen | AP | 0.304 | 0.241 | guard | |
| besiegen | AP | 0.775 | 0.724 | defeat | |
| bestrafen | APpres | 0.045 | 0.12 | punish | |
| besuchen | AP | 0.327 | 0.44 | visit | |
| bewegen | AP | 0.4 | 0.345 | move | |
| bewundern | ES | 0.026 | 0.038 | admire | |
| brauchen | AP | 0.6 | 0.72 | need | |
| danken | APpres | 0.043 | 0.1 | thank | |
| drehen | AP | 0.204 | 0.455 | 0.046 | spin |
| drücken | AP | 0.731 | 0.793 | hug | |
| entdecken | ES | 0.288 | 0.154 | discover | |
| enttäuschen | SE | 0.927 | 0.92 | disappoint | |
| erkennen | AP | 0.379 | 0.357 | recognize | |
| ermorden | AP | 0.377 | 0.44 | murder | |
| erobern | AP | 0.882 | 0.407 | 5,37E + 08 | take/win |
| erschlagen | AP | 0.456 | 0.379 | slay | |
| erschrecken | SE-AP | 0.692 | 0.821 | scare | |
| erstaunen | SE | 0.814 | 1 | 0.034 | astonish |
| erwischen | AP | 0.433 | 0.130 | 0.011 | get hold on |
| fangen | AP | 0.271 | 0.36 | catch | |
| finden | AP | 0.431 | 0.519 | locate | |
| fürchten | ES | 0.015 | 0.125 | (0.053) | be afraid |
| füttern | AP | 0.03 | 0.038 | feed | |
| gefallen | SE | 0.5 | 0.607 | appeal | |
| gratulieren | APpres | 0.014 | 0.074 | congratulate | |
| grüssen | AP | 0.778 | 0.81 | greet | |
| halten | AP | 0.206 | 0.148 | hold | |
| hassen | ES | 0.027 | 0.034 | hate | |
| hauen | AP | 0.213 | 0.179 | beat | |
| heiraten | AP | 0.810 | 0.667 | marry | |
| helfen | AP | 0.258 | 0.207 | assist | |
| herzen | Ap | 0.8 | 0.677 | fondle | |
| hetzen | AP | 0.54 | 0.556 | rush | |
| holen | AP | 0.405 | 0.474 | fetch | |
| hören | ES | 0.059 | 0.16 | hear | |
| kämmen | AP | 0.171 | 0.065 | comb | |
| kitzeln | Ap | 0.607 | 0.458 | tickle | |
| kleiden | AP | 0.235 | 0.276 | clothe | |
| kneifen | AP | 0.357 | 0.419 | pinch | |
| kränken | SE-AP | 0.783 | 0.6 | offend | |
| küssen | AP | 0.788 | 0.862 | kiss | |
| langweilen | SE | 0.855 | 0.815 | bored | |
| lieben | ES | 0.114 | 0.153 | love | |
| loben | APpres | 0 | 0.111 | 0.023 | compliment |
| malen | AP | 0.6 | 0.286 | 0.011 | draw |
| mögen | ES | 0 | 0.25 | 8,56E + 09 | like |
| necken | SE-AP | 0.828 | 0.5 | 0.003 | tease |
| nerven | SE-AP | 0.830 | 0.821 | get on nervs | |
| packen | AP | 0.348 | 0.172 | grab | |
| pflegen | AP | 0.11 | 0 | care for | |
| pieken | AP | 0.552 | 0.483 | sting | |
| prüfen | AP | 0.548 | 0.304 | (0.054) | vet |
| putzen | AP | 0.149 | 0.208 | clean | |
| quälen | SE-AP | 0.544 | 0.581 | torment | |
| riechen | ES | 0.06 | 0.107 | smell | |
| rufen | AP | 0.843 | 0.6 | (0.054) | call |
| schätzen | ES | 0 | 0 | appreciate | |
| schaukeln | AP | 0.155 | 0.214 | dandle | |
| schieben | AP | 0.221 | 0.25 | push | |
| schubsen | AP | 0.479 | 0.467 | slap | |
| schütteln | AP | 0.246 | 0.286 | shake | |
| schützen | AP | 0.468 | 0.222 | 0.035 | guard |
| sehen | AP | 0.35 | 0.25 | see | |
| stören | SE-AP | 0.819 | 0.71 | disturb | |
| stoßen | AP | 0.455 | 0.231 | (0.059) | hustle/prod |
| suchen | AP | 0.517 | 0.517 | look for | |
| täuschen | AP | 0.859 | 0.692 | deceive | |
| testen | AP | 0.629 | 0.607 | test | |
| töten | AP | 0.435 | 0.538 | kill | |
| tragen | AP | 0.098 | 0.074 | carry | |
| trösten | APpres | 0.119 | 0.16 | comfort | |
| überfahren | AP | 0.721 | 0.654 | run over | |
| überraschen | SE-AP | 0.324 | 0.296 | surprise | |
| übersehen | SE-AP | 0.164 | 0.4 | 0.025 | overlook |
| überzeugen | SE-AP | 0.853 | 0.577 | 0.0107 | convince |
| unterbrechen | AP | 0.438 | 0.303 | interrupt | |
| verachten | ES | 0.075 | 0.069 | despise | |
| verbessern | AP | 0.227 | 0.28 | correct | |
| verehren | ES | 0.145 | 0.276 | adore | |
| verfluchen | AP-AP | 0.043 | 0.062 | curse | |
| verhauen | SE-AP | 0.36 | 0.154 | pund | |
| verjagen | AP | 0.353 | 0.31 | chase. away | |
| verletzen | SE-AP | 0.806 | 0.793 | hurt | |
| verlieren | AP | 0.623 | 0.571 | lose | |
| verraten | AP | 0.4 | 0.44 | betray | |
| verspotten | AP | 0.188 | 0.346 | deride | |
| verwandeln | AP | 0.731 | 0.444 | 0.043 | transform |
| verwunden | AP | 0.719 | 0.679 | wound | |
| verzaubern | SE-AP | 0.833 | 0.742 | enchant | |
| wärmen | AP | 0.031 | 0.069 | warm | |
| waschen | AP | 0.058 | 0.04 | wash | |
| wecken | AP | 0.085 | 0.04 | wake so. up | |
| ziehen | AP | 0.238 | 0.13 | pull/drag | |
| zwicken | AP | 0.603 | 0.643 | pinch |
©2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
