Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Verbal Illusion: Now in Three Languages

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The so-called depth charge sentences (e.g., no head injury is too trivial to be ignored) were investigated in a comprehension experiment measuring both whether participants understood the stimuli and how certain they were of their interpretation. The experiment revealed that three factors influence the difficulty of depth charge type sentences: the number of negations, the plausibility of the relation between the subject and the verb, and finally the logic of the relation between the adjective and the verb. When a sentence is maximally complex (i.e., when there are multiple negations, the relation between subject and verb is implausible, and the relation between adjective and verb is illogical) participants misunderstood the sentence, but were at the same time certain of their answers. The experiment supports the idea that depth charge sentences create a verbal illusion—the sentences mean one thing, but people systematically understand them to mean the opposite.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This terminology was coined by Wason and Reich (1979), and we use their terms in this study, even though the terms ‘semantic’ and ‘pragmatic’ are used in a slightly unusual way.

References

  • Baayen, R. H. (2011). LanguageR (Version 1.2). http://cran.r-project.org/src/contrib/Archive/languageR/

  • Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2011). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using Eigen and S4 (Version 0.999375-42). http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/lme4/index.html

  • Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (1975). Sentence comprehension: A psycholinguistic processing model of verification. Psychological Review, 82(1), 45–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., Keller, T. A., Eddy, W. F., & Thulborn, K. R. (1999). Time course of fMRI-activation in language and spatial networks during sentence comprehension. Neuroimage, 10, 216–224.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chase, W. G., & Clark, H. G. (1972). Mental operations in the comparison of sentences and pictures. In L. Gregg (Ed.), Cognition in learning and memory (pp. 205–232). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, K. R. (2009). Negative and affirmative sentences increase activation in different areas in the brain. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 22(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, K. R. (2010). Syntactic reconstruction and reanalysis, semantic dead ends, and prefrontal cortex. Brain and Cognition, 73(1), 41–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, K. R., & Wallentin, M. (2011). The locative alternation: Distinguishing linguistic processing cost from error signals in Broca’s region. NeuroImage, 56(3), 1622–1631. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.02.081.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Drenhaus, H., beim Graben, P., Saddy, D., & Frisch, S. (2006). Diagnosis and repair of negative polarity constructions in the light of symbolic resonance analysis. Brain and Language, 96(3), 255–268. doi:10.1016/j.bandl.2005.05.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, F., Christianson, K., & Hollingworth, A. (2001). Misinterpretations of garden-path sentences: Implications for models of sentence processing and reanalysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30(1), 3–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII (pp. 559–586). Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Ltd.

  • Frazier, L., & Clifton, C, Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friederici, A. D. (2002). Towards a neural basis of auditory sentence processing. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6(2), 78–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hagoort, P., Hald, L., & Bastiaansen, M. (2004). Integration of word meaning and world knowledge in language comprehension. Science, 304(5669), 438–4441. doi:10.1126/science.1095455.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hasegawa, M., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (2002). An fMRI study of bilingual sentence comprehension and workload. NeuroImage, 15(3), 647–660. doi:10.1006/nimg.2001.1001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hasson, U., & Glucksberg, S. (2006). Does understanding negation entail affirmation? Journal of Pragmatics, 38(7), 1015–1032. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.12.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordan, M. P. (1998). The power of negation in English: Text, context and relevance. Journal of Pragmatics, 29(6), 705–752.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J., & Zwaan, R. A. (2006). Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed? Journal of Pragmatics, 38(7), 1033–1050. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2005.09.012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kizach, J., Nyvad, A. M., & Christensen, K. R. (2013). Structure before meaning: Sentence processing, plausibility, and subcategorization. PLoS ONE, 8(10), e76326. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0076326.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kutas, M., & Hillyard, S. A. (1980). Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science, 207(4427), 203–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Natsopoulos, D. (1985). A verbal illusion in two languages. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 14(4), 385–397.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osterhout, L., Holcomb, P. J., & Swinney, D. A. (1994). Brain potentials elicited by garden-path sentences: Evidence of the application of verb information during parsing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(4), 786.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, C., Wagers, M. W., & Lau, E. F. (2011). 5 grammatical illusions and selective fallibility in real-time language comprehension. In J. T. Runner (Ed.), Experiments at the Interfaces (pp. 147–180). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing. doi:10.1108/S0092-4563(2011)0000037009.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prior, A., & Bentin, S. (2006). Differential integration efforts of mandatory and optional sentence constituents. Psychophysiology, 43(5), 440–449. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8986.2006.00426.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, B. L. (1992). Grammatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago: Chicago University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • R Development Core Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing (Version 2.13.2). Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org

  • Saddy, D., Drenhaus, H., & Frisch, S. (2004). Processing polarity items: Contrastive licensing costs. Brain and Language, 90(1–3), 495–502. doi:10.1016/S0093-934X(03)00470-X.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sanford, A. J., & Graesser, A. C. (2006). Shallow processing and underspecification. Discourse Processes, 42(2), 99–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, M. A. (1976). Adjectival negation and the comprehension of multiply negated sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15(2), 143–157. doi:10.1016/0022-5371(76)90015-3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trotzke, A., Bader, M., & Frazier, L. (2013). Third factors and the performance interface in language design. Biolinguistics, 7(1), 1–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venables, W. N., & Ripley, B. D. (2002). Modern applied statistics with S (4th ed.). New York: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wason, P. C., & Reich, S. S. (1979). A verbal illusion. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 31(4), 591–597.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The research reported here was financially supported by the Danish Council for Independent Research. The authors wish to thank Douglas Saddy for valuable discussions, and two anonymous reviewers for insightful comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Aesthetics and Communication, Aarhus University, Jens Chr. Skous Vej 4, 8000, Aarhus, Denmark

    Johannes Kizach, Ken Ramshøj Christensen & Ethan Weed

Authors
  1. Johannes Kizach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ken Ramshøj Christensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ethan Weed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ken Ramshøj Christensen.

Appendix: Non-action verb test

Appendix: Non-action verb test

  1. 1.

    Hvad laver du for tiden?

    what do you do for time

    “What are you doing these days?”

    1. a.

      Jeg aftjener værnepligt

      I serve conscription

      “I am doing military service”

    2. b.

      Jeg undgår værnepligt

      I avoid conscription

      “I am avoiding military service”

  2. 2.

    Hvad laver du lige nu?

    what do you do straight now

    “What are you doing right now?”

    1. a.

      Jeg passer min hund

      I watch my dog

      “I am watching my dog”

    2. b.

      Jeg ignorerer min hund

      I ignore my dog

      “I am ignoring my dog”

  3. 3.

    Hvad laver du lige nu?

    what do you do straight now

    “What are you doing right now?”

    1. a.

      Jeg retter en fejl

      I correct a mistake

      “I am correcting a mistake”

    2. b.

      Jeg overser en fejl

      I overlook a mistake

      “I am overlooking a mistake”

  4. 4.

    Hvad laver du lige nu?

    what do you do straight now

    “What are you doing right now?”

    1. a.

      Jeg passer mine pligter

      I watch my duties

      “I am taking care of my duties”

    2. b.

      Jeg forsømmer mine pligter

      I neglect my duties

      “I am neglecting my duties”

  5. 5.

    Hvad laver du lige nu?

    what do you do straight now

    “What are you doing right now?”

    1. a.

      Jeg sætter et komma

      I add a comma

      “I am adding a comma”

    2. b.

      Jeg udelader et komma

      I leave.out a comma

      “I am leaving out a comma”

  6. 6.

    Hvad laver du lige nu?

    what do you do straight now

    “What are you doing right now?”

    1. a.

      Jeg tager en chance

      I take a chance

      “I am taking a chance”

    2. b.

      Jeg forbigår en chance

      I pass.by a chance

      “I am passing by a chance”

  7. 7.

    Hvad laver du lige nu?

    what do you do straight now

    “What are you doing right now?”

    1. a.

      Jeg tager en bus

      I take a bus

      “I am taking a bus”

    2. b.

      Jeg misser en bus

      I miss a bus

      “I am missing a bus”

  8. 8.

    Hvad laver du lige nu?

    what do you do straight now

    “What are you doing right now?”

    1. a.

      Jeg udnytter en mulighed

      I exploit an oppertunity

      “I am exploiting an oppertunity”

    2. b.

      Jeg forpasser en mulighed

      I miss an oppertunity

      “I am missing an oppertunity”

  9. 9.

    Hvad laver du lige nu?

    what do you do straight now

    “What are you doing right now?”

    1. a.

      Jeg imødekommer kritik

      I comply.with criticism

      “I am complying with criticism”

    2. b.

      Jeg overhører kritik

      I overhear criticism

      “I am overhearing criticism”

  10. 10.

    Hvad laver du lige nu?

    what do you do straight now

    “What are you doing right now?”

    1. a.

      Jeg pudser mine støvler

      I clean my boots

      “I am cleaning my boots”

    2. b.

      Jeg misligholder mine støvler

      I neglect my boots

      “I am neglecting my boots”

  11. 11.

    Hvad laver du for tiden?

    what do you do for time

    “What are you doing these days?”

    1. a.

      Jeg nyder mit liv

      I enjoy my life

      “I am enjoying my life”

    2. b.

      Jeg forspilder mit liv

      I waste my life

      “I am wasting my life”

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kizach, J., Christensen, K.R. & Weed, E. A Verbal Illusion: Now in Three Languages. J Psycholinguist Res 45, 753–768 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-015-9370-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-015-9370-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation