Changes in Nature of Prediction in Speech Acts: An Experimental Study
https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2025-14-3-43-61
Abstract
This article aligns with cognitive and psycholinguistic research on speech acts as indicators of the development of various cognitive processes, a measure of an individual’s linguistic competence, and the extent to which a person masters speech operations. The study investigates changes in the nature of speech acts, reflected in the characteristics of predication (association) between stimuli and responses. Utilizing three associative dictionaries published in different years, the dynamics of prediction in speech acts are demonstrated through the method of interpreting associative fields. The novelty of the research findings lies in substantiating several propositions. In examining the dynamics of speech act execution, the authors emphasize the need to consider different methods of collecting associates: oral-written and written. It is noted that in contemporary linguistic culture, the operations of semantic and surface syntactic processing in speech act production are increasingly supplanted by meaning-based syntactic processing during specific time periods. Indicators of this process include a quantitative increase in topic-comment structures, syntactic primitives, a reduction in the proportion of complete cycle syntactic speech acts, deactivation of surface syntactic processing, a decline in diversity indices within the core of complete cycle syntactic speech acts, and the stereotypization of core associates.
About the Authors
V. A. Pishchalnikova
Moscow State Linguistic University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Vera A. Pishchalnikova - Doctor of Philology, Professor, Department of General and Comparative Linguistics.
Moscow
N. I. Stepykin
Moscow State Linguistic University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Nikolai I. Stepykin - Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor, Professor, Department of Foreign Languages; leading research scientist.
Moscow
References
1. Akhutina, T. V. (2008). Leontiev-Ryabova model of speech generation: 1967—2005. In: Psychology, linguistics and interdisciplinary relations. Moscow: Smysl. 79—104. (In Russ.).
2. Akhutina, T. V. (2022). Vygotsky’s speech generation model: fundamentals and verification. Scientific Journal. The cauldron. University of the Humanities. Science, 164 (1—2): 7—27. DOI: 10.26907/2541-7738.2022.1-2.7-27. (In Russ.).
3. Bates, E. (1976). Language and Context: The Acquisition of Pragmatics. New York: Acad. Press. 375 p.
4. Bates, E., MacWhinney, B. (1982). Functionalist approaches to grammar. In: Language Acquisition: The State of the Art. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. 173—218.
5. Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading activation theory of retrieval in language production. Psychological Review, 93: 283—321.
6. Karaulov, Yu. N. (1999). Active grammar and associative-verbal network. Moscow: Institute of the Russian Language of the Russian Academy of Sciences. 180 p. (In Russ.).
7. Khlopova, A. I., Ladosha, O. M. (2021). Lexical and semantic content of the value “Erfolg” in German linguistic culture. Theoretical and Applied Linguistics, 7(2): 135-151. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.22250/2410-7190_2021_7_2_135_151. (In Russ.).
8. Ladosha, O. M., Khlopova, A. I. (2021). Model of the basic concept “Wahrheit” in German linguoculture. Bulletin of Adyghe State University. Series 2: Philology and Art Criticism, 1(272): 67-78. (In Russ.).
9. Leontyev, A. A. (1969). Language, speech, speech activity. Moscow: Prosveshchenie Publ. 214 p. (In Russ.).
10. Luria, A. R. (1928). Speech and intelligence in child development. Moscow: Lunacharsky Polygraph School. 279 p. (In Russ.).
11. Mcclelland, J. L., Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88: 375–407.
12. Morsella, E., Miozzo, M. (2002). Evidence for a Cascade Model of Lexical Access in Speech Production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 28(3): 555–563. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//0278-7393.28.3.555.
13. Ovchinnikova, I. G. (2018). Syntagmatic failures in Russian speech: interpretation in light of current models of the mental lexicon. Issues of psycholinguistics, 2(36): 84-98. DOI: 10.30982/2077-5911-36-2-84–98. (In Russ.).
14. Pishchalnikova, V. A. (2019). Interpretation of associative data as a problem of the methodology of psycholinguistics. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 23 (3): 749—761. DOI: 10.22363/2312-9182-2019-23-3-749-761. (In Russ.).
15. Pishchalnikova, V. A. (2020). Ethnic picture of the world: problems of terminology description. Bulletin of Voronezh State University. Series: Linguistics and Intercultural communication, 2: 6—11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17308/lic.2020.2/2827. (In Russ.).
16. Stepykin, N. I. (2021). Experience in Modeling Associative Fields (Project “Multilingual Associative Thesaurus of Politeness”). Nauchnyi dialog, 3: 106—120. DOI: 10.24224/2227-1295-2021-3-106-120. (In Russ.).
17. Stepykin, N. I., Bagana, J., Slobodova, K. N., Funikova, S. V. (2023). Investigation of the dynamics of the mental lexicon according to the data of a free associative experiment. Scientific result. Questions of theoretical and applied linguistics, 9 (2): 19—33. DOI: 10.18413/2313-8912-2023-9-2-0-2. (In Russ.).
18. Thompson, C. K. (2014). Neural basis of sentence processing: Evidence from neurolinguistic and neuroimaging studies. In: The Oxford Handbook of Language Production. Oxford: Oxford Univ. Press. 47—69.
19. Walenski, M., Europa, E., Caplan, D., Thompson, C. K. (2019). Neural networks for sentence comprehension and production: An ALE-based meta-analysis of neuroimaging studies. Human Brain Mapping, 40 (8): 2275—2304. DOI: 10.1002/hbm.24523.
20. Zalevskaya, A. A. (2014). Interface theory of word meaning: psycholinguistic approach. London: International Academy of Sciences and Higher Education. 180 p. (In Russ.).
Review
For citations:
Pishchalnikova V.A., Stepykin N.I. Changes in Nature of Prediction in Speech Acts: An Experimental Study. Nauchnyi dialog. 2025;14(3):43-61. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2025-14-3-43-61
Views:
443
Email this article 