1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. Publications
  3. College of Foreign Languages and Literature
  4. Theses
  5. Item

Publications-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

NCCU Library

Citation Infomation

Related Publications in TAIR

題名 台灣華語幽默雙關語的即時理解
The real-time comprehension of humorous puns in Taiwan Mandarin
作者 王存慈
Wang, Tsun-Tzu
貢獻者 賴瑶鍈
Lai, Yao-Ying
王存慈
Wang, Tsun-Tzu
關鍵詞 雙關語
語言處理
框架轉換
失諧
語境調節
結構拆解
Pun
Language processing
Frame-shifting
Incongruity
Contextual modulation
Decomposability
日期 2025
上傳時間 2-Oct-2025 11:00:59 (UTC+8)
摘要 本論文探討台灣華語中諧音雙關語的即時理解過程。基於理論分析及心理語言學模型，本研究探討雙關語的處理歷程，是否受到以下因素的調節：（1）雙關語本身所蘊含的意義與前文語境之間是否存在不一致性；（2）其兩種不同意義轉換之間是否涉及結構性拆解；以及（3）不同語境訊息的影響。這些問題皆與雙關語的多樣性相關，例如雙關語雙重意涵在語境符合性上的差異，以及其內部結構的差異等。然而，這些因素在過往研究中多被忽略，在理解歷程的解釋上可能過度概括了不同類型的雙關語；目前在雙關語處理研究上的爭議或與此異質性有關。 本研究融合前人的 Incongruity-Resolution theory (Suls, 1979) 與Space-Structuring model (Coulson, 2001; 2015)，提出一個整合模型，假設不一致性（即辨識最初獲取的雙關語意義與前文語境的落差）、框架轉換 (frame-shifting)（即重組概念表徵來獲得雙關語的另一種解讀），以及語境整合，皆會影響雙關語的即時理解。此外，我們也假設：有些雙關語的多重意義需經透過分解其內部結構而獲得，在理解時會比不涉及結構分解的雙關語需要更多的認知資源。 為了驗證所提出的整合模型，我們依據語意與語境符合性 (meaning-context congruence)，將雙關語分為兩類：Incongruent-Congruent (IC) 與Congruent-Congruent (CC)。IC 雙關語的初始意義一 (Meaning-1) 與當下句子的語境不符，但其另一層意義二 (Meaning-2) 與語境相符；相對地，CC 雙關語的兩個意義皆與語境相符。此外，我們亦根據雙關語兩層意義之間的轉換過程是否涉及重組結構，將雙關語區分為可分解 (decomposable) 與不可分解 (non-decomposable)。又，為進一步探討語境如何影響雙關語意義的獲取，本研究操弄了兩種語境：一種為中性語境、另一種語境則偏向於初始較不預期的意義二 (Meaning-2-biasing context)。我們採用跨模態詞彙判斷實驗 (cross-modal lexical decision)，以聽覺的方式呈現含雙關語的語句，受試者於句末對與雙關語相關的目標詞(視覺呈現)進行詞彙判斷作業。 實驗結果顯示：（1）在偏向意義二的語境中，不同類型的雙關語呈現顯著差異：IC 雙關語的反應時間顯著快於 CC 雙關語，顯示理解者能迅速轉向獲取符合語境的第二重意義，可能因IC雙關語的初始意義一與語境之間不一致、促進了語意轉換。而CC 雙關語由於兩個意義皆可行，會引發理解者於兩種概念框架間持續性動態地轉換，增加處理的負荷。（2）結構可分解性的效應並不顯著，顯示二重語意間是否涉及結構轉換，對理解雙關語意義的影響有限。（3）語境差異呈現顯著效應：無論為 IC 或 CC 雙關語，當偏向意義二的語境較能促進雙關語理解歷程的意義轉換。綜合來看，本研究結果對於雙關語處理過程所涉及的機制提供更細緻的解釋，並凸顯雙關語不同子類型在即時處理中的差異。
This thesis investigates the real-time comprehension of humorous homophone puns in Taiwan Mandarin. Grounded in theoretical analysis and psych/neurolinguistic models, the study addresses whether pun processing is modulated by (1) the presence of an incongruity between a pun’s encoded meaning and prior context, (2) the decomposability between the two alternative meanings, and (3) different contextual information. These are underpinned by the issue of diversity in puns, such as variations in context congruity of the dual pun meanings and their internal structures, which have been largely overlooked in previous research, leading to overgeneralizations across various pun types. While different mechanisms have been proposed for the online comprehension of puns, debates remain and could potentially result from such heterogeneity of stimuli. We propose an integrated model synthesizing insights from existing theoretical accounts: Incongruity-Resolution theory (Suls, 1979) and Space-Structuring model (Coulson, 2001; 2015). The proposed model incorporates the mechanisms of incongruity detection (i.e., identifying the mismatch between an initially-accessed pun meaning and the preceding context) and frame-shifting (i.e., reorganization of the conceptual representations to arrive at an alternative interpretation) with contextual integration. Additionally, we hypothesize that puns that require a decomposition of the internal structure to reach the alternative meaning would require more cognitive effort than those that do not. To verify, we categorized puns into two subtypes based on meaning-context congruity: Incongruent-Congruent (IC) and Congruent-Congruent (CC) puns. IC puns involve an incongruity between the initially-accessed Meaning-1 and the context, while the alternative Meaning-2 is contextually congruent. In contrast, CC puns are those in which both meanings are congruent with the context. In addition, we dissociated decomposable puns from non-decomposable ones to probe decomposability. To further examine contextual modulation, we manipulated two context types: neutral vs. context biasing toward Meaning-2 that is less expected initially. A cross-modal lexical decision task was conducted with auditory presentation of pun sentences followed by visual probes. Results revealed (i) a significant effect of pun subtypes under Meaning-2-biasing contexts, with IC puns showing faster reaction times than CC puns. This suggests that comprehenders quickly shifted to the contextually appropriate Meaning-2, facilitated by the initial Meaning-1 incongruity. Contrastively for CC puns, the availability of two alternative meanings triggered a series of dynamic shifts between the two conceptual frames, hence increased cost for meaning reorganization. On the other hand, (ii) no decomposability effect was observed, suggesting little influence of structural differences associated with the alternative pun meanings. In addition, we found (iii) a significant effect of context types, which indicates that a context biasing toward the initially less salient (but contextually appropriate) Meaning-2 facilitated the meaning shift for both IC and CC puns. Altogether, these findings offer a more nuanced understanding of pun comprehension, highlighting differences between pun subtypes in shaping real-time meaning computation.
參考文獻 Aarons, D. (2017). Puns and Tacit Linguistic Knowledge. In S. Attardo (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor (pp. 80-94). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315731162. Attardo, S. (1990). The violation of Grice’s Maxims in Jokes. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1990), 355-362. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v16i0.1726. Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219029. Attardo, S. (2018). Universals in puns and humorous wordplay. In E. Winter-Froemel & V. Thaler (Eds.), Cultures and Traditions of Wordplay and Wordplay Research (pp. 89-110). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110586374-005. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01. Bekinschtein, T. A., Davis, M. H., Rodd, J. M., & Owen A. M. (2011). Why Clowns Taste Funny: the Relationship between Humor and semantic Ambiguity. Journal of Neuroscience, 31 (26). https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5058-10.2011. Brown, C., & Hagoort, P. (1993). The processing nature of the N400: evidence from masked priming. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 5(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1993.5.1.34. Caillies, S., & Butcher, K. (2007). Processing of idiomatic expressions: Evidence for a New Hybrid View. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 79–108. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2201_3. Chan, Y. C., Chou, T. L., Chen, H. C., & Liang, K. C. (2012). Segregating the comprehension and elaboration processing of verbal jokes: an fMRI study. NeuroImage, 61(4), 899–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.052. Chan, Y. C., Chou, T. L., Chen, H. C., Yeh, Y. C., Lavallee, J. P., Liang, K. C., & Chang, K. E. (2013). Towards a neural circuit model of verbal humor processing: an fMRI study of the neural substrates of incongruity detection and resolution. NeuroImage, 66, 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.10.019. Chang, LY., Tseng, CC., Perfetti, C.A. et al. (2022). Development and validation of a Chinese pseudo-character/non-character producing system. Behavior Research 54, 632–648. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01611-8. Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic Leaps: Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction (pp. 33–70). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551352.003. Coulson, S., Urbach, T. & Kutas, M. (2006). Looking back: Joke comprehension and the space structuring model. HUMOR, 19(3), 229-250. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMOR.2006.013. Coulson, S. & Severens, E. (2007). Hemispheric asymmetry and pun comprehension: When cowboys have sore calves. Brain and language, 100(2), 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.08.009. Coulson, S. (2015). 9. Frame-shifting and frame semantics: Joke comprehension on the space structuring model. In G. Brône, K. Feyaerts & T. Veale (Ed.), Cognitive Linguistics and Humor Research (pp. 167-190). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110346343-009. Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(4), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90066-6. Dholkia, A., Meade, G., & Coch, D. (2016). The N400 elicited by homonyms in puns: Two primes are not better than one. Psychophysiology, 53(12), 1799-1810. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12762. Feng, Y. J., Chan, Y. C., & Chen H. C. (2014). Specialization of neural mechanisms underlying the three-stage model in humor processing: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 32, 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2014.08.007. Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1990). Taking on semantic commitments: Processing multiple meanings vs. multiple senses. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(2), 181–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(90)90071-7. Guidi, A. (2012). Are pun mechanisms universal? A comparative analysis across language families. HUMOR, 25(3), 339-366. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2012-0017. Hempelmann, C. (2004). Script opposition and logical mechanism in punning. HUMOR, 17(4), 381-392. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.2004.17.4.381. Hempelmann, C. & Attardo, S. (2011). Resolutions and their incongruities: Further thoughts on logical mechanisms. HUMOR, 24(2), 125-149. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMR.2011.008. Hino, Y., Lupker, S. J., & Sears, C. R. (1997). The effects of word association and meaning frequency in a cross-modal lexical decision task: Is the priming due to "semantic" activation? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 51(3), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1037/1196-1961.51.3.195 Jared, D., & Bainbridge, S. (2017). Reading homophone puns: Evidence from eye tracking. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 71(1), 2–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000109. Koleva, K., Mon-Williams, M., & Klepousniotou, E. (2019). Right hemisphere involvement for pun processing – Effects of idiom decomposition. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 51, 165-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2019.02.002. Ku, L.-C., Feng, Y.-J., Chan, Y.-C., Wu, C.-L., & Chen, H.-C. (2017). A re-visit of three-stage humor processing with readers' surprise, comprehension, and funniness ratings: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 42, 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2016.11.008. Lau, E., Phillips, C. & Poeppel, D. (2008). A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 9, 920–933 https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2532 McHugh, T., & Buchanan, L. (2016). Pun processing from a psycholinguistic perspective: Introducing the model of psycholinguistic hemispheric incongruity Laughter (M.PHIL). Laterality, 21(4–6), 455–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2016.1146292. Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum, J. J. (2006). When peanuts fall in love: N400 evidence for the power of discourse. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 18(7), 1098–1111. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2006.18.7.1098. Onifer, W., & Swinney, D. A. (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias. Memory & Cognition, 9(3), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196957. R Core Team. (2023). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/. Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v5i0.2164. Schütze, C. T., & Sprouse, J. (2014). Judgment data. In R. J. Podesva & D. Sharma (Eds.), Research Methods in Linguistics (pp. 27–50). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013734. Shibata, M., Terasawa, Y., & Umeda, S. (2014) Integration of cognitive and affective networks in humor comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 65, 137-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.10.025. Singmann, H., Bolker, B., Westfall, J., Aust, F., & Ben-Shachar, M. (2024). afex: Analysis of Factorial Experiments. R package version 1.4-1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=afex. Solska, A. (2012). The Relevance-Based Model of Context in Processing Puns. Research in Language, 10(4), 387-404. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10015-012-0001-0. Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Blackwell Publishing. Suls, J. M. (1972). A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons. In J. H. Goldstein and P. E. McGhee (Eds.), The psychology of humor: Theoretical perspectives and empirical issues. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-22105-2. Swinney, D. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 18(6), 645–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90355-4. Swinney, D., Parther, P., & Love, T. (2000). The time-course of lexical access and the role of context: Converging evidence from normal and aphasic processing. In Y. Grodzinsky, L. P. Shapiro, & D. Swinney (Eds.), Language and the brain (pp. 273–292). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012304260-6/50016-5. Titone D. (1998). Hemispheric differences in context sensitivity during lexical ambiguity resolution. Brain and language, 65(3), 361–394. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1998.1998. Titone, D. & Libben, M. (2014). Time-dependent effects of decomposability, familiarity and literal plausibility on idiom priming: A cross-modal priming investigation. The Mental Lexicon, 9(3), 473 – 496. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.9.3.05tit. Vaid, J., Hull, R., Heredia, R., Gerkens, D., & Martinez, F. (2003). Getting a joke: the time course of meaning activation in verbal humor. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(9), 1431-1449. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00184-4. Yip, M.C.W., Zhai, M. (2018). Processing Homophones Interactively: Evidence from eye-movement data. Scientific Reports, 8, 9812. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-27768-5. Zheng, W., & Wang, X. (2022). Contextual support for less salient homophones and pun humor appreciation: Evidence from eye movements in reading Chinese Homophone Puns. Frontiers in psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.875479. Zheng, W., & Wang, X. (2023). Frame-shifting instead of incongruity is necessary for pun comprehension: evidence from an ERP study on Chinese homophone puns. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 38(8), 1068-1081. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2023.2192509. Ziv, A. & Francois, L. (1984). Personality and Sense of Humor. Springer. Zwicky, A. & Zwicky, E. D. (1986). Imperfect puns, markedness and phonological similarity. With fronds like these, who needs anemones. Folia Linguistica, 20(3/4), 493-503. 李世之. (1995). 試論漢語中的諧音字 [A Study on xiéyīnzì in the Chinese Language]. 語言教學與研究, 第2期, 頁122-132. 張廷興. (2000). 諧音與民俗 [Xiéyīn and Folklore]. 北京：中央民族大學出版社 黃瓈君. (2005). 民間習俗諧音現象之研究—以漢族婚俗、年俗為主 [A Study on the Phenomenon of xiéyīnzì in Folk Customs: Focusing on Han Chinese Wedding and New Year Traditions]. 國立高雄師範大學國文學系教學碩士論文. 謝韻清. (2014). 網路語言認知影響語言行為及態度之研究 [The Effect of Internet Language Cognition on Verbal Behavior and Attitude]. 中國文化大學華語文教學研究所碩士論文.
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
語言學研究所
111555001
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111555001
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 賴瑶鍈zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Lai, Yao-Yingen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 王存慈zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Wang, Tsun-Tzuen_US
dc.creator (作者) 王存慈zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Wang, Tsun-Tzuen_US
dc.date (日期) 2025en_US
dc.date.accessioned 2-Oct-2025 11:00:59 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 2-Oct-2025 11:00:59 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 2-Oct-2025 11:00:59 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0111555001en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/159690-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 語言學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 111555001zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本論文探討台灣華語中諧音雙關語的即時理解過程。基於理論分析及心理語言學模型，本研究探討雙關語的處理歷程，是否受到以下因素的調節：（1）雙關語本身所蘊含的意義與前文語境之間是否存在不一致性；（2）其兩種不同意義轉換之間是否涉及結構性拆解；以及（3）不同語境訊息的影響。這些問題皆與雙關語的多樣性相關，例如雙關語雙重意涵在語境符合性上的差異，以及其內部結構的差異等。然而，這些因素在過往研究中多被忽略，在理解歷程的解釋上可能過度概括了不同類型的雙關語；目前在雙關語處理研究上的爭議或與此異質性有關。 本研究融合前人的 Incongruity-Resolution theory (Suls, 1979) 與Space-Structuring model (Coulson, 2001; 2015)，提出一個整合模型，假設不一致性（即辨識最初獲取的雙關語意義與前文語境的落差）、框架轉換 (frame-shifting)（即重組概念表徵來獲得雙關語的另一種解讀），以及語境整合，皆會影響雙關語的即時理解。此外，我們也假設：有些雙關語的多重意義需經透過分解其內部結構而獲得，在理解時會比不涉及結構分解的雙關語需要更多的認知資源。 為了驗證所提出的整合模型，我們依據語意與語境符合性 (meaning-context congruence)，將雙關語分為兩類：Incongruent-Congruent (IC) 與Congruent-Congruent (CC)。IC 雙關語的初始意義一 (Meaning-1) 與當下句子的語境不符，但其另一層意義二 (Meaning-2) 與語境相符；相對地，CC 雙關語的兩個意義皆與語境相符。此外，我們亦根據雙關語兩層意義之間的轉換過程是否涉及重組結構，將雙關語區分為可分解 (decomposable) 與不可分解 (non-decomposable)。又，為進一步探討語境如何影響雙關語意義的獲取，本研究操弄了兩種語境：一種為中性語境、另一種語境則偏向於初始較不預期的意義二 (Meaning-2-biasing context)。我們採用跨模態詞彙判斷實驗 (cross-modal lexical decision)，以聽覺的方式呈現含雙關語的語句，受試者於句末對與雙關語相關的目標詞(視覺呈現)進行詞彙判斷作業。 實驗結果顯示：（1）在偏向意義二的語境中，不同類型的雙關語呈現顯著差異：IC 雙關語的反應時間顯著快於 CC 雙關語，顯示理解者能迅速轉向獲取符合語境的第二重意義，可能因IC雙關語的初始意義一與語境之間不一致、促進了語意轉換。而CC 雙關語由於兩個意義皆可行，會引發理解者於兩種概念框架間持續性動態地轉換，增加處理的負荷。（2）結構可分解性的效應並不顯著，顯示二重語意間是否涉及結構轉換，對理解雙關語意義的影響有限。（3）語境差異呈現顯著效應：無論為 IC 或 CC 雙關語，當偏向意義二的語境較能促進雙關語理解歷程的意義轉換。綜合來看，本研究結果對於雙關語處理過程所涉及的機制提供更細緻的解釋，並凸顯雙關語不同子類型在即時處理中的差異。zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) This thesis investigates the real-time comprehension of humorous homophone puns in Taiwan Mandarin. Grounded in theoretical analysis and psych/neurolinguistic models, the study addresses whether pun processing is modulated by (1) the presence of an incongruity between a pun’s encoded meaning and prior context, (2) the decomposability between the two alternative meanings, and (3) different contextual information. These are underpinned by the issue of diversity in puns, such as variations in context congruity of the dual pun meanings and their internal structures, which have been largely overlooked in previous research, leading to overgeneralizations across various pun types. While different mechanisms have been proposed for the online comprehension of puns, debates remain and could potentially result from such heterogeneity of stimuli. We propose an integrated model synthesizing insights from existing theoretical accounts: Incongruity-Resolution theory (Suls, 1979) and Space-Structuring model (Coulson, 2001; 2015). The proposed model incorporates the mechanisms of incongruity detection (i.e., identifying the mismatch between an initially-accessed pun meaning and the preceding context) and frame-shifting (i.e., reorganization of the conceptual representations to arrive at an alternative interpretation) with contextual integration. Additionally, we hypothesize that puns that require a decomposition of the internal structure to reach the alternative meaning would require more cognitive effort than those that do not. To verify, we categorized puns into two subtypes based on meaning-context congruity: Incongruent-Congruent (IC) and Congruent-Congruent (CC) puns. IC puns involve an incongruity between the initially-accessed Meaning-1 and the context, while the alternative Meaning-2 is contextually congruent. In contrast, CC puns are those in which both meanings are congruent with the context. In addition, we dissociated decomposable puns from non-decomposable ones to probe decomposability. To further examine contextual modulation, we manipulated two context types: neutral vs. context biasing toward Meaning-2 that is less expected initially. A cross-modal lexical decision task was conducted with auditory presentation of pun sentences followed by visual probes. Results revealed (i) a significant effect of pun subtypes under Meaning-2-biasing contexts, with IC puns showing faster reaction times than CC puns. This suggests that comprehenders quickly shifted to the contextually appropriate Meaning-2, facilitated by the initial Meaning-1 incongruity. Contrastively for CC puns, the availability of two alternative meanings triggered a series of dynamic shifts between the two conceptual frames, hence increased cost for meaning reorganization. On the other hand, (ii) no decomposability effect was observed, suggesting little influence of structural differences associated with the alternative pun meanings. In addition, we found (iii) a significant effect of context types, which indicates that a context biasing toward the initially less salient (but contextually appropriate) Meaning-2 facilitated the meaning shift for both IC and CC puns. Altogether, these findings offer a more nuanced understanding of pun comprehension, highlighting differences between pun subtypes in shaping real-time meaning computation.en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents 致謝 i 摘要 ii Abstract iv Table of Contents vi Index of Tables viii Index of Figures ix Chapter 1 Introduction 1 Chapter 2 Literature Review 6 2.1 Linguistic analysis of puns 6 2.1.1 Ambiguity and puns 8 2.2 Puns in Mandarin: properties and classification 9 2.3 The processing of puns 12 2.3.1 Incongruity-Resolution theory 12 2.3.2 Space-Structuring model 15 2.3.3 Relevance-based model 18 2.3.4 Summary of previous accounts 19 Chapter 3 The Current Study 22 3.1 Diversity of puns 24 3.2 Hypothesis: An integrative model of pun comprehension 28 3.3 Research design 31 3.4 Predictions of the hypothesized integrated model 35 3.4.1 The effect of Subtypes of puns 35 3.4.2 The effect of Decomposability 35 3.4.3 The effect of Context types 36 Chapter 4 Norming Studies 37 4.1 Norming study 1 37 4.1.1 Method 37 4.1.1.1 Participants 37 4.1.1.2 Materials 37 4.1.1.3 Procedure 38 4.1.1.4 Data analysis 39 4.1.2 Results 40 4.2 Norming study 2 41 4.2.1 Method 41 4.2.1.1 Participants 41 4.2.1.2 Materials 42 4.2.1.3 Procedure 45 4.2.1.4 Data analysis 45 4.2.2 Results 47 4.2.3 Discussion 48 Chapter 5 Cross-Modal Lexical Decision Experiment 50 5.1 Method 50 5.1.1 Participants 50 5.1.2 Materials 50 5.1.3 Procedure 55 5.1.4 Data analysis 56 5.2 Results 57 5.3 Summary of the CMLD experiment 59 Chapter 6 General Discussion and Conclusion 61 6.1 Subtypes of puns 61 6.2 Decomposability of pun targets 64 6.3 Context effect 66 6.4 Conclusion 67 References 70 Appendix 75 Appendix A. Samples of experimental stimuli 75 Appendix B. Results of log RT 79 Appendix C. Analysis and results of accuracy rates 80zh_TW
dc.format.extent 2630703 bytes-
dc.format.mimetype application/pdf-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0111555001en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 雙關語zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 語言處理zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 框架轉換zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 失諧zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 語境調節zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 結構拆解zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Punen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Language processingen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Frame-shiftingen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Incongruityen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Contextual modulationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Decomposabilityen_US
dc.title (題名) 台灣華語幽默雙關語的即時理解zh_TW
dc.title (題名) The real-time comprehension of humorous puns in Taiwan Mandarinen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen_US
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Aarons, D. (2017). Puns and Tacit Linguistic Knowledge. In S. Attardo (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Language and Humor (pp. 80-94). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315731162. Attardo, S. (1990). The violation of Grice’s Maxims in Jokes. Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society (1990), 355-362. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v16i0.1726. Attardo, S. (1994). Linguistic theories of humor. Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110219029. Attardo, S. (2018). Universals in puns and humorous wordplay. In E. Winter-Froemel & V. Thaler (Eds.), Cultures and Traditions of Wordplay and Wordplay Research (pp. 89-110). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110586374-005. Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01. Bekinschtein, T. A., Davis, M. H., Rodd, J. M., & Owen A. M. (2011). Why Clowns Taste Funny: the Relationship between Humor and semantic Ambiguity. Journal of Neuroscience, 31 (26). https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.5058-10.2011. Brown, C., & Hagoort, P. (1993). The processing nature of the N400: evidence from masked priming. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 5(1), 34–44. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.1993.5.1.34. Caillies, S., & Butcher, K. (2007). Processing of idiomatic expressions: Evidence for a New Hybrid View. Metaphor and Symbol, 22(1), 79–108. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327868ms2201_3. Chan, Y. C., Chou, T. L., Chen, H. C., & Liang, K. C. (2012). Segregating the comprehension and elaboration processing of verbal jokes: an fMRI study. NeuroImage, 61(4), 899–906. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.03.052. Chan, Y. C., Chou, T. L., Chen, H. C., Yeh, Y. C., Lavallee, J. P., Liang, K. C., & Chang, K. E. (2013). Towards a neural circuit model of verbal humor processing: an fMRI study of the neural substrates of incongruity detection and resolution. NeuroImage, 66, 169–176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2012.10.019. Chang, LY., Tseng, CC., Perfetti, C.A. et al. (2022). Development and validation of a Chinese pseudo-character/non-character producing system. Behavior Research 54, 632–648. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01611-8. Coulson, S. (2001). Semantic Leaps: Frame-Shifting and Conceptual Blending in Meaning Construction (pp. 33–70). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511551352.003. Coulson, S., Urbach, T. & Kutas, M. (2006). Looking back: Joke comprehension and the space structuring model. HUMOR, 19(3), 229-250. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMOR.2006.013. Coulson, S. & Severens, E. (2007). Hemispheric asymmetry and pun comprehension: When cowboys have sore calves. Brain and language, 100(2), 172–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2005.08.009. Coulson, S. (2015). 9. Frame-shifting and frame semantics: Joke comprehension on the space structuring model. In G. Brône, K. Feyaerts & T. Veale (Ed.), Cognitive Linguistics and Humor Research (pp. 167-190). De Gruyter Mouton. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110346343-009. Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language, 27(4), 429–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(88)90066-6. Dholkia, A., Meade, G., & Coch, D. (2016). The N400 elicited by homonyms in puns: Two primes are not better than one. Psychophysiology, 53(12), 1799-1810. https://doi.org/10.1111/psyp.12762. Feng, Y. J., Chan, Y. C., & Chen H. C. (2014). Specialization of neural mechanisms underlying the three-stage model in humor processing: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 32, 59-70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2014.08.007. Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1990). Taking on semantic commitments: Processing multiple meanings vs. multiple senses. Journal of Memory and Language, 29(2), 181–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(90)90071-7. Guidi, A. (2012). Are pun mechanisms universal? A comparative analysis across language families. HUMOR, 25(3), 339-366. https://doi.org/10.1515/humor-2012-0017. Hempelmann, C. (2004). Script opposition and logical mechanism in punning. HUMOR, 17(4), 381-392. https://doi.org/10.1515/humr.2004.17.4.381. Hempelmann, C. & Attardo, S. (2011). Resolutions and their incongruities: Further thoughts on logical mechanisms. HUMOR, 24(2), 125-149. https://doi.org/10.1515/HUMR.2011.008. Hino, Y., Lupker, S. J., & Sears, C. R. (1997). The effects of word association and meaning frequency in a cross-modal lexical decision task: Is the priming due to "semantic" activation? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 51(3), 195–211. https://doi.org/10.1037/1196-1961.51.3.195 Jared, D., & Bainbridge, S. (2017). Reading homophone puns: Evidence from eye tracking. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 71(1), 2–13. https://doi.org/10.1037/cep0000109. Koleva, K., Mon-Williams, M., & Klepousniotou, E. (2019). Right hemisphere involvement for pun processing – Effects of idiom decomposition. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 51, 165-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2019.02.002. Ku, L.-C., Feng, Y.-J., Chan, Y.-C., Wu, C.-L., & Chen, H.-C. (2017). A re-visit of three-stage humor processing with readers' surprise, comprehension, and funniness ratings: An ERP study. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 42, 49–62. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneuroling.2016.11.008. Lau, E., Phillips, C. & Poeppel, D. (2008). A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 9, 920–933 https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2532 McHugh, T., & Buchanan, L. (2016). Pun processing from a psycholinguistic perspective: Introducing the model of psycholinguistic hemispheric incongruity Laughter (M.PHIL). Laterality, 21(4–6), 455–483. https://doi.org/10.1080/1357650X.2016.1146292. Nieuwland, M. S., & Van Berkum, J. J. (2006). When peanuts fall in love: N400 evidence for the power of discourse. Journal of cognitive neuroscience, 18(7), 1098–1111. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2006.18.7.1098. Onifer, W., & Swinney, D. A. (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias. Memory & Cognition, 9(3), 225–236. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196957. R Core Team. (2023). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org/. Raskin, V. (1985). Semantic Mechanisms of Humor. Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics Society. https://doi.org/10.3765/bls.v5i0.2164. Schütze, C. T., & Sprouse, J. (2014). Judgment data. In R. J. Podesva & D. Sharma (Eds.), Research Methods in Linguistics (pp. 27–50). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139013734. Shibata, M., Terasawa, Y., & Umeda, S. (2014) Integration of cognitive and affective networks in humor comprehension. Neuropsychologia, 65, 137-145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.10.025. Singmann, H., Bolker, B., Westfall, J., Aust, F., & Ben-Shachar, M. (2024). afex: Analysis of Factorial Experiments. R package version 1.4-1. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=afex. Solska, A. (2012). The Relevance-Based Model of Context in Processing Puns. Research in Language, 10(4), 387-404. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10015-012-0001-0. Sperber, D., & Wilson, D. (1995). Relevance: Communication and cognition (2nd ed.). Blackwell Publishing. Suls, J. M. (1972). A two-stage model for the appreciation of jokes and cartoons. In J. H. Goldstein and P. E. McGhee (Eds.), The psychology of humor: Theoretical perspectives and empirical issues. Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-22105-2. Swinney, D. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 18(6), 645–659. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(79)90355-4. Swinney, D., Parther, P., & Love, T. (2000). The time-course of lexical access and the role of context: Converging evidence from normal and aphasic processing. In Y. Grodzinsky, L. P. Shapiro, & D. Swinney (Eds.), Language and the brain (pp. 273–292). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012304260-6/50016-5. Titone D. (1998). Hemispheric differences in context sensitivity during lexical ambiguity resolution. Brain and language, 65(3), 361–394. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.1998.1998. Titone, D. & Libben, M. (2014). Time-dependent effects of decomposability, familiarity and literal plausibility on idiom priming: A cross-modal priming investigation. The Mental Lexicon, 9(3), 473 – 496. https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.9.3.05tit. Vaid, J., Hull, R., Heredia, R., Gerkens, D., & Martinez, F. (2003). Getting a joke: the time course of meaning activation in verbal humor. Journal of Pragmatics, 35(9), 1431-1449. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-2166(02)00184-4. Yip, M.C.W., Zhai, M. (2018). Processing Homophones Interactively: Evidence from eye-movement data. Scientific Reports, 8, 9812. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-018-27768-5. Zheng, W., & Wang, X. (2022). Contextual support for less salient homophones and pun humor appreciation: Evidence from eye movements in reading Chinese Homophone Puns. Frontiers in psychology, 13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.875479. Zheng, W., & Wang, X. (2023). Frame-shifting instead of incongruity is necessary for pun comprehension: evidence from an ERP study on Chinese homophone puns. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 38(8), 1068-1081. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2023.2192509. Ziv, A. & Francois, L. (1984). Personality and Sense of Humor. Springer. Zwicky, A. & Zwicky, E. D. (1986). Imperfect puns, markedness and phonological similarity. With fronds like these, who needs anemones. Folia Linguistica, 20(3/4), 493-503. 李世之. (1995). 試論漢語中的諧音字 [A Study on xiéyīnzì in the Chinese Language]. 語言教學與研究, 第2期, 頁122-132. 張廷興. (2000). 諧音與民俗 [Xiéyīn and Folklore]. 北京：中央民族大學出版社 黃瓈君. (2005). 民間習俗諧音現象之研究—以漢族婚俗、年俗為主 [A Study on the Phenomenon of xiéyīnzì in Folk Customs: Focusing on Han Chinese Wedding and New Year Traditions]. 國立高雄師範大學國文學系教學碩士論文. 謝韻清. (2014). 網路語言認知影響語言行為及態度之研究 [The Effect of Internet Language Cognition on Verbal Behavior and Attitude]. 中國文化大學華語文教學研究所碩士論文.zh_TW