On truth and polarity in negation processing: language-specific effects in non-linguistic contexts

Abstract

IntroductionThis study examines how negation is processed in a nonverbal context (e.g., when assessing ▲ ≠ ▲) by speakers of a truth-based system like Mandarin and a polarity-based system like English. In a truth-based system, negation may take longer to process because it is typically attached to the negation as a whole (it is not true that triangle does not equal triangle), whereas in polarity-based systems, negation is processed relatively faster because it is attached to just the equation symbol (triangle does not equal triangle), which is processed relatively faster. Our hypothesis was that negation processing routines previously observed for verbal contexts, namely that speakers of Mandarin get slowed down more when processing negative stimuli than positive stimuli compared to speakers of English, also extend to contexts when language use is not obligatory.MethodsTo test this, we asked participants to agree/disagree with equations comprising simple shapes and positive ‘=’ or negative ‘≠’ equation symbols. English speakers showed a response-time advantage over Mandarin speakers in negation conditions. In a separate experiment, we also tested the contribution of equation symbols ‘≠’/‘=’ to the cognitive demands by asking participants to judge shape sameness in symbol-free trials, such as ▲ ■. This comparison allowed us to test whether crosslinguistic differences arise not because of shape congruence judgement but arguably due to negation attachment.Results and discussionThe effect of the ‘≠’ symbol on shape congruence was language-specific, speeding up English speakers but slowing down Mandarin speakers when the two shapes differed. These findings suggest language-specific processing of negation in negative equations, interpreted as novel support for linguistic relativity.

Mental simulation of the factual and the illusory in negation processing: evidence from anticipatory eye movements on a blank screen

“…The one-step or two-step debate is additionally complexified by factors that are known to cause processing differences, such as language-specific structural cues in negation 15 – 18 . One such linguistic cue is negative concord 6 , 19 – 21 a type of negation that languages like English and Croatian tolerate differently.…”