Logical-inferential relations in the use of connectives porque and já que: a comparative study between Elementary and Undergraduate Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5007/2175-8026.2019v72n3p123Abstract
This paper presents a comparative study between Elementary School and Undergraduate Education investigating the use of connectives já que and porque in sentences with inferential causal relations established through inductive and deductive logical reasoning. As the acquisition of some connectives is related to schooling and consequent exposure to the written modality, this work can contribute to raising questions about the relationship between the acquisition of this modality and its influence on the way we interpret logical-inferential relations. In this paper, we present a forced-choice judgment test in which participants should choose between the connectives já que and porque when they are exposed to sentences with direct and indirect causal relationships. Our hypothesis was that, in indirect cause relationships, individuals with more experience in reading would choose já que, but individuals with little experience should choose mainly porque in both cases.
References
CAIN, Kate;NASH, Hannah. M. The influence of connectives on young readers' processing and comprehension of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, v. 103, n. 2, p. 429-241, 2011.
CANESTRELLI, Anneloes. R.;MAK, Willem. M. & Sanders, Ted. J. M. Causal connectives in discourse processing: How differences in subjectivity are reflected in eye movements, Language and Cognitive Processes, v. 28, n. 9, p. 1394-1413, 2013.
DE CASTILHO, Ataliba. Nova Gramática do Português Brasileiro. 1ed. São Paulo: Contexto, 2010.
CHOMSKY, Noam. Language and problems of knowledge: The Managua Lectures,Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1988.
COLAÇO, Madalena; MATOS, Gabriela. A natureza paratática das causais explicativas em português. Revista da Associação Portuguesa de Linguística, n. 1, p. 233-259, 2016.
CUNHA, Celso; CINTRA, Lindley. Nova Gramática do Português Contemporâneo. 3ed., Rio de Janeiro: Nova Fronteira, 2005.
FITCH, Tecumseh. Three Meanings of “Recursion”: Key Distinctions for Biolinguistics. In:LARSON,Richard; DÉPREZ, Viviane; YAMAKIDO, Hiroko.The Evolution of Human Language, New York: Cambridge University Press,2010, p. 73-90
GRICE, Hebert Paul. Logic and conversation. In: COLE,Peter; MORGAN, Jerry L.,Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts.New York: Academic Press, 1975, p. 41–58.
HAUSER, Marc; CHOMSKY, Noam; FITCH, Tecumseh. The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It, and How Did It Evolve?,Science,v. 298, n. 5598, p. 1569-1579, 2002.
HONDA, Maya.; O'NEIL, Wayne. On Thinking Linguistically, Revista Linguística, v. 13, n. 1, p. 52-65, 2017.
HONDA, Maya.; O'NEIL, Wayne. Triggering Science-Forming Capacity through Linguistic Inquiry. In: HALE, Kenneth; KEYSER, Samuel Jay. The View from Building 20: essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger, p.229-256, 1993.
LEVINSON, Stephen C. Pragmática. 1ed., São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2007.
MAIA, Marcus A. Computação Estrutural e de Conjunto na Leitura de Períodos: Um Estudo de Rastreamento Ocular. In: MAIA, Marcus. Psicolinguística e educação. São Paulo: Mercado de Letras, 2018, p. 103-132.
MATOS, Gabriela; RAPOSO, Eduardo. Estruturas de coordenação. In:MATHEUS, Maria Helena Mira et al.Gramática da língua portuguesa. 5ed., Lisboa Caminho, 2003, p. 551-592.
MILLIS, Keith K.; JUST, Marcel. The Influence of Connectives on Sentence Comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, p. 128–147, 1994.
MOURÃO, Eliane. O emprego de vírgula em construções causais e explicativas do português. Caligrama, v.19, n.2, p. 61-82, 2014.
PIRES DE OLIVEIRA, R; BASSO, R. Arquitetura da conversação: Teoria das Implicaturas. 1ed. São Paulo: Parabola, 2014.
ROEPER, Tom. The Acquisition of Recursion: How Formalism Articulates the Child’s Path. Biolinguistics. v. 5, n. 1-2, p. 57-86, 2011.
SANDERS, Ted. Coherence, causality and cognitive complexity in discourse. In: Proceedings/Actes SEM-05, First International Symposium on the exploration and modelling of meaning. Toulouse: University of Toulouse-le-Mirail, 2005. p. 105-114.
SPERBER, Dan.; WILSON, Deirdre. Précis of Relevance: Communication and Cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, v. 10, n. 4, p. 697-710, 1987.https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00055345.
_____. Relevance Theory. In: HORN, Laurence R.; WARD, Gregory L. The handbook of pragmatics. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004.
TRAXLER, Matthew. J., BYBEE, Michael. D.; PICKERING, Martin. J. Influence of connectives on language comprehension: Eye tracking evidence for incremental interpretation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology v. 50, n. 3, p. 481-497, 1997.http://doi.org/10.1080/027249897391982
VERHAGEN, Arie. Constructions of Intersubjectivity: Discourse, Syntax, and Cognition. Nova Iorque: Oxford University Press, 2005.
ZUFFEREY, Sandrine. “Car, parce que, puisque” revisited: Three empirical studies on French causal connectives. Journal of Pragmatics, v. 44, n. 2, p. 138-153, 2012.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.018
