Cover not available

Article published In: Language and Dialogue
Vol. 4:2 (2014) ► pp.284–298

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

“Maybe, but probably not”

Negotiating likelihood and perspective

 | California State University, Long Beach, USA
Published online: 15 September 2014
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/ld.4.2.06smi
The goal of our paper is to explore one of the functions of everyday expressions of likelihood; more specifically, to propose that they play an important role in negotiating not only likelihood but also perspective. We will examine examples of such expressions in the context of conversational interactions, identifying the roles of such expressions along with partner responses to them. Our analyses will be integrated with previous models from laboratory research on the production and comprehension of expressions of quantity and frequency (e.g., Moxey and Sanford 2000). Findings will also be interpreted in the context of ongoing discussions on the nature and role of perspective-taking (e.g., Duran, Dale, and Kreuz 2011).
References (18)
Arnold, Jennifer E., and Michael K. Tannenhaus, 2011. “Disfluency Effects in Comprehension: How New Information Becomes Accessible.” In The Processing and Acquisition of Reference, ed. by Edward Gibson, and Neal J. Pearlmutter, 197–218. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Clark, Herbert H., and Jean E. Foxtree. 2002. “Using ‘Uh’ and ‘Um’ in Spontaneous Speaking.” Cognition 841: 73–111. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Duran, Nicholas D., Rick Dale, and Roger J. Kreuz. 2011. “Listeners Invest in an Assumed Other’s Perspective Despite Cognitive Cost.” Cognition 1211: 22–40. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Horton, William S., and Boaz Keysar. 1996. “When Do Speakers Take Into Account Common Ground?” Cognition 591: 91–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Juanchich, Maire, Miroslav Sirota, and Christina Lea Butler. 2012. “The Perceived Functions of Linguistic Risk Quantifiers and Their Effect on Risk, Negativity Perception and Decision Making.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1181: 72–81. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Juanchich, Marie, Karl Halvor Teigen, and Gaelle Villejoubert. 2010. “Is Guilt ‘Likely’ or ‘Not Certain’?: Contrast with Previous Probabilities Determines Choice of Verbal Terms.” Acta Psychologica 1351: 267–277. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jucker, Andreas H., Sara W. Smith, and Tanja Luedge. 2003. “Interactive Aspects of Vagueness in Conversation.” Journal of Pragmatics 351: 1737–1769. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moxey, Linda M., and Anthony J. Sanford. 1987. “Quantifiers and Focus.” Journal of Semantics 51: 189–206. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. “Communicating Quantities: A Review of Psycholinguistic Evidence of How Expressions Determine Perspectives.” Applied Cognitive Psychology 14 (3): 237–255. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moxey, Linda M. 2006. “Effects of What is Expected on the Focussing Properties of Quantifiers: A Test of the Presupposition-Denial Account.” Journal of Memory and Language 551: 422–439. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pickering, Martin J., Janet F. McLean, and Chiara Gambi. 2012. “Do Addressees Adopt the Perspective of the Speaker?” Acta Psychologica. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Piercey, M. David. 2009. “Motivated Reasoning and Verbal vs. Numerical Probability Assessment: Evidence from an Accounting Context.” Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1081: 330–341. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J., Eugene J. Dawydiak, and Linda M. Moxey. 2007. “A Unified Account of Quantifier Perspective Effects in Discourse.” Discourse Processes 44 (1): 1–32. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sanford, Anthony J., and Linda M. Moxey. 2011. “Complement Focus and Reference Phenomena.” In The Processing and Acquisition of Reference, ed. by Edward Gibson, and Neal J. Pearlmutter, 381–402. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Sher, Shlomi, and Craig R.M. McKenzie. 2006. “Information Leakage from Logically Equivalent Frames.” Cognition 1011: 467–494. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Teigen, Karl Halvor, and Wibecke Brun. 1995. “Yes, but it is Uncertain: Direction and Communicative Intention of Verbal Probabilistic Terms.” Acta Psychologica 881: 233–258. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wallsten, Thomas S., David V. Budescu, Amnon Rapoport, Rami Zwick, and Barbara Forsyth. 1986. “Measuring the Vague Meanings of Probability Terms.” Journal of Experimental Psychology 115(4): 348–365. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zwarts, Frans. 1994. “Polarity Items.” In The Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, ed. by Ron E. Asher, and J.M.Y. Simpson. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Teigen, Karl Halvor, Marie Juanchich & Erik Løhre
2023. Combining verbal forecasts: The role of directionality and the reinforcement effect. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 36:2 DOI logo
Juanchich, Marie, Theodore G. Shepherd & Miroslav Sirota
2020. Negations in uncertainty lexicon affect attention, decision-making and trust. Climatic Change 162:3 ► pp. 1677 ff. DOI logo
Collins, Robert N. & David R. Mandel
2019. Cultivating credibility with probability words and numbers. Judgment and Decision Making 14:6 ► pp. 683 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 25 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue