Anda belum login :: 23 Jul 2025 23:02 WIB
Home
|
Logon
Hidden
»
Administration
»
Collection Detail
Detail
Intensifiers And Hedges In Questionnaire Items, And The Lexical Invisibility Hypothesis
Oleh:
Low, Graham
Jenis:
Article from Journal - ilmiah internasional
Dalam koleksi:
Applied Linguistics (Full Text) vol. 17 no. 1 (Mar. 1996)
,
page 1-37.
Fulltext:
Vol 17, 1, p 1-37.pdf
(1.49MB)
Ketersediaan
Perpustakaan PKBB
Nomor Panggil:
405/APL/17
Non-tandon:
tidak ada
Tandon:
1
Lihat Detail Induk
Isi artikel
The wording of questionnaires has suddenly become a fashionable research topic again, with the claim by Gaskell, Wright, and O'Muircheartaigh (1993) that respondents do not notice-and thus do not respond to-high-degree, or 'extreme', intensifiers in the majority of survey questions. This phenomenon is labelled The Lexical Invisibility Hypothesis. One of the major roles of intensifiers and their 'inverse', attenuating devices, or hedges, is to allow the questionnaire designer to control for social and psychological connotations. If Gaskell et al. are correct, hedges, as backgrounding devices, should be even less visible than intensifiers. The present paper takes the data from a small think-aloud study conducted at the University of York in 1993 and explores how nine randomly selected first-year undergraduates react to six 'extreme' intensifiers (very, extremely, far, full, never, and consistently) and two hedges (seem and tend). The data suggest that (a) think-aloud data can within limits provide valid and linguistically rich evidence of attention to specific words, and (b) there is a need to distinguish between attending to a word and using it to formulate a response. There is evidence that most of the intensifiers are attended to by half or more of the subjects, but the hedges (apart from one example of seem), along with never and consistently, do seem to be more 'invisible'.
Opini Anda
Klik untuk menuliskan opini Anda tentang koleksi ini!
Kembali
Process time: 0 second(s)