Information provided by the linguistic context has been shown to have a strong facilitatory effect on the activation and processing of upcoming words. The studies described in this paper aim to model the relation between context and target words using a distributional semantic model. We report three modelling studies in which we show that this model can successfully capture context effects in human-generated data (reading times and association scores).

We conducted two experiments to investigate what triggers sarcasm between close friends and whether the factors prompting sarcastic comments in production are also shared with an external observer. In Experiment 1, participants freely reacted to different types of situations in written form and rated their perception of the given contexts, the level of sarcasm of their responses, and the intentions behind their responses. Results showed that the intentions to say clever things or to mock the addressee in a hilarious or friendly manner triggered a higher number of sarcastic answers. In contrast, the intentions to be direct or to be nice to the addressee triggered less sarcastic answers. In Experiment 2, a new group of participants rated the responses collected in Experiment 1 on the same dimensions. Overall, we observed similar patterns in both experiments. However, the intentions to criticize the addressee softly and to say clever things were stronger predictors of sarcasm for the observers than for the producer of the statement.

Language is multimodal: non-linguistic cues, such as prosody, gestures and mouth movements, are always present in face-to-face communication and interact to support processing. In this paper, we ask whether and how multimodal cues affect L2 processing by recording EEG for highly proficient bilinguals when watching naturalistic materials. For each word, we quantified surprisal and the informativeness of prosody, gestures, and mouth movements. We found that each cue modulates the N400: prosodic accentuation, meaningful gestures, and informative mouth movements all reduce N400. Further, effects of meaningful gestures but not mouth informativeness are enhanced by prosodic accentuation, whereas effects of mouth are enhanced by meaningful gestures but reduced by beat gestures. Compared with L1, L2 participants benefit less from cues and their interactions, except for meaningful gestures and mouth movements. Thus, in real-world language comprehension, L2 comprehenders use multimodal cues just as L1 speakers albeit to a lesser extent.