Lexical Constraints and Prepositional Phrase Attachment

Journal of Memory and Language

Volumn 39, Issue 4, 1998, Pages 684-719

  Boland, Julie E ^a   Boehm Jernigan, Heather ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0000773846     PISSN: 0749596X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jmla.1998.2591     Document Type: Article

References (70)

1. Altmann G. T. M., Steedman M. Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition. 30:1988;191-238.
2. Boland J. E. Resolving syntactic category ambiguities in discourse context. Journal of Memory and Language. 36:1997a;588-615.
3. Boland J. E. The relationship between syntactic and semantic processes in sentence comprehension. Language & Cognitive Processes. 12:1997b;423-484.
4. Boland J. E., Cutler A. Interaction with autonomy: Multiple Output models and the inadequacy of the Great Divide. Cognition. 56:1996;309-320.
5. Boland J. E., Tanenhaus M. K., Garnsey S. M. Evidence for the immediate use of verb control information in sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language. 29:1990;413-432.
6. Boland J. E., Tanenhaus M. K., Garnsey S. M., Carlson G. N. Verb argument structure in parsing and interpretation: Evidence from wh-questions. Journal of Memory & Language. 34:1995;774-806.
7. Britt M. A. The interaction of referential ambiguity and argument structure in the parsing of prepositional phrases. Journal of Memory & Language. 33:1994;251-283.
8. Clifton C. Jr., De Vincenzi M. Comprehending sentences with empty elements. Comprehension processes in reading. 1990;Erlbaum, Hillsdale. p. 265-283.
9. Clifton C. Jr., Frazier L. Comprehending sentences with long-distance dependencies. Carlson G., Tanenhaus M. Linguistic structures in language processing. 1989;1-69 Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.
10. Clifton C. Jr., Speer S., Abney S. P. Parsing arguments: Phrase structure and argument structure as determinants of initial parsing decisions. Journal of Memory and Language. 30:1991;251-271.
11. Crain S., Fodor J. D. How can grammars help parsers? Dowty D. R., Kartunnen L., Zwicky A. M. Natural language processing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives. 1985;94-128 Cambridge Univ. Press, New York.
12. Dowty D. On the semantic content of the notion thematic role. Chierchia G., Partee B. H., Turner R. Properties, types, and meaning II. 1989;69-129 Kluwer, Dordrecht.
13. Ferreira F., Henderson J. M. Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movements and word-by-word reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition. 16:1990;555-568.
14. Ford M. A method for obtaining measures of local parsing complexity throughout the sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 22:1983;203-218.
15. Frazier, L. 1978, On comprehending sentences: syntactic parsing strategies.
16. Frazier L. Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory. 5:1987;519-559.
17. Frazier L. Against lexical generation of syntax. Marslen-Wilson W. D. Lexical Representation and Process. 1989;505-528 MIT Press, Cambridge.
18. Frazier L., Clifton C. Jr. Construal. 1996;MIT Press, Cambridge.
19. Frazier L., Clifton C. Jr. Successive cyclicity in the grammar and the parser. Language and Cognitive Processes. 4:1989;93-126.
20. Garnsey S. M., Pearlmutter N. J., Myers E. The relative contributions of structural biases and plausibility to sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language. 37:1997;58-93.
21. Garnsey S. M., Tanenhaus M. K., Chapman R. M. Evoked potentials and the study of sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 18:1989;51-60.
22. Gawron J. M. Situations and Prepositions. Linguistics and Philosophy. 9:1986;327-382.
23. Gazdar G., Klein E., Pullum G., Sag I. Generalized phrase structure grammar. 1985;Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge.
24. Gibson, E. A. F. 1991, A computational theory of human linguistic processing: Memory limitations and processing breakdown.
25. Gorrell P. Establishing the loci of serial and parallel effects in syntactic processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 18:1989;61-74.
26. Hickock G. Parallel parsing: Evidence from reactivation in garden path sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 22:1993;239-250.
27. Holmes V. M., O'Regan J. K. Eye fixation patterns during the reading of relative clause sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 20:1981;417-430.
28. Huynh H., Feldt L. S. Estimation of the box correction for degrees of freedom from sample data in randomized block and split-plot designs. Journal of Educational Statistics. 1:1976;69-82.
29. Jennings F., Randall B., Tyler L. K. Graded effects of verb subcategory preferences on parsing: Support for constraint-satisfaction models. Language and Cognitive Processes. 12:1997;485-504.
30. Johnson N. F., Pugh K. R. A cohort model of visual word recognition. Cognitive Psychology. 26:1994;240-346.
31. Jusczyk P. W., Luce P. A., Charles-Luce J. Infants' sensitivity to phonotactic patterns in the native language. Journal of Memory and Language. 33:1994;630-645.
32. Just M. A., Carpenter P. A., Woolley J. Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 111:1982;228-238.
33. Kaplan R. M., Bresnan J. Lexical-functional grammar: A formal system for grammatical representation. Bresnan J. The mental representation of grammatical relations. 1982;173-279 MIT Press, Cambridge.
34. King J. W., Kutas M. Who did what and when? Using word- and clause-level ERPs to monitor working memory usage in reading. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 7:1995;376-395.
35. Kluender R., Kutas M. Subjacency as a processing phenomenon. Language and Cognitive Processes. 8:1993a;573-633.
36. Kluender R., Kutas M. Bridging the gap: Evidence from ERPs on the processing of unbounded dependencies. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 5:1993b;196-214.
37. Konieczny L., Hemforth B., Scheepers C., Strube G. The role of lexical heads in parsing: Evidence from German. Language and Cognitive Processes. 12:1997;307-348.
38. Kutas M., Hillyard S. A. Reading senseless sentences: Brain potentials reflect semantic incongruity. Science. 207:1980;203-205.
39. Luce P. A., Pisoni D. B., Goldinger S. D. Similarity neighborhoods of spoken words. Altmann G. T. M. Cognitive models of speech processing. 1990;122-147 MIT Press, Cambridge.
40. MacDonald M. C. The interaction of lexical and syntactic ambiguity. Journal of Memory & Language. 32:1993;692-715.
41. MacDonald M. C. Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes. 9:1994;157-201.
42. MacDonald M. C. Lexical representations and sentence processing. Language & Cognitive Processes. 12:1997;121-136.
43. MacDonald M. C., Pearlmutter N. J., Seidenberg M. S. The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review. 101:1994;676-703.
44. McRae K., Ferretti T. R., Amyote L. Thematic roles as verb-specific concepts. Language and Cognitive Processes. 12:1997;137-176.
45. McRae K., Spivey-Knowlton M. J., Tanenhaus M. K. Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence completion. Journal of Memory & Language. 38:1998;283-312.
46. Mauner G., Tanenhaus M. K., Carlson G. N. Implicit arguments in sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language. 34:1995;357-382.
47. McQueen J. M., Norris D. G., Cutler A. Competition in spoken word recognition: Spotting words in other words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 20:1994;621-638.
48. Mitchell D. C., Cuetos F., Corley M. M. B., Brysbaert M. Exposure-based models of human parsing: Evidence for the use of coarse-grained (nonlexical) statistical records. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 24:1995;469-488.
49. Morton J. Word recognition. Morton J., Marshall J. D. Psycholinguistics 2: Structures and processes. 1979;107-156 Paul Elek, London.
50. Pollard C., Sag I. A. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. 1994;Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago.
51. Pollard C., Sag I. A. Information-based syntax and semantics, Volume 1: Fundamentals. 1987.
52. Pritchett B. Head position and parsing ambiguity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 20:1991;251-270.
53. Rayner K., Carlson M., Frazier L. The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically ambiguous sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 22:1983;358-374.
54. Saffron J. R., Newport E. L., Aslin R. N. Word Segmentation: The role of distributional cues. Journal of Memory and Language. 35:1996;606-621.
55. Schutze C. T. PP attachment and argumenthood. Schutze C. T., Ganger J. B., Broihier K. Papers on language processing and acquisition. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics. 1995;95-151.
56. Schutze C. T., Gibson E. The role of argument preference in English PP attachment. 1996.
57. Sedivy J., Spivey-Knowlton M. The use of structural, lexical, and pragmatic information in parsing attachment ambiguities. Clifton C. Jr., Frazier L., Rayner K. Perspectives on sentence processing. 1994;389-413 Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
58. Speer, S. R. Clifton, C. Jr. Plausibility and argument structure in sentence comprehension, Memory & Cognition.
59. Spivey-Knowlton M., Sedivy J. Resolving attachment ambiguities with multiple constraints. Cognition. 55:1995;227-267.
60. Spivey, M. Tanenhaus, M. Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition.
61. Stowe L. A. Parsing WH-constructions: Evidence for on-line gap location. Language and Cognitive Processes. 1:1986;227-245.
62. Swinney D. A. Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 18:1979;645-659.
63. Tabossi P., Spivey-Knowlton M. J., McRae K., Tanenhaus M. K. Semantic effects on syntactic ambiguity resolution: Evidence for a constraint-based resolution process. Umilta C., Moscovitch M. Attention and Performance XV. 1994;589-615 Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
64. Tanenhaus M. K., Leiman J., Seidenberg M. S. Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic contexts. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 18:1979;427-440.
65. Taraban R., McClelland J. L. Constituent attachment and thematic role assignment in sentence processing: Influences of content-based expectations. Journal of Memory and Language. 27:1988;597-632.
66. Trueswell J. C., Tanenhaus M. K., Garnsey S. M. Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language. 33:1994;285-318.
67. Tyler L. K. The role of lexical representations in language comprehension. Marslen-Wilson M. W. Lexical representation and process. 1989;439-462 MIT Press, Cambridge.
68. Vroomen J., de Gelder B. Metrical segmentation and lexical inhibition in spoken word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 21:1995;98-108.
69. Wanner E., Maratsos M. An ATN approach to comprehension. Halle M., Bresnan J., Miller G. A. Linguistic theory and psychological reality. 1978;119-162 MIT Press, Cambridge.
70. Wechsler S. The semantic basis of argument structure. 1995;CSLI Publications, Stanford.