Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 24, Issue 6, 1998, Pages 1521-1543

  Spivey, Michael J ^a   Tanenhaus, Michael K ^b  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; EYE MOVEMENT; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS;

ADULT; ATTENTION; EYE MOVEMENTS; HUMANS; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS;

EID: 0032199207     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.24.6.1521     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Altmann, G., Garnham, A., & Dennis, Y. (1992). Avoiding the garden-path: Eye movements in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 685-712.
2. Altmann, G., Garnham, A., & Henstra, J. (1994). Effects of syntax in human sentence parsing: Evidence against a structure-based proposal mechanism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20, 209-216.
3. Altmann, G., & Steedman, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30, 191-238.
4. Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B. (1989). Functionalism and the competition model. In B. MacWhinney & E. Bates (Eds.), The crosslinguistic study of sentence processing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
5. Britt, M. A. (1994). The interaction of referential ambiguity and argument structure in parsing of prepositional phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 251-283.
6. Britt, M. A., Perfetti, C. A., Garrod, S., & Rayner, K. (1992). Parsing and discourse: Context effects and their limits. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 293-314.
7. Burgess, C., & Lund, K. (1994). Multiple constraints in syntactic ambiguity resolution: A connectionist account of psycholinguistic data. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 90-95). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
8. Burgess, C., Tanenhaus, M., & Hoffman, M. (1994). Parafoveal and semantic effects on syntactic ambiguity resolution. Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 96-99). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Carandini, M., & Heeger, D. (1994). Summation and division by neurons in primate visual cortex. Science, 264, 1333-1336.
10. Clifton, C., & Ferreira, F. (1989). Ambiguity in context. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 77-104.
11. Connine, C., Ferreira, F., Jones, C., Clifton, C., & Frazier, L. (1984). Verb frame preferences: Descriptive norms. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 13, 307-319.
12. Crain, S., & Steedman, M. (1985). On not being led up the garden path. In D. Dowty, L. Kartunnen, & H. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
13. Douglas, R., Koch, C., Mahowald, M., Martin, K., & Suarez, H. (1995). Recurrent excitation in neocortical circuits. Science, 269, 981-985.
14. Ferreira, F., & Clifton, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 348-368.
15. Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. (1993). Reading processes during syntactic analysis and reanalysis. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 247-275.
16. Francis, W., & Kučera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
17. Frazier, L. (1987). Theories of syntactic processing. In J. Garfield (Ed.), Modularity in knowledge representation and natural language processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
18. Gibson, E., Schutze, C., & Salomon, A. (1996). The relationship between the frequency and the processing complexity of linguistic structure. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 59-92.
19. Hanna, J., Barker, C., & Tanenhaus, M. (1995). Integrating local and discourse constraints in resolving lexical thematic ambiguities. Poster presented at the Eighth Annual City University of New York Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Tucson, AZ.
20. Hanna, J., Spivey-Knowlton, M., & Tanenhaus, M. (1996). Integrating discourse and lexical frequency information in resolving lexical thematic ambiguities. Proceedings of the 15th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 266-271). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
21. Hanna, J., Tanenhaus, M., & Spivey-Knowlton, M. (1997). Integrating .contextual and sentential constraints in ambiguity resolution. Manuscript in preparation.
22. Juliano, C., & Tanenhaus, M. (1995). A constraint-based lexicalist account of subject/object attachment ambiguities. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23, 459-471.
23. Jurafsky, D. (1996). A probabilistic model of lexical and syntactic access and disambiguation. Cognitive Science, 20, 137-194.
24. Liversedge, S. (1994). Referential context, relative clauses and syntactic parsing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Dundee, Scotland.
25. MacDonald, M. (1994). Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 692-715.
26. MacDonald, M., Pearlmutter, N., & Seidenberg, M. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676-703.
27. Marcus, M., Santorini, B., & Marcinkiewicz, M. (1993). Building a large annotated corpus of English: The Penn Treebank. Computational Linguistics, 19, 313-330.
28. McClelland, J., & Rumelhart, D. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. Psychological Review, 88, 375-407.
29. McClelland, J., St. John, M., & Taraban, R. (1989). Sentence comprehension: A parallel distributed approach. Language & Cognitive Processes, 4, 287-335.
30. McRae, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M., & Tanenhaus, M. (1998). Modeling the effects of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 283-312.
31. Mitchell, D., Corley, M., & Garnham, A. (1992). Effects of context in human sentence parsing: Evidence against a discourse-based proposal mechanism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 69-88.
32. Mitchell, D., Cuetos, F., Corley, M., Brysbaert, M. (1995). Exposurebased models of human parsing: Evidence for the use of coarse-grained (nonlexical) statistical records. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 469-488.
33. Murray, W., & Liversedge, S. (1994). Referential context effects on syntactic processing. In C. Clifton, K. Rayner, & L. Frazier (Eds.), Perspectives in Sentence Processing (pp. 359-388). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Pearlmutter, N., Daugherty, K., MacDonald, M., & Seidenberg, M. (1994). Modeling the use of frequency and contextual biases in sentence processing. In Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 699-704). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
35. Pearlmutter, N., & MacDonald, M. (1995). Probabilistic constraints and working memory capacity in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 521-542.
36. Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
37. Rayner, K., Sereno, S., Morris, R., Schmauder, R., & Clifton, C. (1989). Eye movements and on-line language comprehension processes. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 21-50.
38. Rumelhart, D., & McClelland, J. (1982). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: II. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model. Psychological Review, 89, 60-94.
39. Sedivy, J., & Spivey-Knowlton, M. (1994). The use of structural, lexical, and pragmatic information in parsing attachment ambiguities. In C. Clifton, L. Frazier, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
40. Solomon, R., & Postman, L. (1952). Frequency of usage as a determinant of recognition thresholds for words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 43, 195-201.
41. Spivey-Knowlton, M. (1992). Another context effect in sentence processing: Implications for the principle of referential support. Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 486-491). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
42. Spivey-Knowlton, M. (1994). Quantitative predictions from a constraint-based theory of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Proceedings of the 1993 Connectionist Models Summer School (pp. 130-137). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
43. Spivey-Knowlton, M. (1996). Integration of linguistic and visual information: Human data and model simulations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Rochester.
44. Spivey-Knowlton, M., & Sedivy, J. (1995). Resolving attachment ambiguities with multiple constraints. Cognition, 55, 227-267.
45. Spivey-Knowlton, M., & Tanenhaus, M. (1994). Referential context and syntactic ambiguity resolution. In C. Clifton, K. Rayner & L. Frazier (Eds.), Perspectives in sentence processing (pp. 415-439). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
46. Spivey-Knowlton, M., Trueswell, J., & Tanenhaus, M. (1993). Context effects in syntactic ambiguity resolution: Discourse and semantic influences in parsing reduced relative clauses. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 37, 276-309.
47. Stevenson, S. (1994). A competitive attachment model for resolving syntactic ambiguities in natural language parsing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland College Park.
48. Tabor, W., Juliano, C., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1997). Parsing in a dynamical system: An attractor-based account of the interaction of lexical and structural constraints in sentence processing. Language & Cognitive Processes, 12, 211-271.
49. Tabor, W., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Dynamical models of sentence processing. Manuscript submitted for publication.
50. Tabossi, P., Spivey-Knowlton, M., McRae, K., & Tanenhaus, M. (1994). Semantic effects on syntactic ambiguity resolution: Evidence for a constraint-based resolution process. In C. Umiltá & M. Moscovitch (Eds.), Attention and performance XV. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
51. Tanenhaus, M., Spivey-Knowlton, M., Eberhard, K., & Sedivy, J. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 268, 1632-1634.
52. Tanenhaus, M., Spivey-Knowlton, M., & Hanna, J. (in press). Modeling the effects of discourse and thematic fit in syntactic ambiguity resolution. In M. Crocker, M. Pickering, & C. Clifton (Eds.), Architectures and Mechanisms of Language Acquisition and Processing.
53. Tanenhaus, M., & Trueswell, J. (1995). Sentence comprehension. In J. Miller & P. Eimas (Eds.), Speech language and communication. Volume 11 of the handbook of perception and cognition (pp. 217-262). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
54. Trueswell, J. (1996). The role of lexical frequency in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 566-585.
55. Trueswell, J., Kim, A., Lund, K., Burgess, C. (1995). Thematic fit as discourse instantiation of lexically specific information: A distributed processing model of thematic integration. Poster presented at the 8th annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ.
56. Trueswell, J., & Tanenhaus, M. (1991). Tense, temporal context and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language & Cognitive Processes, 6, 303-338.
57. Trueswell, J., & Tanenhaus, M. (1994). Toward a lexicalist approach to syntactic ambiguity resolution. In C. Clifton, L. Frazier, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
58. Trueswell, J., Tanenhaus, M., & Garnsey, S. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic disambiguation. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285-318.
59. van Berkum, J., Hagoort, P., & Brown, C. (1998). Rapid discourse context effects in sentence processing: ERP evidence. Talk presented at the 11th Annual City University of New York Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Rutgers University, NJ.
60. Vaughan, J. (1983). Control of fixation duration in visual search and memory search: Another look. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 8, 709-723.