The Effects of Thematic Fit and Discourse Context on Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution

Journal of Memory and Language

Volumn 44, Issue 2, 2001, Pages 297-324

  Binder, Katherine S ^a   Duffy, Susan A ^b   Rayner, Keith ^b  

^a MOUNT HOLYOKE COLLEGE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Garden path model; Referential context; Syntactic ambiguity; Thematic fit

Indexed keywords

EID: 0035242150     PISSN: 0749596X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1006/jmla.2000.2754     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Altmann G., Steedman M. Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition. 30:1988;191-238.
2. Binder K. S., Morris R. K. Eye movements and lexical ambiguity resolution: Effects of prior encounter and discourse topic. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 21:1995;1186-1196.
3. Binder K. S., Rayner K. Contextual strength does not modulate the subordinate bias effect: Evidence from eye fixations and self-paced reading. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 5:1998;271-276.
4. Boland J. E. The relationship between syntactic and semantic processes in sentence comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes. 12:1997;423-484.
5. Britt M. A., Perfetti C. A., Garrod S., Rayner K. Parsing and discourse: Context effects and their limits. Journal of Memory and Language. 33:1992;293-314.
6. Burgess C., Tanenhaus M. K., Seidenberg M. Context and lexical access: Implications of nonword interference for lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 15:1989;620-632.
7. Clifton C. Evaluating models of human sentence processing. Crocker M., Pickering M., Clifton C. Architectures and mechanisms for language comprehension. 2000;Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
8. Clifton C., Bock J., Rado J. Effects of the focus particle only and intrinsic contrast on comprehension of reduced relative clauses. Kennedy A., Radach R., Heller D., Pynte J. Reading as a perceptual process. 2000;Elsevier, Oxford.
9. Crain, S, Ni, W, Shankweiler, D, Conway, L, &, Braze, D. (1996), Meaning, memory, and modularity. Paper presented at NELS 26 Sentence Processing Workshop, Cambridge, MA.
10. Crain S., Steedman M. J. On not being led up the garden path: The use of context the psychological parser. Dowty D., Karttunen L., Zwicky A. Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives. 1985;Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
11. Daneman M., Carpenter P. A. Individual differences in comprehending and producing words in context. Journal of Memory and Language. 19:1980;450-466.
12. Dopkins S., Morris R. K., Rayner K. Lexical ambiguity and eye fixations in reading: A test of competing models of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language. 31:1992;461-477.
13. Duffy S. A., Morris R. K., Rayner K. Lexical ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of Memory and Language. 27:1988;429-446.
14. Ferreira F., Clifton C. The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language. 25:1986;348-368.
15. Francis W. N., Kuĉera H. Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. 1982;Houghton Mifflin, Boston.
16. Frazier L. On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. 1979;Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington.
17. Frazier L. Sentence processing: A tutorial review. Coltheart M. Attention and performance XII. 1987;Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
18. Frazier L. Against lexical generation of syntax. Marslen-Wilson W. Lexical representation and process. 1989;MIT Press, Cambridge.
19. Frazier L. Constraint satisfaction as a theory of sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 24:1995;437-468.
20. Frazier L, Clifton C. Construal. 1996;MIT Press, Cambridge.
21. Frazier L., Rayner K. Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology. 14:1982;178-210.
22. Gorrell P. Establishing the loci of serial and parallel effects in syntactic processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 18:1989;61-73.
23. MacDonald M. C. Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes. 9:1994;157-201.
24. MacDonald M. C., Just M. A., Carpenter P. A. Working memory constraints on the processing of syntactic ambiguity. Cognitive Psychology. 24:1992;56-98.
25. MacDonald M. C., Pearlmutter N. J., Seidenberg M. S. The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review. 101:1994;676-703.
26. McRae K., Spivey-Knowlton M. J., Tanenhaus M. K. Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language. 38:1998;283-312.
27. Morrison R. E. Manipulations of stimulus onset delay in reading: Evidence for parallel programming of saccades. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance. 10:1984;667-682.
28. Ni W., Crain S. How to resolve structural ambiguities. Proceedings of the 20th annual meeting of the North Eastern Linguistic Society. 1990.
29. Nicol J. L., Pickering M. J. Processing of syntactically ambiguous sentences: Evidence from semantic priming. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research. 22:1993;207-237.
30. Onifer W., Swinney D. A. Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency, meaning, and contextual bias. Memory & Cognition. 9:1981;225-236.
31. Paterson K. B., Liversedge S. P., Underwood G. Quantificational constraints on parsing "short" relative clause sentences. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 52A:1999;717-738.
32. Pearlmutter, N. J, &, MacDonald, M. C. (1992), Garden-paths in simple sentences. Paper presented at the 5th Annual CUNY Conference on Human SentenceProcessing, New York, NY.
33. Pearlmutter N. J., MacDonald M. C. Individual differences and probabilistic constraints in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language. 34:1995;521-542.
34. Rayner K. Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin. 124:1998;372-422.
35. Rayner K., Carlson M., Frazier L. The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 22:1983;358-374.
36. Rayner K., Garrod S., Perfetti C. A. Discourse influences during parsing are delayed. Cognition. 45:1992;109-139.
37. Rayner K., Duffy S. A. Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition. 14:1986;191-201.
38. Rayner K., Frazier L. Selection mechanisms in reading lexically ambiguous words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 15:1989;779-790.
39. Rayner K., Morris R. K. Comprehension processes in reading ambiguous sentences: Reflections from eye movements. Simpson G. Understanding word and sentence. 1991;173-198 North-Holland, Amsterdam.
40. Rayner K., Pacht J. M., Duffy S. A. Effects of prior encounter and discourse bias on the processing of lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye fixations. Journal of Memory and Language. 33:1994;527-544.
41. Rayner K., Pollatsek A. The psychology of reading. 1989;Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs.
42. Sedivy J., Spivey-Knowlton M. The use of structural, lexical, and pragmatic information in parsing attachment ambiguities. Clifton C., Frazier L., Rayner K. Perspectives on sentence processing. 1994;Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
43. Seidenberg M. S., Tanenhaus M. K., Leiman J. M., Bienkowski M. Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge based processing. Cognitive Psychology. 14:1982;489-537.
44. Sereno S. C. The resolution of lexical ambiguity: Evidence from an eye movement paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 21:1995;582-595.
45. Sereno S. C., Pacht J. M., Rayner K. The effect of meaning frequency on processing lexically ambiguous words: Evidence from eye fixations. Psychological Science. 3:1992;296-300.
46. Spivey M. J., Tanenhaus M. K. Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 24:1998;1521-1543.
47. Spivey-Knowlton M. J., Trueswell J. C., Tanenhaus M. K. Context and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Canadian Journal of Psychology. 47:1993;276-309.
48. Swinney D. A. Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior. 18:1979;645-659.
49. 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;Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
50. Tanenhaus M. K., Spivey-Knowlton M. J., Hanna J. E. Modeling thematic and discourse context effects with a multiple constraints approach: Implications for the architecture of the language comprehension system. Crocker M., Pickering M., Clifton C. Architectures and mechanisms of language acquisition and processing. 2000;90-118 Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge.
51. Tanenhaus M. K., Leiman J. M., 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.
52. Traxler M. J., Pickering M. J., Clifton C. Adjunct attachment is not a form of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language. 39:1998;558-592.
53. Trueswell J. C. The role of lexical frequency in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory & Language. 35:1996;566-585.
54. Trueswell J. C., Tanenhaus M. K. Tense, temporal context and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes. 6:1991;303-338.
55. Trueswell J. C., Tanenhaus M. K. Toward a lexicalist framework of constraint-based syntactic ambiguity resolution. Clifton C., Frazier L., Rayner K. Perspectives on sentence processing. 1994;155-179 Erlbaum, Hillsdale.
56. 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.
57. Trueswell J. C., Tanenhaus M. K., Kello C. Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition. 9:1993;528-553.