A syntactic bias in scope ambiguity resolution in the processing of english-french cardinality interrogatives: Evidence for informational encapsulation

Language Learning

Volumn 55, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 1-36

  Dekydtspotter, Laurent ^a   Outcalt, Samantha D ^b  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 14844318057     PISSN: 00238333     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00288.x     Document Type: Article

References (40)

1. Cohen, J. D., MacWhinney, B., Flatt, M., & Provost, J. (1993). PsyScope: A new graphic interactive environment for designing psychology experiments. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 25(2), 257-271.
2. Crain, S. (2000, October). At the semantics-pragmatics interface in child language. Presentation at Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
3. Crain, S., & Steedman, M. (1985). On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the psychological parser. In D. Dowty, L. Karttunen, & A. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing (pp. 320-358). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
4. Cresti, D. (1995). Extraction and reconstruction. Natural Language Semantics, 3, 79-122.
5. Crocker, M. (1996). Computational psycholinguistics: An interdisciplinary approach to the study of language. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
6. Dekydtspotter L. (2001). The universal parser and interlanguage: Domain-specific mental organization in the comprehension of combien interrogatives in English-French interlanguage. Second Language Research, 17, 91-143.
7. Dekydtspotter, L., Sprouse, R. A., & Swanson, K. A. B. (2001). Reflexes of mental architecture in second-language acquisition: The interpretation of combien extractions in English-French interlanguage. Language Acquisition, 9, 175-227.
8. de Swart, H. (1992). Intervention effects, monotonicity and scope. In C. Barker & D. Dowty (Eds.), Proceedings of the Second Conference on Semantics and Linguistic Theory (pp. 387-406). Columbus: Ohio State University, Department of Linguistics.
9. Diesing, M. (1992). Indefinites. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10. Duffield, N., & Matsuo, A. (2001). A comparative study of ellipsis and anaphora in L2 acquisition. In A. H.-J. Do, L. Domínguez, & A. Johansen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 25th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 238-249). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
11. Fodor, J. (1983). Modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Fodor, J. (1998). Parsing to learn. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27(3), 339-374.
13. Fodor, J. (2000). The mind does not work that way. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Frazier, L. (1979). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
15. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C., Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1988). Parameterizing the language processing system: Left- vs. right-branching within and across languages. In J. Hawkins (Ed.), Explaining linguistic universals (pp. 247-279). Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
17. Frenck-Mestre, C., & Pynte, J. (1997). Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 119-148.
18. Gorrell, P. (1995). Syntax and parsing. New York: Cambridge University Press.
19. Gregg, K. (1996). The logical and developmental problems of second language acquisition. In W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 49-81). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
20. Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 3, pp. 41-58). New York: Academic Press.
21. Groenendijk, J., & Stokhof, M. (1982). Semantic analysis of wh-complements. Linguistics and Philosophy, 5, 175-233.
22. Gualmini, A., Crain, S., & Meroni, L. (2000). Acquisition of disjunction in conditional sentences. In S. C. Howell (Ed.), Proceedings of the 24th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development (pp. 367-378). Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
23. Higginbotham, J. (1993). Interrogatives. In K. Hale & S. J. Keyser (Eds.), The view from Building 20: Essays in linguistics in honor of Sylvain Bromberger (pp. 195-227). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
24. Juffs, A. (1998a). Some effects of first language argument structure and morphosyntax on second language sentence processing. Second Language Research, 14, 406-424.
25. Juffs, A. (1998b). Main verb vs. reduced relative clause ambiguity resolution in second language sentence processing. Language Learning, 48, 107-147.
26. Juffs, A. (2001). Psycholinguistically oriented second language research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 21, 207-220.
27. Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (1995). Parsing effects in second language sentence processing: Subject and object asymmetries in wh-extraction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 17, 483-516.
28. Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (1996). Garden-path sentences and error data in second language processing research. Language Learning, 46, 286-324.
29. Karttunen, L. (1977). Syntax and semantics of questions. Linguistics and Philosophy, 1, 3-44.
30. Magnan, S. (1986). Assessing speaker proficiency in the undergraduate curriculum: Data from French. Foreign Language Annals, 5, 429-438.
31. Obenauer, H.-G. (1984-1985). On the identification of empty categories. Linguistic Review, 4, 153-202.
32. Papadopoulou, D., & Clahsen, H. (2003). Parsing strategies in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A study of relative clause attachment in Greek. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(4), 501-528.
33. Pritchett, B. (1992). Grammatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34. Rullman, H. (1994). Maximality in the semantics of wh-constructions (Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 1994). Dissertation Abstracts International, 56(03), 912A.
35. Schwartz, B. D. (1986). The epistemological status of second language acquisition. Second Language Research, 2, 120-159.
36. Schwartz, B. D. (1987). The modular basis of second language acquisition (Doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1987). Dissertation Abstracts International, 49(02), 246A.
37. Schwartz, B. D. (1999). Let's make up your mind: "Special nativist" perspectives on language, modularity of mind, and nonnative language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 635-655.
38. Villalta, E. (1999). Resolution of scope ambiguity in how many questions. In P. Tamanjani, M. Hirotani, & N. Hall (Eds.), Proceedings of the North East Linguistic Society (Vol. 29, pp. 443-457). Amherst: University of Massachusetts, Graduate Linguistics Student Association.
39. Villalta, E. (2003). The role of context in the resolution of quantifier scope ambiguities. Journal of Semantics, 20, 115-162.
40. White, L., & Juffs, A. (1998). Constraints on wh-movement in two different contexts of non-native acquisition: Competence and processing. In S. Flynn, G. Martohardjono, & W. O'Neill (Eds.), The generative study of second language acquisition (pp. 111-130). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.