"Meaning through syntax" in sentence production and comprehension: Reply to McRae et al. (2005)

Psychological Review

Volumn 112, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 1032-1039

  McKoon, Gail ^a   Ratcliff, Roger ^a  

^a OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Reading; Reduced relative clauses; Sentence comprehension; Verbs

Indexed keywords

EID: 27944442514     PISSN: 0033295X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0033-295X.112.4.1032     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Bolinger, D. L. (1968). Entailment and the meaning of structures. Glossa, 2, 119-127.
2. Croft, W. (1998). Event structure in argument linking. In M. Butts & W. Gueder (Eds.), The projection of arguments (pp. 21-64). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
3. Dowty, D. R. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language, 67, 547-619.
4. Frazier, L. (1978). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
5. Frazier, L. (1995). Constraint satisfaction as a theory of sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 437-468.
6. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C., Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
7. Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178-210.
8. Kintsch, W. (1974). The representation of meaning in memory. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
9. Kintsch, W. (1988). The role of knowledge in discourse comprehension: A construction-integration model. Psychological Review, 95, 163-182.
10. Kintsch, W., & Keenan, J. M. (1973). Reading rate and retention as a function of the number of propositions in the base structure of sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 5, 257-274.
11. Kintsch, W., & van Dijk, T. A. (1978). Toward a model of text comprehension and production. Psychological Review, 85, 363-394.
12. Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1995). Unaccusativity: At the syntax-lexical semantics interface. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Levin, B., & Rappaport Hovav, M. (1996). Lexical semantics and syntactic structure. In S. Lappin (Ed.), The handbook of contemporary semantic theory (pp. 487-507). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
14. MacDonald, M. C. (1994). Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution. Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 157-201.
15. McKoon, G., & Macfarland, T. (2000). Externally and internally caused change of state verbs. Language, 76, 833-858.
16. McKoon, G., & Macfarland, T. (2002). Event templates in the lexical representations of verbs. Cognitive Psychology, 45, 1-44.
17. McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1992). Inference during reading. Psychological Review, 99, 440-466.
18. McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (2003). Meaning through syntax: Language comprehension and the reduced relative clause construction. Psychological Review, 110, 490-525.
19. McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (2005). Interactions of meaning and syntax: Implications for models of sentence comprehension. Manuscript submitted for publication.
20. McRae, K., Hare, M., & Tanenhaus, M. (2005). Meaning through syntax is insufficient to explain comprehension of sentences with reduced relative clauses: Comment on McKoon and Ratcliff (2003). Psychological Review, 31, 1022-1031.
21. Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (1998). Building verb meanings. In M. Butt & W. Geuder (Eds.), The projection of arguments: Lexical and compositional factors (pp. 97-134). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
22. Rappaport Hovav, M., & Levin, B. (2001). An event structure account of English resultatives. Language, 77, 766-797.
23. Rayner, K., Carlson, M., & Frazier, L. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 358-374.
24. Schank, R. C., & Abelson, R. P. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals, and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. Spivey-Knowlton, M., & Tanenhaus, M. (1998). Syntactic ambiguity resolution in discourse: Modeling the effects of referential context and lexical frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 24, 1521-1543.
26. Spivey-Knowlton, M., Trueswell, J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1993). Context effects in syntactic ambiguity resolution: Discourse and semantic influences in parsing reduced relative clauses. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 276-309.
27. Trueswell, J. C. (1996). The role of lexical frequency in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 566-585.
28. Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. M. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285-318.
29. Wechsler, S. (1997). Resultative predicates and control. In Proceedings of the 1997 Texas Linguistics Society Conference (pp. 307-321). Texas Linguistic Forum 38. Austin: University of Texas.
30. Wechsler, S. (2000). An analysis of English resultatives under the event-argument homomorphism model of telicity. In Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Text Structure. Austin: University of Texas.
31. Wechsler, S. (2002, January). Resultatives, telicity, and the scalar structure of adjectives. Paper presented at the 76th Annual Meeting of the Linguistics Society of America, San Francisco.