Syntactic prediction in language comprehension: Evidence from either..or

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning Memory and Cognition

Volumn 32, Issue 2, 2006, Pages 425-436

  Staub, Adrian ^a   Clifton Jr , Charles ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

Author keywords

Coordination; Eye movements in reading; Language comprehension; Syntactic parsing; Top down processing

Indexed keywords

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; COMPREHENSION; EYE MOVEMENT; HUMAN; PHONETICS; PHYSIOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; COMPREHENSION; EYE MOVEMENTS; HUMANS; PHONETICS; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REACTION TIME; READING; SEMANTICS; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 33645746293     PISSN: 02787393     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/0278-7393.32.2.425     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Abney, S. (1989). A computational model of human parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 129-144.
2. Altmann, G. T. M., Garnham, A., & Dennis, Y. (1992). Avoiding the garden path: Eye movements in context. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 685-712.
3. Altmann, G. T. M., & Kamide, Y. (1999). Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition, 73, 247-264.
4. Altmann, G. T. M., van Nice, K. Y., Garnham, A., & Henstra, J.-A. (1998). Late closure in context. Journal of Memory and language, 38, 459-484.
5. Bader, M., & Lasser, I. (1994). German verb-final clauses and sentence processing: Evidence for immediate attachment. In C. Clifton, L. Frazier, & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (pp. 225-242). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. Bevor, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In J. R. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the development of language (pp. 279-352). New York: Wiley.
7. Boland, J. E. (2004). Linking eye movements to sentence comprehension in reading and listening. In M. Carreiras & C. Clifton Jr. (Eds.), The on-line study of sentence comprehension: Eyetracking, ERPs, and beyond. New York: Psychology Press.
8. Boland, J. E., & Blodgett, A. (2001). Understanding the constraints on syntactic generation: Lexical bias and discourse congruency effects on eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 391-411.
9. Chen, E., Gibson, E., & Wolf, F. (2005). Online syntactic storage costs in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and language, 52, 144-169.
10. Clifton, C., Jr., Frazier, L., & Connine, C. (1984). Lexical expectations in sentence comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 23, 696-708.
11. Crocker, M. W. (1994). On the nature of the principle-based sentence processor. In C. Clifton, Jr., L. Frazier. & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives on sentence processing (pp. 245-266). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Crocker, M. W. (1996). Computational psycholinguistics: An interdisciplinary approach to the study of language. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer.
13. Elman, J. (1990). Finding structure in time. Cognitive Science, 14, 179-211.
14. Engelhardt, P. E., Bailey, K. G. D., & Ferreira, F. (2004). Coordination ambiguities in the visual world paradigm. Paper presented at the 45th Annual Psychonomic Society meeting, Minneapolis, MN.
15. Frazier, L. (1978). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, Stores.
16. Frazier, L. (1987a). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII (559-586). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
17. Frazier, L. (1987b). Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5, 519-560.
18. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C., Jr. (2000). On bound variable interpretations: The LF-only hypothesis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 29, 125-140.
19. Frazier, L., & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition, 6, 291-326.
20. Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14, 178-210.
21. Frisson, S., Rayner, K. & Pickering, M. J. (2005). Effects of contextual predictability and transitional probability on eye movements during reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 862-877.
22. Garnsey, S. M., Perlmutter, N. J. Myers, E., & Lotocky, M. A. (1997). The contributions of verb bias and plausibility to the comprehension of temporarily ambiguous sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 37, 58-93.
23. Garrod, S., & Terras, M. (2000). The contribution of lexical and situational knowledge to resolving discourse roles: Bonding and resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 42, 526-544.
24. Gibson, E. (1998). Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1-76.
25. Hale, J. (2003). The information conveyed by words in sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 101-123.
26. Hoeks, J. C. J., Vonk, W., & Schriefers, H. (2002). Processing coordinated structures in context: The effect of topic-structure on ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 46, 99-119.
27. Jackendoff, R. (1977). X'-syntax: A study of phrase structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
28. Johannessen, J. B. (1998). Coordination. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
29. Jurafsky, D. (1996). A probabilistic model of lexical and syntactic access and disambiguation. Cognitive Science, 20, 137-194.
30. Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological Review, 87, 329-354.
31. Kamide, Y., Altmann, G. T. M., & Haywood, S. L. (2003). The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements. Journal, of Memory and Language, 49, 133-156.
32. Kamide, Y., & Mitchell, D. C. (1999). Incremental pre-head attachment in Japanese parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 631-663.
33. Kim, Y. (1999). The effects of case marking information on Korean sentence processing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 14, 687-714.
34. Kimball, J. (1973). Seven principles of surface structure parsing in natural language. Cognition, 2, 15-47.
35. Kimball, J. (1975). Predictive analysis and over-the-top parsing. In J. Kimball (Ed.), Syntax and semantics (Vol. 4, pp. 155-179). New York: Academic Press.
36. Konieczny, L., Hemforth, B., Scheepers, C., & Strube, G. (1997). The role of lexical heads in parsing: Evidence from German. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 307-348.
37. Larson, R. (1985). On the syntax of disjunction scope. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 3, 217-264.
38. MacDonald, M. C., Perlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676-703.
39. McDonald, S. A., & Shillcock, R. C. (2003). Eye movements reveal the on-line computation of lexical probabilities during reading. Psychological Science, 14, 648-652.
40. McRae, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 283-312.
41. Miyamoto, E. T. (2002). Case markers as clause boundary inducers in Japanese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31, 307-347.
42. Munn, A. (1993). Topics in the syntax and semantics of coordinate structures. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland. College Park.
43. Pickering, M. J., & Barry, G. (1991). Sentence processing without empty categories. Language and Cognitive Processes, 6, 229-259.
44. Pickering, M. J., Traxler, M. J., & Crocker, M. W. (2000). Ambiguity resolution in sentence processing: Evidence against frequency-based accounts. Journal of Memory and Language, 43, 447-475.
45. Pritchett, B. L. (1992). Grammatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
46. Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: Twenty years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 372-422.
47. Rayner, K., Ashby, J., Pollatsek, A., & Reichle, E. D. (2004). The effects of frequency and predictability on eye fixations in reading: Implications for the E-Z Reader model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 30, 720-732.
48. Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effecs of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity. Memory & Cognition, 14, 191-201.
49. Rayner, K., Kambe, G., & Duffy, S. A. (2000). The effect of clause wrap-up on eye movements during reading. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 53A, 1061-1080.
50. Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (1989). The psychology of reading. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
51. Rayner, K., & Sereno, S. C. (1994). Regressive eye movements and sentence parsing: On the use of regression-contingent analyses. Memory & Cognition, 22, 281-285.
52. Rayner, K., Warren, T., Juhasz, B. J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2004). The effect of plausibility on eye movements in reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory & Cognition, 30, 1290-1301.
53. Rayner, K., & Well, A. D. (1996). Effects of contextual constraint on eye movements in reading: A further examination. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 3, 504-509.
54. Reichle, E. D., Rayner, K., & Pollatsek, A. (2003). The E-Z Reader model of eye-movement control in reading: Comparisons to other models. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 26, 445-526.
55. Schneider, D. (1999). Parsing and incrementality. Doctoral dissertation, University of Delaware.
56. Schwarz, B. (1999). On the syntax of either... or. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 17, 339-370.
57. Staub, A., & Clifton, C., Jr. (2005). Effects of syntactic category predictability on lexical decision and eye movements. Unpublished manuscript.
58. Sturt, P., & Lombardo, V. (2005). Processing coordinated structures: Incrementality and connectedness. Cognitive Science, 29, 291-305.
59. Tabor, W., Galantucci, B., & Richardson, D. (2004). Effects of merely local syntactic coherence on sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 355-370.
60. Traxler, M. J., & Pickering, M. J. (1996). Plausibility and the processing of unbounded dependencies: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language, 35, 454-475.
61. Traxler, M. J., Pickering, M. J., & Clifton, C. (1998). Adjunct attachment is not a form of lexical ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 558-592.
62. van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., Pearson, J., & Liversedge, S. P. (2005). Evidence against competition during syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and language, 52, 284-307.
63. van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (2000). Unrestricted race: A new model of syntactic ambiguity resolution. In A. Kennedy, R. Radach, D. Heller, & J. Pynte (Eds.), Reading as a perceptual process (pp. 621-648). Oxford: Elsevier.
64. van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (2001). Reanalysis in sentence processing: Evidence against current constraint-based and two-stage models. Journal of Memory and Language, 45, 225-258.
65. Wright, B., & Garrett, M. (1984). Lexical decision in sentences: Effects of syntactic structure. Memory & Cognition, 12, 31-45.