Argument status and PP-attachment

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

Volumn 35, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 385-403

  Boland, Julie E ^a   Blodgett, Allison ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^b OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Parsing; Prepositional phrase attachment; Sentence comprehension; Syntactic ambiguity

Indexed keywords

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

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

EID: 33748864786     PISSN: 00906905     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10936-006-9021-z     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Abney, S. P. (1989). A computational model of human parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18(1), 129-144.
2. Altmann, G., & Steedman, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30, 191-238.
3. Boland, J. E. (1997). Resolving syntactic category ambiguities in discourse context: Probabilistic and discourse constraints. Journal of Memory and Language, 36, 588-615.
4. Boland, J. E., & Boehm-Jernigan, H. (1998). Lexical constraints and prepositional phrase attachment. Journal of Memory and Language, 39(4), 684-719.
5. Boland, J. E., & Lewis, R. (1998). The lexical generation of syntax and its implications. Proceedings of the 39th Annual Meeting of the Psychonomics Society, Dallas.
6. Boland, J. E., Sudhakar, M., Lewis, R., & Blodgett, A. (2001). Lexical parsing; Limits on the lexicalization of syntactic generation. Manuscript in preparation, University of Michigan.
7. Britt, M. A. (1994). The interaction of referential ambiguity and argument structure in the parsing of prepositional phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 251-283.
8. Chomsky, N. (1986). Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
10. Clifton, C., Jr., Speer, S. R., & Abney, S. P. (1991). Parsing arguments: Phrase structure and argument structure as determinants of initial parsing decisions. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 251-271.
11. Crain, S. (1980). Pragmatic constraints on sentence comprehension. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California at Irvine.
12. Crain, S., & Steedman, M. J. (1985). On not being led up the garden path: the use of context by the psychological parser. In: D. Dowty, L. Kartunnen & A. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural Language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Ferreira, E, & Clifton, C. Jr. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 348-368.
14. Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. M. (1990). Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16(4), 555-568.
15. Ferretti, T. R., McRae, K., & Hatherell, A. (2001). Integrating verbs, situation schemas, and thematic role concepts. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 516-547.
16. Foraker, S., & McElree, B. (2001). The effects of co-occurrence frequencies on the time-course of parsing operations. Poster session presented at the 14th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Philadelphia.
17. Rancis, W. N., & Kucera, H. (1982). Frequency analysis of English usage: Lexicon and grammar. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
18. Frazier, L. (1978). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut.
19. Frazier, L. (1987). Theories of syntactic processing. In: J. L. Garfleld (Ed.), Modularity in knowledge representation and natural language understanding, (pp. 291-307). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
20. Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. Garnsey, S. M., Pearlmutter, 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.
22. Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Huynh, H., & Feldt, L. S. (1976). Estimation of the box correction for degrees of freedom from sample data in randomized block and split-plot designs. Journal of Educational Statistics, 1, 69-82.
24. Jackendoff, R. (1977). X syntax: A study of phrase structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25. Kegl, J., & Fellbaum, C. (1988). An analysis of obligatory adjuncts: Evidence from the class of measure verbs. Proceedings from the Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL), 5, 275-288.
26. Levin, B. (1993). English verb classes and alternations: A preliminary investigation. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
27. Lucas, M. (2000). Semantic priming without association: A meta-analytic review. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 7, 618-630.
28. MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101(4), 676-703.
29. Mitchell, D. (1989). Verb guidance and other lexical effects in parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4(3/4), 123-1.54.
30. Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In: D. Besner & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual Word Recognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
31. Pesetsky, D. (1995). Zero Syntax: Experiences and cascades. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
32. Pollard, C., & Sag, I. (1994). Head driven phrase structure grammar. Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
33. Schutze, C., & Gibson, E. (1999). Argumenthood and English prepositional phrase attachment. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 409-431.
34. Speer, S. R., & Clifton, C. Jr. (1998). Plausibility and argument structure in sentence comprehension. Memory and Cognition, 26(5), 965-978.
35. Spivey-Knowlton, M., & Sedivy, J. (1995). Resolving attachment ambiguities with multiple constraints. Cognition, 55, 227-267.
36. Steedman, M. (1996). Surface structure and interpretation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
37. Stevenson, S. (1998). Parsing as incremental restructuring. In: J. D. Fodor & F. Ferreira (Eds.), Reanalysis in Sentence Processing, (pp. 327-363). Boston: Kluwer.
38. 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.