Tracking the what and why of speakers' choices: Prosodic boundaries and the length of constituents

Psychonomic Bulletin and Review

Volumn 13, Issue 5, 2006, Pages 854-861

  Clifton Jr , Charles ^a   Carlson, Katy ^b   Frazier, Lyn ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS   (United States)

^b MOREHEAD STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33847630760     PISSN: 10699384     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3758/BF03194009     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. ARNOLD, J. E., WASOW, T., LOSONGCO, A., & GINSTROM, R. (2000). Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering. Language, 76, 28-57.
2. BECKMAN, M. E., & AYERS, G. M. (1993). Guidelines for ToBI labelling, version 2.0. Columbus: Ohio State University, Department of Linguistics.
3. CARLSON, K., CLIFTON, C., JR., & FRAZIER, L. (2001). Prosodic boundaries in adjunct attachment. Journal of Memory & Language, 45, 58-81.
4. CLIFTON, C., JR., CARLSON, K., & FRAZIER, L. (2002). Informative prosodic boundaries. Language & Speech, 45, 87-114.
5. DAHAN, D., TANENHAUS, M. K., & CHAMBERS, C. G. (2002). Accent and reference resolution in spoken-language comprehension. Journal of Memory & Language, 47, 292-314.
6. FERREIRA, V. S. (1996). Is it better to give than to donate? Syntactic flexibility in language production. Journal of Memory & Language, 35, 725-755.
7. FERREIRA, V. S., & DELL, G. S. (2000). Effect of ambiguity and lexical availability on syntactic and lexical production. Cognitive Psychology, 40, 296-340.
8. FODOR, J. D. (1998). Learning to parse? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 285-319.
9. FRAZIER, L., CLIFTON, C., JR., & CARLSON, K. (2004). Don't break, or do: Prosodic boundary preferences. Lingua, 114, 3-27.
10. GEE, J. P., & GROSJEAN, F. (1983). Performance structures: A psycholinguistic and linguistic appraisal. Cognitive Psychology 15, 411-458.
11. GROSJEAN, F. (1983). How long is the sentence? Prediction and prosody in the on-line processing of language. Linguistics, 21, 501-529.
12. HIROSE, Y. (2003). Recycling prosodie boundaries. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 167-195.
13. KJELGAARD, M. M., & SPEER, S. R. (1999). Prosodic facilitation and interference in the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguity. Journal of Memory & Language, 40, 153-194.
14. LEHISTE, I. (1973). Phonetic disambiguation of syntactic ambiguity. Glossa, 7, 107-122.
15. MARCUS, M., & HINDLE, D. (1990). Description theory and intonation boundaries. In G. Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing: Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives (pp. 483-512). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. NESPOR, M., & VOGEL, I. (1986). Prosodic phonology. Dordrecht: Foris.
17. PIERREHUMBERT, J. B. (1980). The phonology and phonetics of English intonation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
18. PRICE, P. J., OSTENDORF, M., SHATTUCK- HUFNAGEL, S., & FONG, C. (1991). The use of prosody in syntactic disambiguation. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 90, 2956-2970.
19. SCHAFER, A., CARLSON, K., CLIFTON, C., JR., & FRAZIER, L. (2000). Focus and the interpretation of pitch accent: Disambiguating embedded questions. Language & Speech, 43, 75-105.
20. SELKIRK, E. (1984). Phonology and syntax: The relation between sound and structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21. TRUCKENBRODT, H. (1995). Phonological phrases: Their relation to syntax, focus, and prominence. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
22. WASOW, T. (1997). End-weight from the speaker's perspective. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26, 347-362.
23. WATSON, D., & GIBSON, E. (2001, March). Linguistic structure and intonational phrasing. Paper presented at the Fourteenth Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Philadelphia.
24. WATSON, D., & GIBSON, E. (2004). The relationship between intonational phrasing and syntactic structure in language production. Language & Cognitive Processes, 19, 713-755.
25. WEBER, A., GRICE, M., & CROCKER, M. (2006). The role of prosody in the interpretation of structural ambiguities: A study of anticipatory eye movements. Cognition, 99, B63-B72.