How do People Construct Logical Form During Language Comprehension?

Psychological Science

Volumn 21, Issue 8, 2010, Pages 1090-1097

  Raffray, Claudine N ^a   Pickering, Martin J ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

comprehension; logical form; priming; quantifier scope; thematic roles

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COMPREHENSION; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; LOGIC; SPEECH;

COMPREHENSION; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; LOGIC; SPEECH;

EID: 78149453782     PISSN: 09567976     EISSN: 14679280     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0956797610375446     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Aoun, J., & Li, Y.A. (1993). Syntax of scope. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Dai, B. (2008). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes [Computer software]. Boston: Free Software Foundation. Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://lme4.r-forge.r-project.org.
3. Bock, J.K. (1986). Syntactic persistence in language production. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 355-387.
4. Bock, J.K., Loebell, H., & Morey, R. (1992). From conceptual roles to structural relations: Bridging the syntactic cleft. Psychological Review, 99, 150-171.
5. Branigan, H.P., Pickering, M.J., & McLean, J.F. (2005). Priming prepositional-phrase attachment during comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 468-481.
6. Carey, P., Mehler, J., & Bever, T.G. (1970). Judging the veracity of an ambiguous sentence. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 243-254.
7. Chang, F., Bock, K., & Goldberg, A.E. (2003). Can thematic roles leave traces of their places? Cognition, 90, 29-49.
8. Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris.
9. Dowty, D.R., Wall, R.E., & Peters, S. (1981). Introduction to Montague semantics. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.
10. Filik, R., Paterson, K.B., & Liversedge, S.P. (2004). Processing doubly-quantified sentences: Evidence from eye-movements. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 11, 953-959.
11. Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 559-586). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Jaeger, T.F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434-446.
13. Kurtzman, H.S., & MacDonald, M.C. (1993). Resolution of quantifier scope ambiguities. Cognition, 48, 243-279.
14. May, R. (1985). Logical form: Its structure and derivation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
15. Parsons, T. (1991). Events in the semantics of English. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Paterson, K.B., Filik, R., & Liversedge, S.P. (2008). Competition during the processing of quantifier scope ambiguities: Evidence from eye movements during reading. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 61, 459-473.
17. Pickering, M.J., & Ferreira, V.S. (2008). Structural priming: A critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 427-459.
18. R Development Core Team. (2008). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Retrieved April 30, 2010, from http://www.R-project.org.
19. Raffray, C.N., Pickering, M.J., & Branigan, H.P. (2007). Priming the interpretation of noun-noun combinations. Journal of Memory and Language, 57, 380-395.
20. Russell, B. (1919). Introduction to mathematical philosophy. London: Allen & Unwin.
21. Zwaan, R.A., & Radvansky, G.A. (1998). Situation models in language comprehension and memory. Psychological Bulletin, 123, 162-185.