Literature DB >> 11430186

The effects of parallelism and prosody in the processing of gapping structures.

K Carlson1.   

Abstract

Two studies explored the processing of ambiguous sentences like Bill took chips to the party and Susan to the game, which may be assigned a gapping (Susan took chips) or a nongapping structure (Bill took Susan). The central question was what factors affect the ultimate interpretive preferences for these sentences. In a written questionnaire, sentences with greater parallelism between arguments in the positions of Bill and Susan received more gapping responses, though an overall bias toward the nongapping structure was seen. An auditory comprehension study showed that prosodic parallels between arguments also affected interpretation. In both experiments parallelism played a significant role in determining an interpretation, but the simpler structure, the nongapping structure, was preferred overall.

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11430186     DOI: 10.1177/00238309010440010101

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lang Speech        ISSN: 0023-8309            Impact factor:   1.500


  21 in total

1.  Processing gapped verbs.

Authors:  Edith Kaan; Carlie Overfelt; Do Tromp; Frank Wijnen
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2013-08

2.  Effects of pitch accents in attachment ambiguity resolution.

Authors:  Eun-Kyung Lee; Duane G Watson
Journal:  Lang Cogn Process       Date:  2011

3.  THE SYNTAX-DISCOURSE DIVIDE: PROCESSING ELLIPSIS.

Authors:  Lyn Frazier; Charles Clifton
Journal:  Syntax       Date:  2005-08

4.  Focus and VP ellipsis.

Authors:  Lyn Frazier; Charles Clifton; Katy Carlson
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 1.500

5.  Processing Elided Verb Phrases with Flawed Antecedents: the Recycling Hypothesis.

Authors:  Ana Arregui; Charles Clifton; Lyn Frazier; Keir Moulton
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2006-08       Impact factor: 3.059

6.  Fill the gap! Combining pragmatic and prosodic information to make gapping easy.

Authors:  John C J Hoeks; Gisela Redeker; Petra Hendriks
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2009-04-05

7.  Information structure expectations in sentence comprehension.

Authors:  Katy Carlson; Michael Walsh Dickey; Lyn Frazier; Charles Clifton
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2008-04-18       Impact factor: 2.143

Review 8.  Structural priming: a critical review.

Authors:  Martin J Pickering; Victor S Ferreira
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  2008-05       Impact factor: 17.737

9.  Parallelism effects and verb activation: the sustained reactivation hypothesis.

Authors:  Sarah M Callahan; Lewis P Shapiro; Tracy Love
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2010-04

10.  Information Structure Preferences in Focus-Sensitive Ellipsis: How Defaults Persist.

Authors:  Jesse A Harris; Katy Carlson
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  2017-11-09       Impact factor: 1.500

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.