Literature DB >> 1451412

Discourse influences during parsing are delayed.

K Rayner1, S Garrod, C A Perfetti.   

Abstract

Subjects read sentences containing either a syntactically ambiguous prepositional phrase attachment or a syntactically ambiguous reduced relative clause. The sentences were embedded in passages of text that were consistent with either the minimal or non-minimal attachment reading. In addition, a discourse factor (i.e., whether or not the target sentence was in the discourse focus) was varied. Subjects' eye movements were recorded as they read the passages of text. Our primary finding was that subjects were garden-pathed even when there was biasing context. However, when the target sentence was in the discourse focus, subjects were able to recover more readily from their initial erroneous parse of the sentence. The data thus support models of sentence parsing that postulate that the parsing of a sentence is based upon structurally based principles and the influence of semantic or pragmatic information makes itself felt only after the initial parsing decision has been made.

Mesh:

Year:  1992        PMID: 1451412     DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(92)90026-e

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cognition        ISSN: 0010-0277


  9 in total

1.  Misinterpretations of garden-path sentences: implications for models of sentence processing and reanalysis.

Authors:  F Ferreira; K Christianson; A Hollingworth
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2001-01

2.  Understanding and producing the reduced relative construction: Evidence from ratings, editing and corpora.

Authors:  Mary Hare; Michael K Tanenhaus; Ken McRae
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 3.059

3.  Comprehending semantic and grammatical violations in Italian. N400 and P600 comparison with visual and auditory stimuli.

Authors:  Michela Balconi; Uberto Pozzoli
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2005-01

4.  Interface problems: structural constraints on interpretation?

Authors:  Lyn Frazier; Charles Clifton; Keith Rayner; Patricia Deevy; Sungryong Koh; Markus Bader
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2005-05

5.  Gradiency and Visual Context in Syntactic Garden-Paths.

Authors:  Thomas A Farmer; Sarah A Cargill; Michael J Spivey
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 3.059

6.  Focus as a contextual priming mechanism in reading.

Authors:  R K Morris; J R Folk
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1998-11

7.  Linguistic focus affects eye movements during reading.

Authors:  S Birch; K Rayner
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1997-09

8.  Regressive eye movements and sentence parsing: on the use of regression-contingent analyses.

Authors:  K Rayner; S C Sereno
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  1994-05

9.  Does Online Comprehension Monitoring Make a Unique Contribution to Reading Comprehension in Beginning Readers? Evidence from Eye Movements.

Authors:  Young-Suk Grace Kim; Christian Vorstius; Ralph Radach
Journal:  Sci Stud Read       Date:  2018-04-05
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.