Literature DB >> 15788160

The influence of contextual contrast on syntactic processing: evidence for strong-interaction in sentence comprehension.

Daniel Grodner1, Edward Gibson, Duane Watson.   

Abstract

The present study compares the processing of unambiguous restrictive and non-restrictive relative clauses (RCs) within both a null context and a supportive discourse using a self-paced reading methodology. Individuals read restrictive RCs more slowly than non-restrictive RCs in a null context, but processed restrictive RCs faster than non-restrictive RCs in supportive context, resulting in an interaction between context and RC type. These results provide evidence for two theoretical points. First, principles analogous to those in referential theory [Altmann G. T. M., & Steedman, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30, 191-238; Crain, S., & Steedman, M. (1985). On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the psychological parser. In D. Dowty, L. Karttunnen, A. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press] apply not only in resolving ambiguity but also in processing unambiguous sentences. Second, the discourse context can guide and facilitate interpretive processing. This result suggests that intrasentential factors such as syntax are not autonomous from contextual processing, contrary to the modularity hypothesis [Fodor, J. A. (1983). Modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press].

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15788160     DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2004.01.007

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


  12 in total

1.  Investigating effects of selectional restriction violations and plausibility violation severity on eye-movements in reading.

Authors:  Tessa Warren; Kerry McConnell
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2007-08

2.  Word lengths are optimized for efficient communication.

Authors:  Steven T Piantadosi; Harry Tily; Edward Gibson
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2011-01-28       Impact factor: 11.205

3.  Interaction Between Syntactic Structure and Information Structure in the Processing of a Head-Final Language.

Authors:  Masatoshi Koizumi; Satoshi Imamura
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2017-02

4.  Evidence for the Influence of Syntax on Prosodic Parsing.

Authors:  Andrés Buxó-Lugo; Duane G Watson
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2016-03-28       Impact factor: 3.059

5.  "Some," and possibly all, scalar inferences are not delayed: Evidence for immediate pragmatic enrichment.

Authors:  Daniel J Grodner; Natalie M Klein; Kathleen M Carbary; Michael K Tanenhaus
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2010-04-14

6.  Cue-dependent interference in comprehension.

Authors:  Julie A Van Dyke
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2011-10-01       Impact factor: 3.059

7.  Moment-to-Moment Processing of Complex Sentences by Adults with and without Developmental Language Disorder.

Authors:  Gerard H Poll; Alanna Martin
Journal:  J Commun Disord       Date:  2022-08-21       Impact factor: 1.864

8.  Effects of context on eye movements when reading about possible and impossible events.

Authors:  Tessa Warren; Kerry McConnell; Keith Rayner
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  How the emotional content of discourse affects language comprehension.

Authors:  Laura Jiménez-Ortega; Manuel Martín-Loeches; Pilar Casado; Alejandra Sel; Sabela Fondevila; Pilar Herreros de Tejada; Annekathrin Schacht; Werner Sommer
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2012-03-29       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Restrictive vs. non-restrictive composition: a magnetoencephalography study.

Authors:  Timothy Leffel; Miriam Lauter; Masha Westerlund; Liina Pylkkänen
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2014-09-16       Impact factor: 2.331

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.