Literature DB >> 18609404

Information structure expectations in sentence comprehension.

Katy Carlson1, Michael Walsh Dickey, Lyn Frazier, Charles Clifton.   

Abstract

In English, new information typically appears late in the sentence, as does primary accent. Because of this tendency, perceivers might expect the final constituent or constituents of a sentence to contain informational focus. This expectation should in turn affect how they comprehend focus-sensitive constructions such as ellipsis sentences. Results from four experiments on sluicing sentences (e.g., The mobster implicated the thug, but we can't find out who else) suggest that perceivers do prefer to place focus late in the sentence, though that preference can be mitigated by prosodic information (pitch accents, Experiment 2) or syntactic information (clefted sentences, Experiment 3) indicating that focus is located elsewhere. Furthermore, it is not necessarily the direct object, but the informationally focused constituent that is the preferred antecedent (Experiment 4). Expectations regarding the information structure of a sentence, which are only partly cancellable by means of overt focus markers, may explain persistent biases in ellipsis resolution.

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18609404      PMCID: PMC2713347          DOI: 10.1080/17470210701880171

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)        ISSN: 1747-0218            Impact factor:   2.143


  14 in total

1.  Noun-phrase anaphors and focus: the informational load hypothesis.

Authors:  A Almor
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1999-10       Impact factor: 8.934

2.  Memory interference during language processing.

Authors:  P C Gordon; R Hendrick; M Johnson
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 3.051

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

Authors:  K Carlson
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  2001-03       Impact factor: 1.500

4.  The influence of only on syntactic processing of "long" relative clause sentences.

Authors:  Simon P Liversedge; Kevin B Paterson; Emma L Clayes
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol A       Date:  2002-01

5.  Effects of pitch accent position, type, and status on focus projection.

Authors:  Pauline Welby
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  2003-03       Impact factor: 1.500

6.  Linguistic focus and good-enough representations: an application of the change-detection paradigm.

Authors:  Patrick Sturt; Anthony J Sanford; Andrew Stewart; Eugene Dawydiak
Journal:  Psychon Bull Rev       Date:  2004-10

7.  Focus, accent, and argument structure: effects on language comprehension.

Authors:  S Birch; C Clifton
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  1995 Oct-Dec       Impact factor: 1.500

8.  Linguistic focus affects eye movements during reading.

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

9.  Semantic focus and sentence comprehension.

Authors:  A Cutler; J A Fodor
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  1979-03

10.  Focus identification during sentence comprehension: evidence from eye movements.

Authors:  Kevin B Paterson; Simon P Liversedge; Ruth Filik; Barbara J Juhasz; Sarah J White; Keith Rayner
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 2.143

View more
  12 in total

1.  Misleading Bias-Driven Expectations in Referential Processing and the Facilitative Role of Contrastive Accent.

Authors:  Inbal Itzhak; Shari R Baum
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2015-10

2.  The Role of Non-Actuality Implicatures in Processing Elided Constituents.

Authors:  Margaret Grant; Charles Clifton; Lyn Frazier
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 3.059

3.  The Role of Only in Contrasts in and out of Context.

Authors:  Katy Carlson
Journal:  Discourse Process       Date:  2013

4.  The real-time processing of sluiced sentences.

Authors:  Josée Poirier; Katie Wolfinger; Lisa Spellman; Lewis P Shapiro
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2010-10

5.  Accents, Not Just Prosodic Boundaries, Influence Syntactic Attachment.

Authors:  Katy Carlson; Joseph C Tyler
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  2017-07-07       Impact factor: 1.500

6.  Keep it local (and final): Remnant preferences in "let alone" ellipsis.

Authors:  Jesse A Harris; Katy Carlson
Journal:  Q J Exp Psychol (Hove)       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 2.143

7.  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

8.  Predicting contrast in sentences with and without focus marking.

Authors:  Katy Carlson
Journal:  Lingua       Date:  2014-10-01

9.  New is not always costly: evidence from online processing of topic and contrast in Japanese.

Authors:  Luming Wang; Petra B Schumacher
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-06-28

10.  Focus Attracts Attachment.

Authors:  Katy Carlson; David Potter
Journal:  Lang Speech       Date:  2021-07-21       Impact factor: 1.835

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.