Literature DB >> 25200381

Trends in syntactic parsing: anticipation, Bayesian estimation, and good-enough parsing.

Matthew J Traxler1.   

Abstract

Syntactic parsing processes establish dependencies between words in a sentence. These dependencies affect how comprehenders assign meaning to sentence constituents. Classical approaches to parsing describe it entirely as a bottom-up signal analysis. More recent approaches assign the comprehender a more active role, allowing the comprehender's individual experience, knowledge, and beliefs to influence his or her interpretation. This review describes developments in three related aspects of sentence processing research: anticipatory processing, Bayesian/noisy-channel approaches to sentence processing, and the 'good-enough' parsing hypothesis.
Copyright © 2014. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayes’ theorem; good-enough parsing; noisy channels; parsing; syntax

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25200381      PMCID: PMC6814003          DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2014.08.001

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Trends Cogn Sci        ISSN: 1364-6613            Impact factor:   20.229


  40 in total

1.  Processing structure of sentence perception.

Authors:  W Marslen-Wilson; L K Tyler
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1975-10-30       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  The role of working memory in syntactic ambiguity resolution: a psychometric approach.

Authors:  Benjamin Swets; Timothy Desmet; David Z Hambrick; Fernanda Ferreira
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Gen       Date:  2007-02

3.  Underspecification of syntactic ambiguities: evidence from self-paced reading.

Authors:  Benjamin Swets; Timothy Desmet; Charles Clifton; Fernanda Ferreira
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2008-01

4.  Structural priming across cognitive domains: from simple arithmetic to relative-clause attachment.

Authors:  Christoph Scheepers; Patrick Sturt; Catherine J Martin; Andriy Myachykov; Kay Teevan; Izabela Viskupova
Journal:  Psychol Sci       Date:  2011-08-26

5.  Probabilistic modeling of discourse-aware sentence processing.

Authors:  Amit Dubey; Frank Keller; Patrick Sturt
Journal:  Top Cogn Sci       Date:  2013-04-24

6.  The processing of extraposed structures in English.

Authors:  Roger Levy; Evelina Fedorenko; Mara Breen; Edward Gibson
Journal:  Cognition       Date:  2011-10-27

7.  Lexical and message-level sentence context effects on fixation times in reading.

Authors:  R K Morris
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 3.051

8.  The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution [corrected].

Authors:  M C MacDonald; N J Pearlmutter; M S Seidenberg
Journal:  Psychol Rev       Date:  1994-10       Impact factor: 8.934

9.  Generalized event knowledge activation during online sentence comprehension.

Authors:  Ross Metusalem; Marta Kutas; Thomas P Urbach; Mary Hare; Ken McRae; Jeffrey L Elman
Journal:  J Mem Lang       Date:  2012-05-01       Impact factor: 3.059

10.  Structural integration in language and music: evidence for a shared system.

Authors:  Evelina Fedorenko; Aniruddh Patel; Daniel Casasanto; Jonathan Winawer; Edward Gibson
Journal:  Mem Cognit       Date:  2009-01
View more
  14 in total

1.  The real-time prediction and inhibition of linguistic outcomes: Effects of language and literacy skill.

Authors:  Anuenue Kukona; David Braze; Clinton L Johns; W Einar Mencl; Julie A Van Dyke; James S Magnuson; Kenneth R Pugh; Donald P Shankweiler; Whitney Tabor
Journal:  Acta Psychol (Amst)       Date:  2016-10-07

2.  Measuring Metasyntactic Abilities: On a Classification of Metasyntactic Tasks.

Authors:  Daphnée Simard; Marie Labelle; Annie Bergeron
Journal:  J Psycholinguist Res       Date:  2017-04

3.  The Domain-General Multiple Demand (MD) Network Does Not Support Core Aspects of Language Comprehension: A Large-Scale fMRI Investigation.

Authors:  Evgeniia Diachek; Idan Blank; Matthew Siegelman; Josef Affourtit; Evelina Fedorenko
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 6.167

4.  Bilinguals on the garden-path: Individual differences in syntactic ambiguity resolution.

Authors:  Trevor Brothers; Liv J Hoversten; Matthew J Traxler
Journal:  Biling (Camb Engl)       Date:  2021-04-08

5.  Recovery from misinterpretations during online sentence processing.

Authors:  Lena M Blott; Jennifer M Rodd; Fernanda Ferreira; Jane E Warren
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2020-11-30       Impact factor: 3.140

6.  The use of context in resolving syntactic ambiguity: Structural and semantic influences.

Authors:  Kathryn Bousquet; Tamara Y Swaab; Debra L Long
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2019-05-27       Impact factor: 2.331

7.  What do we mean by prediction in language comprehension?

Authors:  Gina R Kuperberg; T Florian Jaeger
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2015-11-13       Impact factor: 2.331

8.  Anticipating syntax during reading: Evidence from the boundary change paradigm.

Authors:  Trevor Brothers; Matthew J Traxler
Journal:  J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn       Date:  2016-04-28       Impact factor: 3.051

9.  Do you what I say? People reconstruct the syntax of anomalous utterances.

Authors:  Iva Ivanova; Holly P Branigan; Janet F McLean; Albert Costa; Martin J Pickering
Journal:  Lang Cogn Neurosci       Date:  2016-10-28       Impact factor: 2.331

10.  Resolving Conflicts Between Syntax and Plausibility in Sentence Comprehension.

Authors:  Glenda Andrews; Jessica E Ogden; Graeme S Halford
Journal:  Adv Cogn Psychol       Date:  2017-03-31
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.