Processing syntactically ambiguous sentences: evidence from semantic priming
- PMID: 8366476
- DOI: 10.1007/BF01067831
Processing syntactically ambiguous sentences: evidence from semantic priming
Abstract
In this paper, we report the results of a study which investigates the processing of syntactically ambiguous sentences. We examined the processing of sentences in which an embedded clause is interpretable as either a complement clause or as a relative clause, as in, for example, "The receptionist informed the doctor that the journalist had phoned about the events." The embedded clause in such sentences is typically analyzed as a complement to the verb informed, rather than as a relative clause modifying the doctor. A number of models parsing predict this is the only analysis ever considered, while others predict that both interpretations are computed in parallel. Using a cross-model semantic priming technique, we probed for activation of doctor just after the embedded verb. Since only the relative clause analysis contains a connection between the doctor and the embedded verb, we expected reactivation of doctor at that point only if the relative clause analysis were a viable option. Our results suggest that this is the case: Compared to priming in an ambiguous control sentence, a significant reactivation effect was obtained. These results are argued to support a model of parsing in which attachment of a clause may be delayed.
Similar articles
-
Sentential Complement Clause Sentence Constructions of Early School-Age Children With and Without Developmental Language Disorder.Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2025 Jul-Aug;60(4):e70063. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.70063. Int J Lang Commun Disord. 2025. PMID: 40485348
-
The on-line resolution of the sentence complement/relative clause ambiguity: evidence from Spanish.Exp Psychol. 2004;51(1):59-71. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169.51.1.59. Exp Psychol. 2004. PMID: 14959507
-
Discourse influences during parsing are delayed.Cognition. 1992 Nov;45(2):109-39. doi: 10.1016/0010-0277(92)90026-e. Cognition. 1992. PMID: 1451412
-
Processing Dutch sentence structures.J Psycholinguist Res. 1993 Mar;22(2):85-108. doi: 10.1007/BF01067826. J Psycholinguist Res. 1993. PMID: 8366479 Review.
-
Pupillary responses to syntactic ambiguity of sentences.Brain Lang. 1986 Mar;27(2):322-44. doi: 10.1016/0093-934x(86)90023-4. Brain Lang. 1986. PMID: 3513899 Review.
Cited by
-
The on-line study of sentence comprehension: an examination of dual task paradigms.J Psycholinguist Res. 2006 May;35(3):215-31. doi: 10.1007/s10936-006-9012-0. J Psycholinguist Res. 2006. PMID: 16708287
-
The processing of non-canonically ordered constituents in long distance dependencies by pre-school children: a real-time investigation.J Psycholinguist Res. 2007 May;36(3):191-206. doi: 10.1007/s10936-006-9040-9. J Psycholinguist Res. 2007. PMID: 17186385
-
Effects of Implicit Prosody and Semantic Bias on the Resolution of Ambiguous Chinese Phrases.Front Psychol. 2019 Jun 4;10:1308. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01308. eCollection 2019. Front Psychol. 2019. PMID: 31214096 Free PMC article.
-
Coreference processing and levels of analysis in object-relative constructions; demonstration of antecedent reactivation with the cross-modal priming paradigm.J Psycholinguist Res. 1996 Jan;25(1):5-24. doi: 10.1007/BF01708418. J Psycholinguist Res. 1996. PMID: 8789365
-
Falsifying serial and parallel parsing models: empirical conundrums and an overlooked paradigm.J Psycholinguist Res. 2000 Mar;29(2):241-8. doi: 10.1023/a:1005105414238. J Psycholinguist Res. 2000. PMID: 10709188