Semantic Influences On Parsing: Use of Thematic Role Information in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution
Open accessAbstract
Ferreira and Clifton (1986, Experiment 1) found that readers experienced equal difficulty with temporarily ambiguous reduced relatives clauses when the first noun was animate (e.g., "The defendant examined by the lawyer was . . .") and when it was inanimate and thus an unlikely Agent (e.g., "The evidence examined . . ."). This data pattern suggested that a verb′s semantic constraints do not affect initial syntactic ambiguity resolution. We repeated the experiment using: (1) inanimate noun/verb combinations that did not easily permit a main clause continuation, (2) a baseline condition with morphologically unambiguous verbs (e.g., "stolen"), (3) a homogeneous set of disambiguating prepositional phrases, and (4) a display in which all of the critical regions were presented on the same line of text. In two eye-movement experiments, animacy had immediate effects on ambiguity resolution: only animate nouns showed clear signs of difficulty. Post-hoc regression analyses revealed that what little processing difficulty readers had with the inanimate nouns varied with the semantic fit of individual noun/verb combinations: items with strong semantic fit showed no processing difficulty compared to unambiguous controls, whereas items with weak semantic fit showed a pattern of processing difficulty which was similar to Ferreira and Clifton (1986). The results are interpreted within the framework of an evidential (constraint-based) approach to ambiguity resolution. Analyses of reading times also suggested that the millisecond per character correction for region length is problematic, especially for small scoring regions. An alternative transformation is suggested.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Interpretation is constrained by combinatorial lexical information.
“In this fashion, interpretation is also constrained bycombinatorial lexical information (MacDonald; Tabossi, Spivey-Knowlton, McRae, & Tanenhaus, 1994; Trueswell, Tanenhaus, & Garnsey, 1994).”
From FREQUENCY EFFECTS IN LANGUAGE PROCESSING: A Review with Implications for Theories of Implicit and Explicit Language Acquisition (2002) · cites this paper as Trueswell, Tanenhaus, & Garnsey, 1994
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research
Rayner, K. (1998) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.124.3.372 · Cited by 7,979 · see citing works
Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains.
Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S., & Patterson, K. (1996) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.1.56 · Cited by 2,698 · see citing works
Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies
Gibson, E. (1998) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00034-1 · Cited by 2,537 · see citing works
Ellis, N. C. (2002) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263102002024 · Cited by 2,230 · see citing works
The P600 as an index of syntactic integration difficulty
Kaan, E., Harris, A., Gibson, E., & Holcomb, P. (2000) · Language and Cognitive Processes · doi:10.1080/016909600386084 · Cited by 993 · see citing works
More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases
Arnon, I., & Snider, N. (2010) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.005 · Cited by 791 · see citing works
Word lengths are optimized for efficient communication
Piantadosi, S. T., Tily, H., & Gibson, E. (2011) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1012551108 · Cited by 695 · see citing works
Cognitive control and parsing: Reexamining the role of Broca’s area in sentence comprehension
Novick, J. M., Trueswell, J. C., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2005) · Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/cabn.5.3.263 · Cited by 682 · see citing works
Self-citationThe communicative function of ambiguity in language
Piantadosi, S. T., Tily, H., & Gibson, E. (2012) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2011.10.004 · Cited by 628 · see citing works
Rational integration of noisy evidence and prior semantic expectations in sentence interpretation
Gibson, E., Bergen, L., & Piantadosi, S. T. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1216438110 · Cited by 407 · see citing works
Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution
MacDonald, M. C. (1994) · Language and Cognitive Processes · doi:10.1080/01690969408402115 · Cited by 379 · see citing works
Lack of selectivity for syntax relative to word meanings throughout the language network
Fedorenko, E., Blank, I. A., Siegelman, M., & Mineroff, Z. (2020) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2020.104348 · Cited by 170 · see citing works
MEMORY-BASED LANGUAGE PROCESSING: Psycholinguistic Research in the 1990s
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1998) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.25 · Cited by 179 · see citing works
A Systematic Assessment of Syntactic Generalization in Neural Language Models
Hu, J., Gauthier, J., Qian, P., Wilcox, E., & Levy, R. (2020) · Proceedings of the 58th Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics · doi:10.18653/v1/2020.acl-main.158 · Cited by 134 · see citing works
Caplan, D., Stanczak, L., & Waters, G. (2008) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/jocn.2008.20044 · Cited by 82 · see citing works
Ambiguity, Accessibility, and a Division of Labor for Communicative Success
Ferreira, V. S. (2008) · Psychology of Learning and Motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(08)00006-6 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
Structural priming during comprehension: A pattern from many pieces
Tooley, K. M. (2023) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-022-02209-7 · Cited by 47 · see citing works
- Authors
- Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Garnsey, S. M.
- Affiliations
- University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign (US)
- Venue
- Journal of Memory and Language
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1994-06
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 285-318
- ISSN
- 0749-596X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2061311021
- Cited by
- 1,175
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 15 · 2025: 44 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 29 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 28 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 66 · 2018: 47 · 2017: 37 · 2016: 47 · 2015: 46 · 2014: 35 · 2013: 50 · 2012: 40
- FWCI
- 11.06
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Journal of Memory and Language (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
- Topics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Syntax, Semantics, Linguistic Variation
- Keywords
- syntactic ambiguity resolution, thematic roles, reduced relative clauses, animacy effect, verb semantics, eye movements, reading time
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review