Verb Argument Structure in Parsing and Interpretation: Evidence from wh-Questions

Abstract

The hypothesis that readers use verb argument structure information to generate and evaluate likely syntactic alternatives and assign provisional interpretations was evaluated using wh-questions. such as Which client did the salesman visit while in the city? Using a word by word, self-paced reading task with a "makes sense" judgment, we manipulated the plausibility of the wh-phrase with respect to the semantic role that it would play if it were the direct object. We also manipulated the preferred argument structure of the verb, using (1) transitive verbs that typically occur with only a direct object; (2) objective control verbs that typically are used with both a direct object and an infinitive complement; and (3) dative verbs that are typically used with both a direct object and an indirect object. The results showed clear and immediate effects of argument structure. Sentences with implausible wh-phrases were judged to stop making sense at the verb for simple transitive verbs. However, sentences with object control verbs and dative verbs were judged to make sense as long as the wh-phrase could be plausibly interpreted as one of the verb′s arguments. Thus, the bias to initially interpret a wh-phrase as the direct object of a verb was blocked when the filler was implausible in the direct object role if the verb provided another argument position. In addition, interpretation of the wh-phrase began at the verb, prior to the gap, even when the syntactic position of the gap was ambiguous. The results are taken as support for constraint-based lexicalist models of processing.