Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 530

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Bridging the Gap: Evidence from ERPs on the Processing of Unbounded Dependencies

Kluender, Robert, Kutas, Marta·1993·Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience

Abstract

Since the early days of generative grammar, the study of “unbounded dependencies” such as wh-questions and relative clauses has occupied a central place in both syntactic theory and language processing research. The problem that such constructions pose is as follows. In a normal wh-question, a wh-phrase is typically displaced to the left periphery of a clause (What did you say — to John?); this displaced constituent is often referred to as a “filler.” The vacant position (indicated in the previous example by a blank line) where it would ordinarily occur in an “echo” question (You said what to John?) is correspondingly referred to as a “gap.” Filler and gap are mutually dependent on each other since they share syntactic and semantic information essential for successful sentence interpretation. However, since sentence processing is a sequential operation, a filler cannot be assigned to its gap until some time after it has occurred. In other words, the filler must be held in working memory until such time as filler-gap assignment can take place. The intent of the research reported here was to examine the processing of unbounded dependencies in English as revealed in event-related brain potentials (ERPs). To this end, subjects were shown both grammatical and ungrammatical yes/no-questions (Did you say something to John?) and wh-questions. A number of comparisons made at various points in these questions showed that both the storage of a filler in working memory and its subsequent retrieval for filler-gap assignment were associated with an enhanced negativity between 300 and 500 msec poststimulus over left anterior sites. This effect of left anterior negativity (LAN) was independent of and orthogonal to the grammaticality of the eliciting condition. We show how this interpretation coincides with recent studies that demonstrate a correlation between left anterior negativity, working memory capacity, and successful language processing.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1162/jocn.1993.5.2.196

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 530

Metadata

Authors
Kluender, R., & Kutas, M.
Venue
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Published
1993
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
196-214
ISSN
  • 0898-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1530-8898
OpenAlex
W2090957216
Cited by
530
References
2
FWCI
2.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.