Reactivation of antecedens by overt versus null pronouns : Evidence from Persian

• Autorzy: Keshtiari N. , Vasishth S.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15398/jlm.v1i2.54

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In Persian, a construction exists in which a gap can optionally be replaced by an overt pronoun. A self-paced reading study (110 participants) suggests that the overt pronoun results in deeper encoding (higher activation) of the antecedent noun, presumably because of richer retrieval cue specifications during antecedent retrieval at the pronoun; this higher activation has the consequence that the antecedent is easier to retrieve at a subsequent stage. This provides new evidence for reactivation effects of the type assumed in the cue-based retrieval model of parsing (Lewis and Vasishth 2005), and shows that dependency resolution is not simply a matter of connecting two codependents; the retrieval cue specification has a differential impast on processing.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

sentence comprehension; pronoun processing; reactivation; expectation-based processing

• Wydawca: Instytut Podstaw Informatyki PAN
• Czasopismo: Journal of Language Modelling
• Rocznik: 2013
• Tom: Vol. 1, No. 2
• Strony: 243--266
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 34 poz., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Keshtiari N.

• Cluster of Languages of Emotion, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany

autor

Vasishth S.

• Department of Linguistics, University of Potsdam, Germany
• School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Sheffield, UK

Bibliografia

• [1] John R. Anderson, Dan Bothell, Michael D. Byrne, Scott Douglass, Christian Lebiere, and Yulin Qin (2004), An integrated theory of the mind, Psychological Review, 111 (4): 1036-1060.
• [2] Brian Bartek, Richard L. Lewis, Shravan Vasishth, and Mason Smith (2011), In search of on-line locality effects in sentence comprehension, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 37 (5): 1178-1198.
• [3] Douglas Bates and Deepayan Sarkar (2007), lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes, R package version 0.9975-11.
• [4] Thomas G. Bever and Brian McElree (1988), Empty categories access their antecedents during comprehension, Linguistic Inquiry, 19 (1): 35-43.
• [5] Marisa F. Boston, John T. Hale, Shravan Vasishth, and Reinhold Kliegl (2011), Parallel processing and sentence comprehension difficulty, Language and Cognitive Processes, 26 (3): 301-349.
• [6] George E. P. Box and David R. Cox (1964), An analysis of transformations, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 26 (2): 211-252.
• [7] Brian Dillon, Alan Mishler, Shayne Sloggett, and Colin Phillips (2011), A computational cognitive model of syntactic priming, Journal of Memory and Language, 69 (4): 85-103.
• [8] Brian W. Dillon (2011), Structured access in sentence comprehension, Ph.D. thesis, University of Maryland.
• [9] Karen Emmorey and Diane Lillo-Martin (1995), Processing spatial anaphora: Referent reactivation with overt and null pronouns in American Sign Language, Language and Cognitive Processes, 10 (6): 631-653.
• [10] Felix Engelmann, Shravan Vasishth, Ralf Engbert, and Reinhold Kliegl (2013), A framework for modeling the interaction of syntactic processing and eye movement control, Topics in Cognitive Science, 5 (3): 452-474.
• [11] Edward Gibson (2000), Dependency Locality Theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity, in Alec Marantz, Yasushi Miyashita, and Wayne O’Neil, editors, Image, Language, Brain: Papers from the First Mind Articulation Project Symposium, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
• [12] Daniel Grodner and Edward Gibson (2005), Consequences of the serial nature of linguistic input, Cognitive Science, 29: 261-290.
• [13] Philip Hofmeister (2011), Representational complexity and memory retrieval in language comprehension, Language and Cognitive Processes, 26 (3): 376-405.
• [14] Samar Husain, Shravan Vasishth, and Narayanan Srinivasan (2013), Locality effects depend on processing load and expectation strength, in Proceedings of the Conference on Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing, p. 96, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille, France.
• [15] Marcel A. Just, Patricia A. Carpenter, and Jacqueline D. Woolley (1982), Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 111 (2): 228-238.
• [16] Reinhold Kliegl, Michael E. J. Masson, and Eike M. Richter (2010), A linear mixed model analysis of masked repetition priming, Visual Cognition, 18 (5): 655-681.
• [17] Nóra Kovács and Shravan Vasishth (2013), The processing of relative clauses in Hungarian, in Cheryl Frenck-Mestre, F-Xavier Alario, Noël Nguyen, Philippe Blache, and Christine Meunier, editors, Proceedings of the Conference on Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing, p. 13, Aix-Marseille Université, Marseille.
• [18] Roger Levy (2008), Expectation-based syntactic comprehension, Cognition, 106: 1126-1177.
• [19] Roger Levy, Evelina Fedorenko, and Edward Gibson (2013), The syntactic complexity of Russian relative clauses, Journal of Memory and Language, 69 (4): 461-495.
• [20] Richard L. Lewis and Shravan Vasishth (2005), An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval, Cognitive Science, 29: 1-45.
• [21] Richard L. Lewis, Shravan Vasishth, and Julie Van Dyke (2006), Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension, Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10 (10): 447-454.
• [22] Maryellen C. MacDonald (1989), Priming effects from gaps to antecedents, Language and Cognitive Processes, 4 (1): 35-56.
• [23] Umesh Patil, Sandra Hanne, Frank Burchert, Ria De Bleser, and Shravan Vasishth (2013), Sentence comprehension in aphasia: A computational evaluation of representational and processing accounts, manuscript, accepted pending revision, Cognitive Science.
• [24] Umesh Patil, Shravan Vasishth, and Richard L. Lewis (2012), Retrieval interference in syntactic processing: The case of reflexive binding in English, manuscript.
• [25] Martin Plummer (2010), JAGS Version 2.2.0 user manual.
• [26] R Development Core Team (2006), R: A language and environment for statistical computing, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, http://www.R-project.org, ISBN 3-900051-07-0.
• [27] David Reitter, Frank Keller, and Johanna D. Moore (2011), A computational cognitive model of syntactic priming, Cognitive Science, 35 (4): 587-637.
• [28] Mehran Taghvaipour (2004), An HPSG analysis of Persian relative clauses, in Stefan Müller, editor, Proceedings of the HPSG-2004 Conference, Center for Computational Linguistics, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, pp. 274-293, CSLI Publications, Stanford.
• [29] Julie Van Dyke and Brian McElree (2006), Retrieval interference in sentence comprehension, Journal of Memory and Language, 55: 157-166.
• [30] Shravan Vasishth, Sven Bruessow, Richard L. Lewis, and Heiner Drenhaus (2008), Processing polarity: How the ungrammatical intrudes on the grammatical, Cognitive Science, 32 (4).
• [31] Shravan Vasishth and Heiner Drenhaus (2011), Locality in German, Dialogue and Discourse, 1: 59-82, http://elanguage.net/journals/index.php/dad/article/view/615.
• [32] Shravan Vasishth and Richard L. Lewis (2006), Argument-head distance and processing complexity: Explaining both locality and antilocality effects, Language, 82 (4): 767-794.
• [33] Shravan Vasishth, Rukshin Shaher, and Narayanan Srinivasan (2012), The role of clefting, word order and given-new ordering in sentence comprehension: Evidence from Hindi, Journal of South Asian Linguistics, 5: 35-56.
• [34] William N. Venables and Brian D. Ripley (2002), Modern Applied Statistics with S-PLUS, Springer, New York.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu ze środków MNiSW, umowa Nr 461252 w ramach programu "Społeczna odpowiedzialność nauki" - moduł: Popularyzacja nauki i promocja sportu (2020).