English
 
Help Privacy Policy Disclaimer
  Advanced SearchBrowse

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT
  In defense of competition during syntactic ambiguity resolution

Vosse, T., & Kempen, G. (2009). In defense of competition during syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 38(1), 1-9. doi:10.1007/s10936-008-9075-1.

Item is

Files

show Files
hide Files
:
Vosse-Kempen-Competition-JoPR2009.pdf (Publisher version), 224KB
Name:
Vosse-Kempen-Competition-JoPR2009.pdf
Description:
-
OA-Status:
Visibility:
Public
MIME-Type / Checksum:
application/pdf
Technical Metadata:
Copyright Date:
2008
Copyright Info:
© The Author(s) 2008
License:
-

Locators

show

Creators

show
hide
 Creators:
Vosse, Theo1, Author
Kempen, Gerard2, Author           
Affiliations:
1FC Donders Institute for Cognitive neuroimaging, ou_persistent22              
2Other Research, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society, Nijmegen, NL, ou_55217              

Content

show
hide
Free keywords: Syntactic processing, Sentence comprehension, Ambiguity resolution, Competition, Reanalysis
 Abstract: In a recent series of publications (Traxler et al. J Mem Lang 39:558–592, 1998; Van Gompel et al. J Mem Lang 52:284–307, 2005; see also Van Gompel et al. (In: Kennedy, et al.(eds) Reading as a perceptual process, Oxford, Elsevier pp 621–648, 2000); Van Gompel et al. J Mem Lang 45:225–258, 2001) eye tracking data are reported showing that globally ambiguous (GA) sentences are read faster than locally ambiguous (LA) counterparts. They argue that these data rule out “constraint-based” models where syntactic and conceptual processors operate concurrently and syntactic ambiguity resolution is accomplished by competition. Such models predict the opposite pattern of reading times. However, this argument against competition is valid only in conjunction with two standard assumptions in current constraint-based models of sentence comprehension: (1) that syntactic competitions (e.g., Which is the best attachment site of the incoming constituent?) are pooled together with conceptual competitions (e.g., Which attachment site entails the most plausible meaning?), and (2) that the duration of a competition is a function of the overall (pooled) quality score obtained by each competitor. We argue that it is not necessary to abandon competition as a successful basis for explaining parsing phenomena and that the above-mentioned reading time data can be accounted for by a parallel-interactive model with conceptual and syntactic processors that do not pool their quality scores together. Within the individual linguistic modules, decision-making can very well be competition-based.

Details

show
hide
Language(s):
 Dates: 20082009
 Publication Status: Issued
 Pages: 9
 Publishing info: -
 Table of Contents: -
 Rev. Type: Peer
 Degree: -

Event

show

Legal Case

show

Project information

show

Source 1

show
hide
Title: Journal of Psycholinguistic Research
Source Genre: Journal
 Creator(s):
Affiliations:
Publ. Info: New York : Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers [etc.]
Pages: - Volume / Issue: 38 (1) Sequence Number: - Start / End Page: 1 - 9 Identifier: Other: 954925462140
ISSN: 0090-6905