Abstract
AbstractCataphors precede their antecedents, so they cannot be fully interpreted until those antecedents are encountered. Some researchers propose that cataphors trigger an active search during incremental processing in which the parser predictively posits potential antecedents in upcoming syntactic positions (Kazanina et al., Journal of Memory and Language, 56[3], 384–409, 2007). One characteristic of active search is that it is persistent: If a prediction is disconfirmed in an earlier position, the parser should iteratively search later positions until the predicted element is found. Previous research has assumed, but not established, that antecedent search is persistent. In four experiments in English and Norwegian, we test this hypothesis. Two sentence completion experiments show a strong off-line preference for coreference between a fronted cataphor and the first available argument position (the main subject). When the main subject cannot be the antecedent, participants posit the antecedent in the next closest position: object position. Two self-paced reading studies demonstrate that comprehenders actively expect the antecedent of a fronted cataphor to appear in the main clause subject position, and then successively in object position if the subject does not match the cataphor in gender. Our results therefore support the claim that antecedent search is active and persistent.
Funder
NTNU Norwegian University of Science and Technology
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Experimental and Cognitive Psychology,Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology
Reference47 articles.
1. Ackerman, L. M. (2015). Influences on parsing ambiguity [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Northwestern University.
2. Aoshima, S., Phillips, C., & Weinberg, A. (2004). Processing filler-gap dependencies in a head-final language. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(1), 23–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.03.001
3. Aoshima, S., Yoshida, M., & Phillips, C. (2009). Incremental processing of coreference and binding in Japanese. Syntax, 12(2), 93–134. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9612.2009.00123.x
4. Ariel, M. (1990). Accessing non-phrase antecedents. Routledge.
5. Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008) Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
Cited by
7 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献