Information structure expectations in sentence comprehension

被引:45
作者
Carlson, Katy [1 ]
Dickey, Michael Walsh [2 ]
Frazier, Lyn [3 ]
Clifton, Charles, Jr. [3 ]
机构
[1] Morehead State Univ, Dept English Foreign Lauguages & Philosophy, Morehead, KY 40351 USA
[2] Univ Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA USA
[3] Univ Massachusetts, Amherst, MA 01003 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会; 美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
Sentence processing; Prosody; Information structure; Ellipsis; Sluicing; RELATIVE CLAUSE SENTENCES; NOUN-PHRASE ANAPHORA; EYE-MOVEMENTS; LINGUISTIC FOCUS; AMBIGUITIES; ENGLISH; ACCENT; REPRESENTATIONS; DISCOURSE; PROSODY;
D O I
10.1080/17470210701880171
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
In English, new information typically appears late in the sentence, as does primary accent. Because of this tendency, perceivers might expect the final constituent or constituents of a sentence to contain informational focus. This expectation should in turn affect how they comprehend focus-sensitive constructions such as ellipsis sentences. Results from four experiments on sluicing sentences (e.g., The mobster implicated The thug, but we can't find aut who else) Suggest that perceivers do prefer to place focus late in the sentence, though that preference can be mitigated by prosodic information (pitch accents, Experiment 2) or syntactic information (clefted sentences, Experiment 3) indicating that focus is located elsewhere. Furthermore, it is not necessarily the direct object, but the informationally focused constituent that is the preferred antecedent (Experiment 4). Expectations regarding the information structure of a sentence, which are only partly cancellable by means of overt focus markets, may explain persistent biases in ellipsis resolution.
引用
收藏
页码:114 / 139
页数:26
相关论文
共 74 条
[1]   Noun-phrase anaphora and focus: The informational load hypothesis [J].
Almor, A .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1999, 106 (04) :748-765
[2]   Late closure in context [J].
Altmann, GTM ;
van Nice, KY ;
Garnham, A ;
Henstra, JA .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 1998, 38 (04) :459-484
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1995, The Handbook of Phonological Theory, DOI DOI 10.1111/B.9780631201267.1996.00018.X
[4]  
[Anonymous], COGN NEUR NEW YORK C
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1992 INT C SPOK LANG
[6]  
ATLAS J., 1981, RADICAL PRAGMATICS, P1
[7]  
BARTELS C, 1996, UMOP, V19, P1
[8]  
Beckman Mary, 1997, GUIDELINES TOBI TRAN
[9]  
Beckman Mary E., 1986, Phonology Yearbook, V3, P255, DOI [https://doi.org/10.1017/s095267570000066x, DOI 10.1017/S095267570000066X]
[10]  
Beckman MaryE., 2006, Prosodic typology: The phonology of intonation and phrasing, P9