| |
Abstract:
A growing number of studies has explored apparent
cross-linguistic differences in the processing of sentences
containing a complex NP followed by a relative clause (RC) which
may permissibly modify the head noun (N1) or the embedded noun (N2)
of the NP, as in (1):
(1) My friend met the [aide]
N1
of the [detective]
N2
[that was investigating the case]
RC.
Speakers of English tend to attach the RC low, to N2, while the
preference for speakers of languages such as Spanish, French,
Dutch, German and a number of others is to attach high, to N1.
These preferences, however, have been found to vary within
languages both at the level of individual participants (Brysbaert
& Mitchell, 1996) and at the level of characteristics internal
to the complex NP of individual experimental items (Gilboy et al.,
1995; Henstra, 1998).
This study focuses on how the length of the attaching RC affects
attachment preferences. Fodor (1998) has proposed that attachment
preferences are partly determined by taking into consideration the
prosodic weight of the attaching constituent vis-à-vis the
host constituent. To test this, sentences with RCs containing two
or more phonological phrases ("long" RCs, see (1)) were contrasted
to sentences with RCs containing no more than one phonological
phrase ("short" RCs, see (2)), using both off- and on-line
measures.
(2) My friend met the [aide]
N1
of the [detective]
N2
[that was fired]
RC.
Off-line, ambiguous target sentences like (1) and (2) were,
overall, likely to be interpreted with the RC referring to the
lower constituent, replicating earlier findings (e.g., those
reported by Cuetos & Mitchell, 1988). Critically, the short-RC
sentences exhibited a statistically reliable low attachment
preference while the long-RC sentences did not.
In the on-line study, target sentences were disambiguated by
number agreement (as shown in (3) and (4) below), in a design fully
crossing length and attachment site. The targets with forced low
attachment were read faster than the those with forced high
attachment only in the short-RC condition, while no reliable
preference was found in the long-RC condition. (Results for the
comprehension questions that immediately followed self-paced
reading of each target sentence will also be discussed.)
(3) My friend met the aides of the detective that was ...
(FORCED LOW)
(4) My friend met the aide of the detectives that was ... (FORCED
HIGH)
Together, these data support Fodor's proposal that relative
clause attachment in English is sensitive to prosodic aspects of
the attaching RC.
References
Brysbaert, M., & Mitchell, D. C. (1996). Modifier attachment
in sentence parsing: Evidence from Dutch.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,
49A, 3, 664-695.
Cuetos, F., & Mitchell, D. C. (1988). Cross-linguistic
differences in parsing: Restrictions on the use of the Late Closure
strategy in Spanish.
Cognition,
30, 73-105.
Fodor, J. D. (1998). Learning to parse and parsing to learn.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 21(5), 1303-1321.
Gilboy, E., Sopena, J. M., Clifton, C., & Frazier, L. (1995).
Argument structure and preferences in the processing of Spanish and
English complex NPs.
Cognition,
54, 131-1677.
Henstra, J.-A. (1998). Relative clause attachment: Complex noun
phrases with a possessive.
Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology.
|
