|
Abstract:
It has been proposed that the on-line comprehension
difficulty at an incoming word can be partially explained by the
distance between the incoming word and the point(s) to which it
integrates in the existing sentence structure (Gibson, 1998;
Stevenson, 1994). Gibson (1998) and Warren & Gibson (1999) have
proposed that one potential measure of distance is discourse
referents: count new discourse referents between endpoints of an
integration.We explore an additional discourse-based distance
measure: new predications. Specifically, we investigate the effects
of adjectives and thematic prepositions on sentence complexity.
Some evidence that this may be the case comes from the
processing of ambiguous sentence strings in Spanish and French. In
particular, if a preposition separating two potential NP sites for
a relative clause is predicative such as "con" in Spanish ("with")
then there is a stronger preference to attach the relative clause
to the more local NP site than if the intervening preposition is
thematically empty such as Spanish "de" ("of") (Gilboy, Sopena,
Clifton & Frazier, 1995; De Vincenzi & Job, 1995). It is
possible that this local attachment preference is driven by the
integration distances in the two conditions. If predications are a
measure of distance, integrating the relative clause with the high
attachment site will be more difficult when there is an intervening
predicative preposition ("with") then when there is an intervening
nonpredicative preposition ("of").
We investigated whether adjectives and predicative prepositions
cause increase in integration cost as measured by reading times in
unambiguous sentences in a self-paced reading task. Two factors
were crossed: (1) the presence or absence of an adjective modifying
the embedded subject and (2) the predication type of the
preposition in the relative clause. The items in the preposition
conditions were controlled through a plausibility survey. In the
self-paced reading task, we compared reading times at the embedded
verb and main verb in sentences like example (1) below. In the
predicative preposition conditions, the preposition separating the
NPs "the fan" and "the movie" is "at", which is a modifier that is
represented in discourse structure by a predicate independent of
the representations for "fan" and "movie". In the non-predicative
preposition conditions, the preposition separating the two NPs is
"of." It introduces the argument of "fan" and has no independent
representation in discourse structure. If intervening discourse
predicates cause an increment in linguistic integration cost, then
the verb phrases "had noticed" and "was" will be read more slowly
in the predicative preposition conditions than in the
non-predicative preposition conditions. The theory also predicts
that the conditions with adjectives ("eccentric") should be read
more slowly then those without adjectives. Reading times at the
verbs suggest that this is the case. Reading times at the embedded
and main verbs were significantly longer when there was an extra
intervening prepositional predication between the verbs and the
subjects and there was a nonsignificant trend of slower reading
times at the same region in the conditions that had an extra
intervening adjective. Results suggest that predications are an
additional component of integration distance.
Example 1
a. No adjective / Predicative preposition
The director who the fan at the movie had noticed was more than
happy to sign an autograph.
b. No adjective / Non-predicative preposition
The director who the fan of the movie had noticed was more than
happy to sign an autograph.
c. Adjective / Predicative preposition
The director who the eccentric fan at the movie had noticed was
more than happy to sign an autograph.
d. Adjective / Non-predicative preposition
The director who the eccentric fan of the movie had noticed was
more than happy to sign an autograph.
|
