Syntactic and semantic interference in sentence comprehension: Support from English and German eye-tracking data

Daniela Mertzen, Dario Paape, Brian Dillon, Ralf Engbert, Shravan Vasishth
{"title":"Syntactic and semantic interference in sentence comprehension: Support from English and German eye-tracking data","authors":"Daniela Mertzen, Dario Paape, Brian Dillon, Ralf Engbert, Shravan Vasishth","doi":"10.5070/g60111266","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A long-standing debate in the sentence processing literature concerns the time course of syntactic and semantic information processing in online sentence comprehension. The default assumption in cue-based models of parsing is that syntactic and semantic retrieval cues simultaneously guide dependency resolution. When retrieval cues match multiple items in memory, this leads to similarity-based interference. Both semantic and syntactic interference have been shown to occur in English. However, the relative timing of syntactic vs. semantic interference remains unclear. In this cross-linguistic investigation of the time course of syntactic vs. semantic interference, the data from two eye-tracking during reading experiments (English and German) suggest that the two types of interference can in principle arise simultaneously during retrieval. However, the data also indicate that semantic cues are evaluated with a small timing lag in German compared to English. This cross-linguistic difference between English and German may be due to German having richer morphosyntactic marking than English, resulting in syntactic cues dominating over semantic cues during dependency resolution. More broadly, our cross-linguistic results pose a challenge for the cue-based retrieval model’s default assumption that syntactic and semantic cues are used simultaneously during long-distance dependency formation. Our work also highlights the importance of collecting cross-linguistic data on psycholinguistic phenomena which can potentially advance theory development.","PeriodicalId":164622,"journal":{"name":"Glossa Psycholinguistics","volume":"42 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Glossa Psycholinguistics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/g60111266","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A long-standing debate in the sentence processing literature concerns the time course of syntactic and semantic information processing in online sentence comprehension. The default assumption in cue-based models of parsing is that syntactic and semantic retrieval cues simultaneously guide dependency resolution. When retrieval cues match multiple items in memory, this leads to similarity-based interference. Both semantic and syntactic interference have been shown to occur in English. However, the relative timing of syntactic vs. semantic interference remains unclear. In this cross-linguistic investigation of the time course of syntactic vs. semantic interference, the data from two eye-tracking during reading experiments (English and German) suggest that the two types of interference can in principle arise simultaneously during retrieval. However, the data also indicate that semantic cues are evaluated with a small timing lag in German compared to English. This cross-linguistic difference between English and German may be due to German having richer morphosyntactic marking than English, resulting in syntactic cues dominating over semantic cues during dependency resolution. More broadly, our cross-linguistic results pose a challenge for the cue-based retrieval model’s default assumption that syntactic and semantic cues are used simultaneously during long-distance dependency formation. Our work also highlights the importance of collecting cross-linguistic data on psycholinguistic phenomena which can potentially advance theory development.
句子理解中的句法和语义干扰:来自英语和德语眼动数据的支持
在线句子理解中句法和语义信息加工的时间过程是句子加工文献中一个长期争论的问题。基于线索的解析模型的默认假设是,语法和语义检索线索同时指导依赖项解析。当检索线索匹配记忆中的多个项目时,这会导致基于相似性的干扰。在英语中,语义干扰和句法干扰都有发生。然而,句法干扰和语义干扰的相对时间仍然不清楚。在对语法和语义干扰时间过程的跨语言研究中,两个阅读实验(英语和德语)的眼动追踪数据表明,两种类型的干扰原则上可以在检索过程中同时出现。然而,数据也表明,与英语相比,德语对语义线索的评估有较小的时间滞后。英语和德语之间的这种跨语言差异可能是由于德语比英语具有更丰富的形态句法标记,导致句法线索在依存关系解决过程中占主导地位。更广泛地说,我们的跨语言结果对基于线索的检索模型的默认假设提出了挑战,即句法和语义线索在长距离依赖形成过程中同时被使用。我们的工作还强调了收集心理语言学现象的跨语言数据的重要性,这可能会促进理论的发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信