Prosody Influences Real-Time Processing When Grammar Allows but Plays Less of a Role in Final Interpretation: An Eye-Tracking Study on VP Ellipsis and Stripping.

IF 1.1 2区 文学 Q3 AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY
Haerim Hwang
{"title":"Prosody Influences Real-Time Processing When Grammar Allows but Plays Less of a Role in Final Interpretation: An Eye-Tracking Study on VP Ellipsis and Stripping.","authors":"Haerim Hwang","doi":"10.1177/00238309261477073","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study examines whether prosody affects how people process and interpret two types of sentences that both have missing material but differ in ambiguity. Stripping sentences (e.g., <i>Grandma hugged the kid at home and Grandpa too</i>) are ambiguous because the argument after <i>and</i> can be read as either the subject of the missing verb or the second object of the audible/visible verb. In contrast, verb phrase (VP) ellipsis sentences (e.g., <i>Grandma hugged the kid at home and Grandpa did too</i>) are unambiguous, only allowing a subject reading. In a visual-world eye-tracking experiment, 43 English speakers heard VP ellipsis and Stripping sentences, with either the subject or object in the first conjunct made more prominent through prosody. The analysis of their mouse-click responses shows that prosody did not change their final interpretations: They always preferred the subject reading for VP ellipsis sentences and exhibited no preference for Stripping sentences, no matter which argument was prosodically prominent. The eye-movement data for VP ellipsis sentences also display a consistent pattern of early looks to the subject-reading image. However, the eye-movement data for Stripping sentences reveal a prosody effect: After sentence offset, listeners briefly showed divergent looks toward either the subject- or object-reading image, depending on whether the subject or object carried prosodic prominence. These findings suggest that prosody can influence temporary interpretations during real-time processing but has little impact on final interpretations.</p>","PeriodicalId":51255,"journal":{"name":"Language and Speech","volume":" ","pages":"238309261477073"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language and Speech","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00238309261477073","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examines whether prosody affects how people process and interpret two types of sentences that both have missing material but differ in ambiguity. Stripping sentences (e.g., Grandma hugged the kid at home and Grandpa too) are ambiguous because the argument after and can be read as either the subject of the missing verb or the second object of the audible/visible verb. In contrast, verb phrase (VP) ellipsis sentences (e.g., Grandma hugged the kid at home and Grandpa did too) are unambiguous, only allowing a subject reading. In a visual-world eye-tracking experiment, 43 English speakers heard VP ellipsis and Stripping sentences, with either the subject or object in the first conjunct made more prominent through prosody. The analysis of their mouse-click responses shows that prosody did not change their final interpretations: They always preferred the subject reading for VP ellipsis sentences and exhibited no preference for Stripping sentences, no matter which argument was prosodically prominent. The eye-movement data for VP ellipsis sentences also display a consistent pattern of early looks to the subject-reading image. However, the eye-movement data for Stripping sentences reveal a prosody effect: After sentence offset, listeners briefly showed divergent looks toward either the subject- or object-reading image, depending on whether the subject or object carried prosodic prominence. These findings suggest that prosody can influence temporary interpretations during real-time processing but has little impact on final interpretations.

当语法允许但在最终解释中作用较小时,韵律影响实时加工:副语序省略和剥离的眼动追踪研究。
本研究考察了韵律是否会影响人们处理和解释两种句子的方式,这两种句子都有缺失的材料,但歧义不同。剥离句子(例如,奶奶在家里拥抱了孩子,爷爷也拥抱了孩子)是模棱两可的,因为和之后的论点可以被解读为缺失动词的主语或听觉/视觉动词的第二个宾语。相反,动词短语(VP)省略句(例如,奶奶在家里拥抱了孩子,爷爷也拥抱了孩子)是明确的,只允许一个主题阅读。在一项视觉世界眼球追踪实验中,43名说英语的人听到了VP省略和剥离句子,第一个连词中的主语或宾语通过韵律变得更加突出。对他们鼠标点击反应的分析表明,韵律并没有改变他们的最终解释:无论哪个论点在韵律上突出,他们总是更喜欢主语阅读VP省略句,而没有表现出对剥离句的偏好。副谓语省略句的眼动数据也显示了受试者对阅读图像早期注视的一致模式。然而,剥离句子的眼动数据揭示了韵律效应:在句子偏移后,听者对阅读主体或客体的图像短暂地表现出不同的目光,这取决于主体或客体是否具有韵律突出。这些发现表明,韵律可以影响实时处理过程中的临时解释,但对最终解释的影响很小。
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
Language and Speech
Language and Speech AUDIOLOGY & SPEECH-LANGUAGE PATHOLOGY-
CiteScore
4.00
自引率
5.60%
发文量
39
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Language and Speech is a peer-reviewed journal which provides an international forum for communication among researchers in the disciplines that contribute to our understanding of the production, perception, processing, learning, use, and disorders of speech and language. The journal accepts reports of original research in all these areas.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书