The primary goal of this dissertation is to characterize the relative strength of two of the influences on the parser’s behavior during ambiguity resolution: coreference dependency formation and verb frame preference. I find that coreference dependency formation exerts a stronger influence on the parser than does verb frame preference, even when verb frame preference is maximized in transitively biased frames.
Previous studies have shown local attachment bias initially directs the parser to an embedded object analysis in sentences like (1), in which the DP Annie’s melody is locally ambiguous between the embedded object (EO)/matrix subject (MS) analyses (Ferreira and Henderson, 1990).
(1) Whenever she was trying to casually hum Annie’s melody was beautiful.
Additionally, (1) contains a cataphoric pronoun she which triggers an active search for an antecedent, whereby the parser seeks the antecedent only in grammatically sanctioned positions, such as where the antecedent is not c-commanded by the pronoun (Kazanina et al., 2007; van Gompel and Liversedge, 2003). In (1), the closest potential antecedent is Annie. However, it can be the antecedent only if the DP that contains it is analyzed as the MS, thus outside the whenever-clause and not c-commanded by she. A bias toward an early cataphoric dependency formation could lead the parser to analyze the ambiguous DP as the MS. In (1), there is a bias toward a MS analysis from the antecedent search in addition to a bias toward the local attachment EO analysis.
I find that, regardless of the transitivity bias of the verb in the position of hums, the parser forms a dependency between the pronoun she and Annie. This indicates that dependency formation can supersede verb frame preferences and any default preference the parser may have toward local attachment (Phillips and Gibson, 1997). Moreover, I also observe effects attributable to both the MS and EO parses. This suggests that the parser builds both alternatives and maintains them in parallel. From this, I conclude that the parser prioritizes information from an ongoing dependency search over lexical properties during ambiguity resolution.
|Commitee:||Goldrick, Matthew, Kazanina, Nina|
|School Location:||United States -- Illinois|
|Source:||DAI-A 77/05(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Linguistics, Cognitive psychology|
|Keywords:||Ambiguity, Coreference, Dependency formation, Parsing, Psycholinguistics, Sentence processing|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be