Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-22dnz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T23:08:48.815Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of discourse processing with regard to syntactic and semantic cues: A competition model study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2004

I-RU SU
I-RU SU
Affiliation:
National Tsing Hua University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Based on Bates and MacWhinney's competition model, the present study aims to examine the effects of discourse context on sentence interpretation. In my previous study it was found that both Chinese and English monolinguals paid less attention to context than to intrasentential cues that have been identified as the determinants for Chinese and English sentence processing. The conclusions obtained in that study have to be considered tentative because the contextual sentences were short and might not have been sufficiently biasing toward the intended interpretation. Hence, the present study was undertaken to further examine the context effects by elaborating the contents of the contextual sentences. The results show that English native speakers rely on discourse context in interpreting their native language to a greater extent than the previous research has suggested and that Chinese native speakers make use of context information to a greater degree than do their English counterparts.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , October 2004 , pp. 587 - 601
Copyright
© 2004 Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Bates E., & MacWhinney B. 1981. Second language acquisition from a functionalist perspective: Pragmatic, semantic, and perceptual strategies. In H. Winitz (Ed.), Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences Conference on Native and Foreign Language Acquisition (pp. 190– 214). New York: Academy Press.
Bates E., & MacWhinney B. 1989. Functionalism and the competition model. In B. MacWhinney & E. Bates (Eds.), The cross-linguistic study of sentence processing (pp. 3– 73). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bates E., McNew S., MacWhinney B., Devescovi A., & Smith S. 1982. Functional constraints on sentence-processing: A cross-linguistic study. Cognition, 11, 245– 299.Google Scholar
Britt M., Perfetti C., Garrod S., & Rayner K. 1992. Parsing in discourse: Context effects and their limits. Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 293– 314.Google Scholar
Davison A. & Lutz R. 1985. Measuring syntactic complexity relative to discourse context. In D. Dowty, L. Karttunen, & A. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing: Psychological, computational, and theoretical perspectives (pp. 26– 66). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ferreira F., & Clifton C. 1986. The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 248– 368.Google Scholar
Ferreira F., & Henderson M. 1990. Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movement and word-by-word self-paced reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16, 555– 568.Google Scholar
Gass S. 1987. The resolution of conflicts among competing systems: A bi-directional perspective. Applied Psycholinguistics, 8, 329– 350.Google Scholar
Hargrove P., & Panagos J. 1982. Role saliency cues and children's sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 11, 217– 228.Google Scholar
Holmes V. M. 1984. Parsing strategies and discourse context. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 13, 237– 257.Google Scholar
Li P., Bates E., Liu H., & MacWhinney B. 1993. Processing a language without inflections: A reaction time study of sentence interpretation in Chinese. Journal of Memory and Language, 32, 169– 192.Google Scholar
Liu H., Bates E., & Li P. 1992. Sentence interpretation in bilingual speakers of English and Chinese. Applied Psycholinguistics, 13, 451– 484.Google Scholar
Liversedge S., Pickering M., Branigan H., & Gompel R. 1998. Processing arguments and adjuncts in isolation and context: The case of by-phrase ambiguities in passives. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 24, 461– 475.Google Scholar
MacWhinney B., Bates E., & Kligel R. 1984. Cue validity and sentence interpretation in English, German and Italian. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 127– 150.Google Scholar
MacWhinney B., & Bates E. 1987. Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanism of language acquisition (pp. 157– 193). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlaum.
Mitchell D., Corley M., & Garnham A. 1992. Effects of context in human sentence parsing: Evidence against a discourse-based proposal mechanism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 69– 88.Google Scholar
Su I. 2001a. Transfer of sentence processing strategies: A comparison of L2 learners of Chinese and English. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 83– 112.Google Scholar
Su I. 2001b. Context effects on sentence processing: A study based on the Competition Model. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22, 167– 189.Google Scholar