Skip to main content
Log in

The Effects of Syntactic Complexity on Processing Sentences in Noise

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper discusses the influence of stationary (non-fluctuating) noise on processing and understanding of sentences, which vary in their syntactic complexity (with the factors canonicity, embedding, ambiguity). It presents data from two RT-studies with 44 participants testing processing of German sentences in silence and in noise. Results show a stronger impact of noise on the processing of structurally difficult than on syntactically simpler parts of the sentence. This may be explained by a combination of decreased acoustical information and an increased strain on cognitive resources, such as working memory or attention, which is caused by noise. The noise effect for embedded sentences is less than for non-embedded sentences, which may be explained by a benefit from prosodic information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bader M., Bayer J. (2006) Case and linking in language comprehension: Evidence from German. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  • Bader M., Häussler J. (2010) Word order in German: A corpus study. Lingua 120(3): 717–762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bader M., Meng M. (1999) Subject-object ambiguities in German embedded clauses: An across-the-board comparison. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 28: 121–143

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bader M., Meng M., Bayer J., Hopf J.-M. (2000) Syntaktische Funktions-Ambiguitäten im Deutschen: Ein Überblick. Zeitschrift für Sprachwissenschaft 19(1): 34–102

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boothroyd A., Nittrouer S. (1988) Mathematical treatment of context effects in phoneme and word recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 84: 101–114

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bornkessel I., Schlesewsky M. (2006a) The role of contrast in the local licensing of scrambling in German: Evidence from online comprehension. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 18: 1–43

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornkessel I., Schlesewsky M. (2006b) Context-sensitive neural responses to conflict resolution: Electrophysiological evidence from subject–object ambiguities in language comprehension. Brain Research 1098(1): 139–152

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bornkessel-Schlesewsky I., Schlesewsky M. (2009) Processing syntax and morphology: A neurocognitive perspective. Oxford University Press, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronkhorst A. (2000) The cocktail party phenomenon: A review of research on speech intelligibility in multiple-talker conditions. Acta Acustica united with Acustica 86: 117–128

    Google Scholar 

  • Bronkhorst A. W., Brand T., Wagener K. (2002) Evaluation of context effects in sentence recognition. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 111: 2874–2886

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Caplan D., Waters G. S. (1999) Verbal working memory and sentence comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22: 77–94

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Croft W. (1990) Typology and universals. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Daneman M., Carpenter P. A. (1980) Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19: 450–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutscher Wortschatz. Universität Leipzig. http://wortschatz.uni-leipzig.de (as of Jan. 12, 2011).

  • de Vincenzi M. (1998) Reanalysis aspects of movement. In: Fodor J. A., Ferreira F. (Eds.), Reanalysis in sentence processing. Kluwer, Dordrecht, pp 47–71

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, L. M. (1995). The effect of noise and syntactic complexity on listening comprehension. Unpublished M.Sc. thesis, University of British Columbia. Vancouver.

  • dos Santos Sequeira S., Specht K., Hämäläinen H., Hugdahl K. (2008) The effects of background noise on dichotic listening to consonant–vowel syllables. Brain and Language 107(1): 11–15

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg P. (2006a) Das Wort: Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik Band 1 (3rd ed.). Metzler, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenberg P. (2006b) Der Satz: Grundriss der deutschen Grammatik Band 2 (3rd ed.). Metzler, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier L. (1985) Syntactic complexity. In: Dowty D., Karttunen L., Zwicky A. (Eds.), Natural language parsing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 129–189

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier L. (1987) Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In: Coltheart M. (Ed.), The psychology of reading. Erlbaum, Hove, pp 559–586

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier L., Flores d’Arcais G. (1989) Filler driven parsing: A study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language 28: 331–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frazier L., Rayner K. (1982) Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology 14: 178–210

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friederici A., Kotz S., Scott S., Obleser J. (2010) Disentangling syntax and intelligibility in auditory language comprehension. Human Brain Mapping 31: 448–457

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Friedmann N., Gvion A. (2003) Sentence comprehension and working memory limitation in aphasia: A dissociation between semantic-syntactic and phonological reactivation. Brain and Language 86: 23–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Friedmann N. P., Miyake A. (2005) Comparison of four scoring methods for the reading span test. Behavior Research Methods 37(4): 581–590

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson E. (1998) Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68: 1–76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson E. (2000) The dependency locality theory: A distance-based theory of linguistic complexity. In: Miyashita Y., Marantz A., O’Neil W. (Eds.), Image, language, brain. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, pp 95–126

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon P. C., Hendrick R., Levine W. H. (2002) Memory load interference in syntactic processing. Psychological Science 13(5): 425–430

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Greenberg J. (1966) Universals of language. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Grodzinsky Y. (2000) The neurology of syntax: Language use without Broca’s area. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23: 1–21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Grodzinsky Y. (2005) Syntactic dependencies as memorized sequences in the brain. Canadian Journal of Linguistics 50: 241–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haarmann H. J., Kolk H. H. (1994) On-line sensitivity to subject-verb agreement violations in Broca’s aphasics: The role of syntactic complexity and time. Brain and Language 46: 493–516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hemforth, B. (1993). Kognitives Parsing: Repräsentation und Verarbeitung sprachlichen Wissens. Sankt Augustin: Infix.

  • Just M. A., Carpenter P. A. (1992) A capacity theory of comprehension: Individual differences in working memory. Psychological Review 99: 122–149

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaan E. (2002) Investigating the effects of distance and number interference in processing subject-verb dependencies: An ERP study. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 31: 165–193

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kalikow D. N., Stevens K. N., Elliott L. L. (1977) Development of a test of speech intelligibility in noise using sentence materials with controlled word predictability. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 61(5): 1337–1351

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kamide Y., Scheepers C., Altmann G. T. M. (2003) Integration of syntactic and semantic information in predictive processing: Cross-linguistic evidence from German and English. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32: 37–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kilborn K., Moss H. (1996) Word monitoring. Language and Cognitive Processes 11: 689–694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kjellberg A. (2004) Effects of reverberation time on the cognitive load in speech communication: Theoretical considerations. Noise and Health 7(25): 11–21

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kollmeier B., Wesselkamp M. (1997) Development and evaluation of a German sentence test for objective and subjective speech intelligibility assessment. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 102(4): 2412–2421

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis R., Vasishth S. (2005) An activation-based model of sentence processing as skilled memory retrieval. Cognitive Science 29: 375–419

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lewis R. L., Vasishth S., van Dyke J. A. (2006) Computational principles of working memory in sentence comprehension. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10: 447–454

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lyxell B., Rönnberg J. (1993) The effects of background noise and working memory capacity on speechreading performance. Scandinavian Audiology 22: 67–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson W., Tyler L. K. (1980) The temporal structure of spoken language understanding. Cognition 8: 1–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Martin C. R., Shelton J. R., Yaffee L. S. (1994) Language processing and working memory: Neuropsychological evidence for separate phonological and semantic capacities. Journal of Memory and Language 33: 83–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mattys S. L., Brooks J., Cooke M. (2009) Recognizing speech under a processing load: Dissociating energetic from informational factors. Cognitive Psychology 59: 203–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • McElree B., Foraker S., Dyer L. (2003) Memory structures that subserve sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory & Language 48: 67–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller S. (2010) Grammatiktheorie. Stauffenburg Verlag, Stuttgart

    Google Scholar 

  • Pappert S., Pechmann T. (2012) The impact of case and prosody on the availability of argument structures. In: Lamers M., de Swart P. (Eds.), Case, word order, and prominence: Psycholinguistic and theoretical approaches to argument structure. Springer, Berlin, pp 173–186

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Plomp R., Mimpen A. M. (1979) Improving the reliability of testing the speech reception threshold for sentences. Audiology 18: 43–52

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rizzi L. (1990) Relativized minimality. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  • Rönnberg J., Rudner M., Lunner T., Zekveld A. A. (2010) When cognition kicks in: Working memory and speech understanding in noise. Noise and Health 12: 263–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Salisbury D. F., Desantis M. A., Shenton M. E., McCarley R. W. (2002) The effect of background noise on P300 to suprathreshold stimuli. Psychophysiology 39: 111–115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schriefers H., Friederici A. D., Kühn K. (1995) The processing of locally ambiguous relative clauses in German. Journal of Memory and Language 34: 499–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro L. P., Zurif E., Grimshaw J. (1987) Sentence processing and the mental representation of verbs. Cognition 27: 219–246

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro L.P., Zurif E.B., Grimshaw J. (1989) Verb processing during sentence comprehension: Contextual impenetrability. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 18(2): 223–243

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Uslar, V. N., Brand, T., Hanke, M., Carroll, R., Ruigendijk, E., Hamann, C., et al. (2010). Does sentence complexity interfere with intelligibility in noise? Evaluation of the Oldenburg Linguistically and Audiologically Controlled Sentence Test (OLACS). In Proceedings of interspeech (pp. 2482–2485). Makuhari, Chiba, Japan.

  • Uslar V., Ruigendijk E., Hamann C., Brand T., Kollmeier B. (2011) How does linguistic complexity influence intelligibility in a German audiometric sentence intelligibility test?. International Journal of Audiology 50: 621–631

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wagener K., Kühnel V., Kollmeier B. (1999a) Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache I: Design des Oldenburger Satztests. Zeitschrift für Audiologie/ Audiological Acoustics 38: 4–15

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagener K., Brand T., Kollmeier B. (1999b) Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests für die Deutsche Sprache II: Optimierung des Oldenburger Satztests. Zeitschrift für Audiologie/ Audiological Acoustics 38: 44–56

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagener K., Brand T., Kollmeier B. (1999c) Entwicklung und Evaluation eines Satztests für die deutsche Sprache III: Evaluation des Oldenburger Satztests. Zeitschrift für Audiologie/ Audiological Acoustics 38: 86–95

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagener K., Josvassen J., Ardenkjær R. (2003) Design, optimization and evaluation of a Danish sentence test in noise. International Journal of Audiology 42(1): 10–17

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Weskott, T., Hörnig, R., Fanselow, G., & Kliegl, R. (2009). Strong contextual licensing of German marked OVS word order. Poster presented at the 15th Annual Conference of Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing (AMLaP). Universidad Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona. September 7–9, 2009. Barcelona.

  • Wingfield A., Peelle J. E., Grossman M. (2003) Speech rate and syntactic complexity as multiplicative factors in speech comprehension by young and older adults. Aging and Neuropsychological Cognition 10: 310–322

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wingfield A., McCoy S. L., Peelle J. E., Tun P. A., Cox L. C. (2006) Effects of adult aging and hearing loss on comprehension of rapid speech varying in syntactic complexity. Journal of the American Academy of Audiology 17: 487–497

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yampolsky S., Waters G., Caplan D., Matthies M., Chiu P. (2002) Effects of acoustic degradation on syntactic processing: Implications for the nature of the resource system used in language processing. Brain & Cognition 48(2–3): 617–625

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rebecca Carroll.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Carroll, R., Ruigendijk, E. The Effects of Syntactic Complexity on Processing Sentences in Noise. J Psycholinguist Res 42, 139–159 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-012-9213-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-012-9213-7

Keywords

Navigation