Skip to main content
Log in

Context Improves Comprehension of Fronted Objects

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

Abstract

Object-initial clauses (OCs) are associated with more processing difficulties than subject-initial clauses (SCs) in a number of languages (e.g. English, German and Finnish), but a supportive context can reduce or neutralize the difference between SCs and OCs with respect to reading times. Still, it is unresolved how context can affect the comprehension of OCs. In the present self-paced reading study of Danish, we therefore investigated both reading times, comprehension accuracy and response times for OCs and SCs. In line with previous studies on word order processing, OCs in an unsupportive context showed longer reading times than SCs, longer response times and a comprehension accuracy as poor as chance level. A manipulation of context showed no effect of reading time, but a supportive context had a stronger facilitating effect on comprehension (response accuracy and response time) for OCs than for SCs.

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

  • Altmann, G., & Steedman, M. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition, 30, 191–238.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Baayen, R. H. (2008). Analyzing linguistic data. A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  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 

  • Bornkessel, I., & Schlesewsky, M. (2006). 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., & Friederici, A. D. (2003a). Contextual information modulates initial processes of syntactic integration: The role of inter-versus intrasentential predictions. Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition, 29, 871–882.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bornkessel, I., Schlesewsky, M., & Friederici, A. D. (2003b). Eliciting thematic reanalysis effects: The role of syntax-independent information during parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 18, 269–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chafe, W. L. (1976). Givenness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics and point of view. In C. N. Li (Ed.), Subject and topic (pp. 25–56). New York: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christianson, K., & Luke, S. G. (2011). Context strengthens initial misinterpretations of text. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 136–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Croft, W. (2000). Explaining language change: An evolutionary approach. Essex: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dik, S. (1997). The theory of functional grammar. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eberhard, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M., Sedivy, J., & Tanenhaus, M. (1995). Eye movements as a window into real-time spoken language comprehension in natural contexts. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 24, 409–436.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Erteschik-Shir, N. (2005a). On the architecture of topic and focus. In V. Molnár & S. Winkler (Eds.), On the architecture of topic and focus (pp. 33–57). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erteschik-Shir, N. (2005b). Sound patterns of syntax: Object shift. Theoretical Linguistics, 31, 47–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, F. (2003). The misinterpretation of noncanonical sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 47, 164–203.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, F., & Clifton, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 348–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hannay, M. (1991). Pragmatic function assignment and word order variation in a functional grammar of English. Journal of Pragmatics, 16, 131–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harder, P., & Poulsen, S. (2001). Editing for speaking: First position, foregrounding and object fronting in Danish and English. In Ikonicitet og Struktur (pp. 1–22), Netværk for Funktionel Lingvistik, Engelsk Insititut, Københavns Universitet.

  • Hyönä, J., & Hujanen, H. (1997). Effect of word order and case marking on sentence processing in Finnish: An eye fixation analysis. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 50A, 841–858.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 434–446.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kaiser, E., & Trueswell, J. C. (2004). The role of discourse context in the processing of a flexible word-order language. Cognition, 94, 113–147.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lambrecht, K. (1994). Information structure and sentence form. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Mak, W., Vonk, W., & Schriefers, H. (2008). Discourse structure and relative clause processing. Memory & Cognition, 36, 170–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Molnár, V. (2005). On different kinds of contrast. In V. Molnár & S. Winkler (Eds.), The architecture of focus (pp. 197–233). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molnár, V., & Järventausta, M. (2003) Discourse configurationality in Finnish and Hungarian. In J. Hetland, & V. Molnár (Eds.), Structures of focus and grammatical relations Vol. 477 (pp. 231–262). Tübingen: Niemeyer.

  • Poulsen, M. (2008). Acceptability and processing of long-distance dependencies in Danish. Nordic Journal of Linguistics, 31, 73–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, W., Eschman, A., & Zuccolotto, A. (2002). E-Prime reference guide.

  • Slioussar, N. (2011). Processing of a free word order language: The role of syntax and context. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 40, 291–306.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Team, R. D. C. (2010). R: A language and environment for statistical computing, Vienna.

  • Trueswell, J. C., Sekerina, I., Hill, N. M., & Logrip, M. L. (1999). The kindergarten-path effect: Studying on-line sentence processing in young children. Cognition, 73, 89–134.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Vallduví, E. (1993). The informational component. PhD Thesis, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia (Unpublished).

  • Vallduví, E., & Vilkuna, M. (1998). On rheme and kontrast. In P. W. Culicover & L. McNally (Eds.), The limits of syntax (pp. 79–108). London: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vilkuna, M. (1989). Free word order in Finnish. Helsinki: Hakapaino Oy.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Line Burholt Kristensen.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOC 95 KB)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kristensen, L.B., Engberg-Pedersen, E. & Poulsen, M. Context Improves Comprehension of Fronted Objects. J Psycholinguist Res 43, 125–140 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-013-9241-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-013-9241-y

Keywords

Navigation