Advertisement

Journal of Psycholinguistic Research

, Volume 35, Issue 3, pp 233–244 | Cite as

Time-Course of Semantic Composition: The Case of Aspectual Coercion

  • Maria Mercedes Piñango
  • Aaron Winnick
  • Rashad Ullah
  • Edgar Zurif
Original Article

Abstract

We examine the time-course of semantic structure formation during real-time sentence comprehension. We do this through the lens of aspectual coercion, a semantic combinatorial operation that lacks morpho-syntactic reflections, yet is indispensable for sentence interpretation. We describe two experiments. Experiment 1 replicates the results of a previously published study (Piñango, Zurif, & Jackendoff, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 28(4), 395–414 1999) showing that the cost of implementing aspectual coercion is detectable as late as 250 ms after the operation is licensed. Experiment 2 expands the window of observation by revealing that the implementation of aspectual coercion is not detectable immediately upon its being licensed, that is, at the point at which the syntactic representation is assumed to be fully formed. These findings suggest a dissociation in the integration of information, in which semantic composition—even mandatory and automatic semantic composition—takes time to develop after it is syntactically licensed to do so.

Keywords

Time-course of integration Semantic processing Aspectual coercion Type shifting Syntax-semantics correspondence 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Briscoe, E., Copestake, A., & Bougarev, B. (1990). Enjoy the paper: Lexical semantics via lexicology. In proceedings of the 13th international conference on Computational Linguistics, Helsinki, 42–47.Google Scholar
  2. Chierchia G. (1984). Topics in the syntax and semantics of infinitives and gerunds. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MAGoogle Scholar
  3. De Swart H. (1998). Aspect shift and coercion. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 16:347–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Jackendoff R. (1997). The architecture of the language faculty. Linguistic inquiry monograph. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  5. Klein E., Sag I. (1985). Type-driven translation. Linguistics and Philosophy 8:163–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. McElree B., Griffith T. (1995). Syntactic and thematic processing in sentence comprehension: Evidence for a temporal dissociation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 21:134–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Moens, M., & Steedman, M. (1987). Temporal ontology in natural language. In 25th ACL Meeting, Stanford, CA, pp. 1–7Google Scholar
  8. Partee, B., & Roth, M. (1983). Generalized conjunction and type ambiguity in meaning, use and interpretation of language. Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  9. Piñango M.M., Zurif E., Jackendoff R. (1999). Real-time processing implications of aspectual coercion at the syntax-semantics interface. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 28(4):395–414PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Pustejovsky J. (1991). The generative Lexicon. Computational Linguistics 17:409–441Google Scholar
  11. Pustejovsky J. (1995). The generative lexicon. MIT Press, Cambridge, MAGoogle Scholar
  12. Shapiro L.P., Levine B. (1990). Verb processing during sentence comprehension in aphasia. Brain and Language 38:21–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Shapiro L.P., Zurif E., Grimshaw J. (1987). Sentence processing and the mental representation of verbs. Cognition 27:219–246PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shapiro L.P., Zurif E., Grimshaw J. (1989). Verb representation and sentence processing: contextual impenetrability. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 18:223–243PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Swinney, D., & Fodor, J. D. (Eds.). (1989). Journal of Psycholinguistic Research (Special issue on sentence processing), 18(1).Google Scholar
  16. Swinney D., Zurif E. (1995). Syntactic processing in aphasia. Brain and Language 50:225–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Todorova, M., Straub, K., Badecker, W., & Frank, R. (2000). Aspectual coercion and online computation of sentential aspect. Cognitive Science Society Annual Meeting, Philadelphia, PAGoogle Scholar
  18. Vendler Z. (1967). Linguistics in philosophy. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  19. Verkuyl H. (1993). A theory of aspectuality. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  20. Verkuyl H.J. (1989). Aspectual classes and aspectual compostion. Linguistics and Philosophy 12:39–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria Mercedes Piñango
    • 1
  • Aaron Winnick
    • 2
  • Rashad Ullah
    • 2
  • Edgar Zurif
    • 3
  1. 1.Yale UniversityNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.Brandeis UniversityWalthamUSA
  3. 3.University of CaliforniaSan DiegoUSA

Personalised recommendations