Skip to main content
Log in

Head position and parsing ambiguity

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

    We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

    Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

A strongly principle-based model of parsing seeks to employ principles of the competence grammar directly in language processing. Within grammatical theory, the Projection Principle holds that each level of syntactic representation is a uniform projection of the lexical properties of heads. With respect to parsing this suggests that a phrasal node cannot be projected until the occurrence of its head and thus constitutes a strong empirical hypothesis concerning the fundamental nature of human language processing. This paper contrasts some cross-linguistic predictions made by a specific Grammarderived parsing model against those of a well-known top-down model whose functional motivation is decidedly nonlinguistic. This latter Minimal Attachment model is found to predict significant difficulty with respect to the processing of languages such as Japanese, which display rather different surface properties than English. This problem is not encountered in a model which recognizes the crucial role of heads in licensing argument structure with respect to Processing as well as Grammar. Cross-linguistic parsing differences are attributed to the linear and structural positions of licensing heads which constitute the primary locus of the cross-linguistic variation which is therefore ultimately to be ascribed directly to the Projection Principle.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abney, S. (1991). On the notions GB-parser and psychological reality. In R. Berwick, S. Abney, and C. Teny (eds.),Principle-based parsing: Computational models, and psycholinguistics. Boston: Reidel, (no page numbers available).

    Google Scholar 

  • Berwick, R., & Weinberg, A. (1984).The Grammatical basis of linguistic performance. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1986a).Knowledge of language, New York: Praeger.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1986b).Barriers. Cambridge, MA: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1989). Some notes on economy of derivation and representation. In I. Laka and A. Mahajan (Eds.),MIT working papers in linguistics 10. (pp. 43–74). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, M. (1990).Principle-based sentence processing: A cross-linguistic account (Research Paper 1). Edinburgh: Human Communication Research Center, University of Edinburgh.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fong, S. (1991). The computational implementation of principle-based parsers. In R. Berwick, S. Abney, and C. Teny (eds.),Principle-based parsing: Computational models and psycholinguistics. Boston: Reidel, (no page numbers available).

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L. (1987). Syntactic processing: Evidence from Dutch.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5.4. 519–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L. (1987). Against lexical generation of syntax. In W. Marslen-Wilson (Ed.),Lexical representation and process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press/Bradford Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L., & Rayner, K. (1988). Parameterizing the language processing system: Leftvs. right-branching within and across languages. In J. Hawkins (Ed.),Explaining language universals (pp. 247–279). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, E. (1991).A computational theory of human linguistic processing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorrell, P. (1991). Subcategorization and sentence processing: In R. Berwick, S. Abney, and C. Teny (eds.),Principle-based parsing: Computational models and psycholinguistics. Boston: Reidel, (no page numbers available).

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, M. (1991). Parsing as deduction: The use of knowledge of language. In R. Berwick, S. Abney, and C. Teny (eds.),Principle-based parsing: Computational models and psycholinguistics. Boston: Reidel, (no page numbers available).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kashket, M. (1991). Parsing Warlpiri, a free-word order language. In R. Berwick, S. Abney, and C. Teny (eds.),Principle-based parsing: Computational models and psycholinguistics. Boston: Reidel, (no page numbers available).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuno, S. (1973).The structure of the Japanese language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazuka, R., & Lust, B. (1988). Why Japanese is not difficult to process: A proposal to integrate parameter setting in Universal Grammar and parsing.NELS, 18, 334–356.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mazuka, R., Itoh, K., Kiritani, S., Niwa, S., Ikejiru, K., and Naito, K. (1989). Processing of Japanese garden path, center-embedded, and multiply-left-embedded sentences.Annual Bulletin of the Research Institute of Logopedics and Phoniatrics (University of Tokyo),23, 187–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • McConnel-Ginet, S. (1982). Adverbs and logical form.Language 58.1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. (1987). Lexical guidance in human parsing: Locus and processing characteristics. In M. Coltheart (Ed.),Attention and performance (Vol. XII). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, B. (1987).Garden path phenomena and the grammatical basis of language processing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, B. (1988). Garden path phenomena and the grammatical basis of language processing.Language 64.3. 539–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, B. (1991). Subjacency in a principle-based parser. In R. Berwick, S. Abney, and C. Teny (eds.),Principle-based parsing: Computational models and psycholinguistics. Boston: Reidel, (no page numbers available).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, B. (in press).Principle-based parsing and processing breakdown. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

  • Pritchett, B., & Reitano, J. (1990).Parsing with on-line principles, a psychologically plausible, object-oriented approach. From theProceedings of COLING '90, Helsinki, Finland.

  • Shibatani, (1977). Grammatical relations and surface cases.Language 53.3.

  • Stabler, E. (in press).The logical approach to syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Wehrli, E. (1988). Parsing with a GB-grammer. In U. Reyle & C. Rohrer, (Eds.),natural Language parsing and linguistic theories. (pp. 177–201). Boston: Reidel.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitman, J. (1989).String vacuous V toCOMP. Paper presented at GLOW 1991, Leiden, Holland.

  • Yamada, Y. (1910).Nihon bunpoo ron. Tokyo: Kasama Shoin.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pritchett, B.L. Head position and parsing ambiguity. J Psycholinguist Res 20, 251–270 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067218

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067218

Keywords

Navigation