Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Processing local and unbounded dependencies: A unified account

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

Abstract

This paper proposes an account of incremental sentence processing and the initial stage of syntactic ambiguity resolution, based on the claim that the processor seeks to provide semantic interpretations for sentence fragments as soon as it possibly can. In this model, there is no fundamental distinction between local and unbounded dependencies. The processor employs a version of categorial grammar based on dependency grammar, in which dependency constituents are derived from dependencies between words and are permitted to overlap. The processor seeks to form dependency constituents as soon as it can, and to give interpretations to these fragments immediately. The initial stage of ambiguity resolution is determined by theprinciple of dependency formation, under which the processor automatically chooses an analysis that allows a single dependency constituent to be formed in preference to one that does not. The motivation is semantic: Such an analysis maximizes the amount of incremental interpretation that is possible. But if more than one analysis is compatible with the formation of a single constituent, the processor can appeal to a range of sources of nonsyntactic information in making its choice. I show how this account can capture a range of psycholinguistic evidence without positing any fundamental distinction between local and unbounded dependencies.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

  • Abney, S. (1989). A computational model of human parsing.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 129–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adams, B., Clifton, C., & Mitchell, D. (1992). Lexical guidance in sentence processing: Further support for a filtering account. Paper presented at the Psychonomics Society Meeting St. Louis.

  • Ades, A., & Steedman, M. J. (1982). On the order of words.Linguistics and Philosophy, 4, 517–588.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajdukiewicz, K. (1935). Die syntakische Konnexität.Studia Philosophia, 1, 1–27. (Translated as Syntactic connection, in S. McCall, (Ed.),Polish Logic: 1920–1939, pp. 207–231). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Altmann, G. T. M., Garnham, A., & Dennis, Y. I. L. (1992). Avoiding the garden path: Eye-movements in context.Journal of Memory and Language, 31, 685–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Hillel, Y. (1953). A quasi-arithmetical notation for syntactic description.Language, 29, 47–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barry, G. (1992).Derivation and structure in categorial grammar. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.

  • Barry, G., & Pickering, M. (1990). Dependency and constituency in categorial grammar. In G. Barry & G. Morrill (eds.),Edinburgh working papers in cognitive science: Vol. 5. Studies in categorial grammar, Edinburgh Centre for Cognitive Science, University of Edinburgh.

  • Beach, C. (1991). The interpretation of prosodic patterns at points of syntactic structure ambiguity: Evidence for cue trading relations.Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 644–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bever, T. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In J. R. Hayes (Ed.),Cognition and the development of language. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloomfield, L. (1933).Language. New York: Holt, Reinhart and Winston.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branigan, H., Pickering, M. J., & Stewart, A. (1994).Syntactic priming in language comprehension. Poster presented at The Seventh CUNY Sentence Processing Conference, New York, March 1994.

  • Burgess, C. (1991).Interaction of semantic, syntactic, and visual factors in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Rochester, Rochester, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burgess, C., & Tanenhaus, M. (1992).The interaction of semantic and parafoveal information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Carreiras, M., & Clifton, C. (in press). Relative clause interpretation preferences in Spanish and English.Language and Speech.

  • Chater, N., Pickering, M., & Milward, D. (1994).What is incremental interpretation? Unpublished Manuscript.

  • Chomsky, N. (1965).Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA.: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clifton, C. (1993). Thematic roles in sentence parsing.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 222–246.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Clifton, C., & Frazier, L. (1989). Comprehending sentences with long distance dependencies. In G. Carlson and M. Tanenhaus, (Eds.),Linguistic structure in language processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crain, S., & Fodor, J. D. (1985). How can grammars help parsers? In D. Dowty, L. Karttunen, and A. Zwicky (Eds.),Natural language parsing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crain, S., & Steedman, M. J. (1985). On not being led up the garden path: The use of context by the psychological parser. In D. Dowty, L. Karttunen, & A. Zwicky (Eds.),Natural language parsing. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuetos, F., & Mitchell, D. (1988). Cross-linguistic differences in attachment preferences: Restrictions on the use of the late closure strategy in Spanish.Cognition, 30, 73–105.

    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 

  • Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. (1990). The use of verb information in syntactic parsing: A comparison of evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 16, 555–568.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. (1991a). Recovery from misanalyses of garden-path sentences.Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 725–745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. (1991b). How is verb information used during syntactic parsing? In G. B. Simpson (Ed.),Understanding word and sentence. Amsterdam, Holland: North-Holland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fodor, J. D. (1978). Parsing strategies and constraints on transformations.Linguistic Inquiry, 9, 427–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, M., Bresnan, J. W., & Kaplan, R. M. (1982). A competence based theory of syntactic closure. In J. D. Bresnan (Ed.),The Mental Representation of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L. (1979).On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Bloomington: Indiana University Linguistics Club.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing. In M. Coltheart (Ed.),Attention and Performance XII. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L., & Fodor, J. D. (1978). The sausage machine: a new two-stage parsing model.Cognition, 6, 291–325.

    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 

  • Frazier, L., Taft, L., Roeper, T., Clifton, C., & Ehrlich, K. (1984) Parallel structure: A source of facilitation in sentence comprehension.Memory & Cognition, 12, 430–431.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gaifman, H. (1965). Dependency systems and phrase structure systems.Information and Control. 8, 304–337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garnsey, S. M., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Chapman, R. M. (1989). Evoked potentials and the study of sentence comprehension.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 18, 51–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, E. (1991).A computational theory of linguistic processing: memory limitations and processing breakdown. Unpublished doctoral dissociation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, E., & Hickok, G. (1993). Sentence processing with empty categories.Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 147–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorrell, P. (1993). Evaluating the direct association hypothesis: A reply to Pickering and Barry (1991).Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 199–246.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorrell, P. (in press).Syntax and perception. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

  • Haddock, N. (1989). Computational models of incremental semantic interpretation.Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 337–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hays, D. (1964). Dependency grammar: A formalism and some observations.Language, 40, 511–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickok, G. (1993). Parallel parsing: Evidence from reactivation in garden path sentences.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 239–250.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hickok, G., Canseco-Gonzalez, E., Zurif, E., & Grimshaw, J. (1991). Modularity in locating gaps. Poster presented at 1991 CUNY Conference, Rochester, NY.

  • Holmes, V. M., Kennedy, A., & Murray, W. (1987). Syntactic structure and the garden path.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 277–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, R. A. (1984).Word grammar. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hudson, R. A. (1990).English word grammar. Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, R. (1972).Semantic interpretation in generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff, R. (1977).X' syntax: A study of phrase structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, E., & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar.Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kennedy, A., Murray, W., Jennings, F., & Reid, C. (1989). Parsing complements: Comments on the generality of the principle of minimal attachment.Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 51–76.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimball, J. (1973). Seven principles of surface structure parsing in natural language.Cognition, 2, 15–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lambek, J. (1958). The mathematics of sentence structure.American Mathematical Monthly, 65, 154–170.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, M. C. (1994). Probabilistic constraints and syntactic ambiguity resolution.Language and Cognitive Processes, 9, 157–201.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N., & Seidenberg, M. (1993).The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. (Beckman Institute Cognitive Science Technical Report UIUC-CI-CS-93-13). Urbana: University of Illinois.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcus, M. (1980).A theory of syntactic recognition for natural language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1973). Linguistic structure and speech shadowing at very short latencies.Nature, 244, 522–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (1975). Sentence perception as an interactive parallel process.Science, 189, 226–228.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marslen-Wilson, W. D., Tyler, L. K., Warren, P., Grenier, P., & Lee, C. S. (1992). Prosodic effects in minimal attachment.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45A, 73–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matthews, P. (1981).Syntax. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehler, J., & Carey, P. (1967). Role of surface and base structure in the perception of sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 6, 335–338.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D., & Cuetos, F. (1991).The origins of parsing strategies. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Moortgat, M. (1988).Categorial investigations: Logical and linguistic aspects of the lambek calculus. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ni, W., & Crain, S. (1990). How to resolve structural ambiguities.Proceedings of the 20th Meeting of the North Eastern Linguistics Society. Pittsburgh.

  • Nicol, J., & Pickering, M. (1993). Processing syntactically ambiguous sentences: Evidence from semantic priming.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research.22, 207–237.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension.Journal of Pyscholinguistic Research, 18, 5–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Perfetti, C. (1990). The cooperative language processors: Semantic influences in an autonomous syntax. In D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d'Arcais, and K. Rayner, (Eds.),Comprehension processes in reading. (pp. 205–230. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, M. J. (1991).Processing dependencies. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Edinburgh.

  • Pickering, M. J. (1993). Direct association and sentence processing: A reply to Gorrell and to Gibson and Hickok.Language and Cognitive Processes, 8, 163–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, M. J., & Barry, G. (1991). Sentence processing without empty categories.Language and Cognitive Processes, 6, 229–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, M. J., & Barry, G. (1993). Dependency categorial grammar and coordination.Linguistics, 31, 855–902.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. (1994).Plausibility and recovery from garden paths. Manuscript submitted for publication.

  • Pollard, C., & Sag, I. A. (1987).Information-based syntax and semantics. Stanford, CA.: CSLI.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, C., & Sag, I. A. (1993).Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Stanford, CA, and Chicago: CSLI and University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, B. (1988). Garden path phenomena and the grammatical basis of language processing.Language, 64, 539–576.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, B. (1992).Grammatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pulman, S. G. (1986). Grammars, parsers and memory limitations.Language and Cognitive Processes, 1, 197–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, K., Carlson, M., & Frazier, L. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biassed sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22, 358–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rayner, K., & Frazier, L. (1987). Parsing temporarily ambiguous complements.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 657–673.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheiber, S., & Johnson, M. (1993). Variations on incremental interpretation.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 287–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spivey-Knowlton, M., Trueswell, J., & Tanenhaus, M. (1993). Context and syntactic ambiguity resolution.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 276–309.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Stabler, E. (1991). Avoid the pedestrian's paradox. In R. Berwick, S. Abney, & C. Tenny, (Eds.),Principle-based parsing: Computation and psycholinguistics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, M. J. (1987). Combinatory grammars and parasitic gaps.Natural Language and Linguistic Theory, 5, 403–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steedman M. J. (1989). Grammar, interpretation and processing from the lexicon. In W. Marslen-Wilson (Ed.).Lexical representation and process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steedman, M. J. (1992).Grammars and processors. (Tech. Rep. MS-CIS-92-52). Philadelphia: Department of Computer and Information Science, University of Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stowe, L. A. (1986). Parsing WH-constructions: Evidence for on-line gap location.Language and Cognitive Processes, 1, 227–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stowe, L. A. (1989). Thematic roles and sentence comprchension. In G. N. Carlson & M. K. Tanenhaus (Eds.),Linguistic structure in language processing. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Swinney, D., Ford, M., Frauenfelder, U., & Bresnan, J. (1988).On the temporal course of gap-filling and antecedent assignment during sentence comprehension. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Tanenhaus, M., Garsney, S., & Boland, J. (1990). Combinatory lexical information and language comprehension. In G. T. M. Altmann (Ed.),Cognitive models of speech processing. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M., Stowe, L., & Carlson, G. (1985). The interaction of lexical expectations and pragmatics in parsing filler-gap constructions. InProceedings of the Seventh Annual Cognitive Science Society Meetings. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taraban, R., & McClelland, J. L. (1988). Constituent attachment and thematic role assignment in sentence processing: Influence of content-based expectations.Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 597–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tesnière, L. (1959).Elements de syntaxe structurale. Paris: Klincksieck.

    Google Scholar 

  • Trueswell, J., Tanenhaus, M., & Garnsey, S. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic disambiguation.Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trueswell, J., Tanenhaus, M., & Kello, C. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 19, 528–553.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tyler, L., & Marslen-Wilson, W. (1977). The on-line effects of semantic context on syntactic processing.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 645–660.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wanner, E., & Maratsos, M. (1978). AN ATN approach to comprehension. In M. Halle, J. Bresnan, & G. A. Miller (Eds.),Linguistic theory and psychological reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinberg, A. (1993). Minimal commitment: A parsing theory for the nineties.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22, 339–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Communieation Research Centre, Department of Psychology, University of Glasgow, 56 Hillhead Street, G12 9YR, Glasgow, UK

    Martin J. Pickering

Authors
  1. Martin J. Pickering
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pickering, M.J. Processing local and unbounded dependencies: A unified account. J Psycholinguist Res 23, 323–352 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02145045

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02145045

Keywords

Search

Navigation