Memory & Cognition

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 318–331 | Cite as

Evidence for an anaphoric mechanism within syntactic processing: Some reference relations defy semantic and pragmatic constraints

  • Wayne Cowart
  • Helen S. Cairns


In three experiments, we examined an interaction between the pronounthey and syntactic analysis. Experiment 1 demonstrates thatthey can slow reading times tois when this verb is visually presented immediately after a sentence fragment ending with an ambiguous expression such asflying kites. This effect seems to involve a coreference assignment linkingthey and the ambiguous expression that influences the syntactic analysis of the latter. Experiments 2 and 3 show that this effect can operate even when coreference betweenthey and the ambiguous expression is implausible. These results support a modular theory of comprehension that includes structurally oriented reference processes with access to some, but not all, of the listener’s knowledge relevant to coreference.


  1. Cairns, H. S. (1984). Research in language comprehension. In R. Naremore (Ed.),guage science (pp. 211–242). San Diego: College Hill Press.Google Scholar
  2. Camazza, A., Gorber, E., Garvey, C., &Yates, J. (1977). Comprehension of anaphoric pronouns.rnal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,16, 601–609.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chomsky, N. (1965).Aspects of the theory ofsyntax. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Chomsky, N. (1981).Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Foris Publications.Google Scholar
  5. Clark, H. H. (1973). The language-as-fixed-effect fallacy: A critique of language statistics in psychological research.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,12, 335–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clark, H. H., &Marshall, C. (1981). Definite reference and mutual knowledge. In A. Joshi, B. Webber, & I. Sag (Eds.),Elements of discourse understanding (pp. 10–63). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Corbett, A. T., &Chang, F. R. (1983). Pronoun disambiguation: Accessingpotential antecedents.Memory & Cognition,11, 283–294.Google Scholar
  8. Cowart, W. (1982). Autonomy and interaction in the language processing system: A reply to Marslen-Wilson & Tyler.Cognition,12, 109–117.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Cowart, W. (1983).Reference relations and syntactic processing: Evidence of a pronoun’s influence on a syntactic decision that affects word naming. Doctoral dissertation, City University of New York. Available from Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, IN.Google Scholar
  10. Cowart, W. (1980a). Evidence for a strictly sentence-internal antecedent-finding mechanism. In M. van Clay, M. Niepokuj, & V. Nikiforidou (Eds.),Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of the Berkeley linguistics Society (pp. 41–50). Berkeley: Berkeley Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
  11. Cowart, W. (1986b). Evidence for structural reference processes. In A. Farley, P. Farley, & K.-E. McCullough (Eds.),Proceedings of the 22nd Regional Meeting of the Chicago linguistics Society (pp. 307–317). Chicago: Chicago Linguistics Society.Google Scholar
  12. Dell, G. S., Mckoon, G., &Ratcliff, R. (1983). The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,22, 121–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Ehrlich, F. (1980). Comprehension of pronouns.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,32, 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Ferreira, F., &Clifton, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing.Journal of Memory & Language,25, 348–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fodor, J. A. (1983).The modularity of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  16. Forster, K. I. (1976). Accessing the mental lexicon. In R. Wales & E. Walker (Eds.),New approaches to language mechanisms (pp. 257–287). Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  17. Forster, K. I. (1979). Levels of processing and the structure of the language processor. In W. Cooper & E. Walker (Eds.),Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  18. Forster, K. I., &Olbrei, I. (1973). Semantic heuristics and syntactic analysis.Cognition,2, 319–347.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Forster, K. I., &Ryder, L. (1971). Perceiving the structure and meaning of sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,10, 285–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Frazier, L., &Rayner, K (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehenson: Eye movements In the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences.Cognitive Psychology,14, 178–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Garrod, S., &Sanford, A. (1977). Interpreting anaphoric relations The integraton of semantic information while reading.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,16, 77–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Garvey, C., &Caramazza, A. (1974). Implicit causality In verbslinguistic Inquiry,5, 459–464Google Scholar
  23. Garvey C., Caramazza, A., &Yates, J (1974). Factors influencing assignment of pronoun antecedents.Cognition,3, 227–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Grober, E., Beardsley, W, &Caramazza, A. (1978). A parallel function strategy in pronoun assignment.Cognition,6, 117–133.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Hirst, W., &Brill, G. (1980). Contextual aspects of pronoun assignment.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 168–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jackendoff, R. (1972).Semantic interpretation In generative grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  27. Marslen-Wilson, W. (1973). Linguistic structure and speech shadowing at very short latencies.Nature,244, 522–523.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Marslen-Wilson, W. (1975). Sentence perception as an interactive parallel process.Science,189:4198, 226–228.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Marslen-Wilson, W., &Tyler, L. K. (1975). Processing structure of sentence perception.Nature (London),257, 784–786.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Marslen-Wilson, W., &Tyler, L. K. (l980a). The temporal structure of spoken language understanding.Cognition,8, 1–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Marslen-Wilson, W., &Tyler, L. K. (l980b). Towards a psychological basis for a theory of anaphora. In J. Kreiman & A. jOjeda (Eds.),Papers from the Parasession on Pronouns and Anaphora. Chicago: Chicago Linguistics SocietyGoogle Scholar
  32. Marslen-Wilson, W., Tyler, L. K., &Seidenberg, M. (1978). Sentence processing and the clause-boundary. In W. Levelt & G. D’Arcais (Eds.),Studies in the perception of language (pp. 219–246). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  33. Marslen-Wilson, W., &Welsh, A. (1976). Processing interactions and lexical access during word recogrution in continuous speech.Cognitive Psychology,10, 29–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Matthews, A. (1986).Pronoun resolution In two-clause sentences. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of New York.Google Scholar
  35. McCawley, J. (l968a). Concerning the base component of a transformational grammar.Foundations of Language,4, 243–269.Google Scholar
  36. Mccawley, J. (l968b). The role of semantics in grammar. In E. Bach & R. Harms (Eds.),Universals in linguistic theory (pp. 124–169). New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar
  37. Mckoon, G., &Ratcliff, R. (1980). The comprehension processes and memory structures involved in anaphoric reference.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,19, 668–682.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Murphy, G. L. (1984). Establishing and accessing referents m dISCOUrse.Memory & Cognition,12, 489–497.Google Scholar
  39. Rayner, K., Carlson, M., &Frazier, L. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,22, 358–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Townsend, D. J., &Bever, T. (1982). Natural units of representation Interact during sentence comprehension.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,21, 688–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Tyler, L. K., &Marslen-Wilson, W. (1977). The on-line effects of semantic context on syntactic processing.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,16, 683–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Tyler, L. K., &Marslen-Wilson, W. (1982). Speech comprehension processes. In J. Mehler, E. C. T. Walker, & M. Garrett (Eds.),Perspectives on mental representations (pp. 169–184). Hillsdale, NJ. Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  43. Van Riemsdijk, H., &Williams, E. (1986)Introduction to the theory of grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wayne Cowart
    • 1
  • Helen S. Cairns
    • 2
    • 3
  1. 1.Ohio State UniversityColumbus
  2. 2.Queens CollegeFlushing
  3. 3.City University of New YorkNew York

Personalised recommendations