Abstract
The human sentence processing device sometimes makes errors, and when it does, it can sometimes correct them. This much is generally agreed, though opinions differ with respect to how and why the errors occur. In this paper we are concerned with the process of recovery from garden paths in sentence processing. A garden path occurs when the parser makes an error in assigning structure to the input word string but is nevertheless able to continue integrating some subsequent words into the structure that it has constructed for the sentence so far (the current partial phrase marker, or CPPM). Recognition that a garden path has occurred comes from the subsequent discovery that there is a word in the input string which does not fit into the CPPM. This word is the error signal, or symptom, that reveals the existence of the earlier error of analysis. The parser’s task is to discover the nature of the problem and put it right if possible. The input may actually be ungrammatical, in which case nothing can be done. But the parser must also consider the possibility that it is the analysis that is at fault: that some aspect of the CPPM prior to the symptom is incorrect. Recovery from a garden path consists in finding an alternative analysis which fits the initial portion of the sentence and also accommodates the symptom and later words.
We thank the members of the Max-Planck-Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience in Leipzig for their comments on this work. Special thanks are due to Paul Gorrell for his insightful comments on an earlier draft, and to Yuki Kamide and Patrick Sturt for interesting discussion of the Japanese examples.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Baccino, T., De Vincenzi, M. and Job, R. (this volume) Cross-linguistic studies of the Late Closure strategy: French and Italian.
Branigan, H., Start, P. and Matsumoto Sturt, Y. (1996) Left branching attachment and thematic domains. Poster presented at AMLaP-96 Conference, Torino, September 1996.
Clifton, C, Jr., Speer, S. and Abney, S. (1991) Parsing arguments: Phrase structure and argument structure as determinants of initial parsing decisions. Journal of Memory and Language 30, 251–271.
Cuetos, F. and Mitchell, D. C. (1988) Cross-linguistic differences in parsing: Restrictions on the use of the late closure strategy in Spanish. Cognition 30, 73–105.
Fodor, J. D. (1998) Learning to parse? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 27, 285–319.
Fodor, J. D. and Ferreira, F. (eds.) (1998) Re-analysis in Sentence Processing. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
Fodor, J. D. and Frazier, L. (1980) Is the human sentence parsing mechanism an ATN? Cognition 8, 417–459.
Fodor, J. D. and Inoue, A. (1994) The diagnosis and cure of garden paths. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 23.5, 407–434.
Fodor, J. D. and Inoue, A. (1997) Garden path diagnosis: The Grammatical Dependency Principle. Manuscript, CUNY Graduate Center. To appear in M. Ryan (ed.) CUNYForum 20.
Fodor, J. D. and Inoue, A. (1998) Attach Anyway. In J. D. Fodor and F. Ferreira (eds.).
Frazier, L. (1990a) Identifying Structure under X0. In A. Jongman and A. Lahiri (eds.) Yearbook of Morphology, 3, 87–109.
Frazier, L. (1990b) Parsing modifiers: Special purpose routines in the human sentence processing mechanism? In D. A. Balota, G. B. Flores d’Arcais and K. Rayner (eds.) Comprehension processes in reading. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ.
Frazier, L. and Clifton, C. (1996) Construal. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Frazier, L. and Clifton, C. (1998) Sentence re-analysis and visibility. In J. D. Fodor and F. Ferreira (eds.).
Frazier, L. and Fodor, J. D. (1978) The Sausage Machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition 6, 1–34.
Frazier, L. and Rayner, K. (1988) Parameterizing the language processing system: Left-vs. right-branching within and across languages. In J. A. Hawkins (ed.) Explaining Language Universals. Basil Blackwell, Oxford, UK.
Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N., Canseco-Gonzalez, E. and Hickok, G. (1996) Recency preference in the human sentence processing mechanism. Cognition 59, 23–59.
Gorrell, P. (1995) Syntax and Parsing. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Hirose, Y., Inoue, A., Fodor, J. D. and Bradley, D. C. (1998) Adjunct attachment ambiguity in Japanese: The role of constituent weight. Poster presented at the 11th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, New Brunswick, NJ, March 1998.
Igoa, J. M. (1995) Parsing decisions and the Construal hypothesis: Attachment preferences in primary phrases. Paper presented at the Second Symposium on Psycholinguistics, Tarragona, Spain, April 1995.
Inoue, A. (1991) A Comparative Study of Parsing in English and Japanese. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT.
Inoue, A. and Fodor, J. D. (1995) Information-paced parsing of Japanese. In R. Mazuka and N. Nagai (eds.) Japanese Sentence Processing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Kamide, Y. and Mitchell, D. C. (1997) Relative clause attachment: Nondeterminism in Japanese parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 26, 247–254.
Kimball, J. (1973) Seven principles of surface structure parsing in natural language. Cognition 2, 15–47.
Kubozono, H. (1993) The Organization of Japanese Prosody. Kurosio Publishers, Tokyo.
Lewis, R. L. (1993) An Architecturally-based Theory of Human Sentence Comprehension. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
Marcus, M. P., Hindle, D. and Fleck, M. M. (1983) D-theory: Talking about talking about trees. Association for Computational Linguistics, 21, 129–136.
Mitchell, D. C. and Brysbaert, M. (1998) Challenges to recent theories of cross-linguistic variation in parsing: Evidence from Dutch. In D. Hillert (ed.) Sentence Processing: A Cross-Linguistic Perspective. Academic Press, San Diego.
Phillips, C. (1996) Order and Structure. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, MIT, Cambridge, MA.
Selkirk, E. (1984) Phonology and Syntax: The Relation between Sound and Structure. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Stevenson, S. (1994) Competition and recency in a hybrid network model of syntactic disambiguation. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 23, 295–322.
Stevenson, S. (1998) Parsing as incremental restructuring. In J. D. Fodor and F. Ferreira (eds.).
Sturt, P. and Crocker, M. W. (1996) Monotonic syntactic processing: A cross-linguistic study of attachment and re-analysis. Language and Cognitive Processes 11.5, 449–494.
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Fodor, J.D., Inoue, A. (2000). Garden Path Re-Analysis: Attach (Anyway) and Revision as Last Resort. In: De Vincenzi, M., Lombardo, V. (eds) Cross-Linguistic Perspectives on Language Processing. Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, vol 25. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3949-6_2
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-3949-6_2
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-0292-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-011-3949-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive