Variable binding and coreference in sentence comprehension: Evidence from eye movements

Cunnings, Ian; Patterson, Clare; Felser, Claudia

doi:10.1016/j.jml.2013.10.001

Cited by 34 publications

(48 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This may, for example, shed further light on possible feature-driven processes, or reveal an underlying sensitivity to the linear ordering of antecedents, as has been found in certain syntactic environments (Cunnings et al, 2014). The online processing of pronouns in SDP environments has rarely been investigated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 74%

The online application of binding condition B in native and non-native pronoun resolution

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has shown that anaphor resolution in a non-native language may be more vulnerable to interference from structurally inappropriate antecedents compared to native anaphor resolution. To test whether previous findings on reflexive anaphors generalize to non-reflexive pronouns, we carried out an eye-movement monitoring study investigating the application of binding condition B during native and non-native sentence processing. In two online reading experiments we examined when during processing local and/or non-local antecedents for pronouns were considered in different types of syntactic environment. Our results demonstrate that both native English speakers and native German-speaking learners of English showed online sensitivity to binding condition B in that they did not consider syntactically inappropriate antecedents. For pronouns thought to be exempt from condition B (so-called “short-distance pronouns”), the native readers showed a weak preference for the local antecedent during processing. The non-native readers, on the other hand, showed a preference for the matrix subject even where local coreference was permitted, and despite demonstrating awareness of short-distance pronouns' referential ambiguity in a complementary offline task. This indicates that non-native comprehenders are less sensitive during processing to structural cues that render pronouns exempt from condition B, and prefer to link a pronoun to a salient subject antecedent instead.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 74%

The online application of binding condition B in native and non-native pronoun resolution

2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Although they introduce potential ambiguity, listeners usually resolve pronouns correctly on the basis of available information. Several semantic and discourse factors have been found to influence pronoun resolution, including grammatical role parallelism (Branigan, Pickering, Liversedge, Stewart, & Urbach, 1995;Frazier, Taft, Roeper, Clifton, & Ehrlich, 1984;Smyth, 1994), gender information (Arnold, Eisenband, Brown-Schmidt, & Trueswell, 2000;Badecker & Straub, 2002;Ehrlich, 1980), antecedent prominence, accessibility, and topicality (Arnold et al, 2000;Chafe, 1976;Cunnings, Patterson, & Felser, 2014;Givón, 1983;Järvikivi, Pyykkönen-Klauck, Schimke, Colonna, & Hemforth, 2014;Spenader, Smits, & Hendriks, 2009;Van Rij, Van Rijn, & Hendriks, 2013), and interference of prominent competitor antecedents (Badecker & Straub, 2002;Clackson, Felser, & Clahsen, 2011). In addition, syntactic constraints play a role (Hendriks & Spenader, 2006;Reinhart & Reuland, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pupillary responses reflect ambiguity resolution in pronoun processing

Vogelzang

Hendriks

Rijn³

2016

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The resolution of ambiguous pronouns is influenced by the preceding linguistic discourse. This raises the question whether the processing of an object pronoun is also influenced by the preceding sentential subject. In an experiment with Dutch adults, we recorded pupil dilation as a measure of the cognitive effort involved in resolving pronominal versus full noun phrase (NP) subjects and pronominal versus reflexive objects. Our results indicate that more effort is needed to resolve a pronominal subject or object compared to a less ambiguous full NP subject or reflexive object. These results support the hypothesis that the ambiguity of a referring expression influences processing. Contrary to our expectations, no evidence was found that the form of the subject influences the processing of a subsequent pronominal object. We conclude that pupillary responses reflect ambiguity resolution in pronoun processing, and that the process to resolve pronouns commences as soon as the pronoun is encountered. ARTICLE HISTORY

show abstract

“…Under the TTC, parsers may prefer OC because of its simpler structure (Landau 2017). In addition to or instead of these, OC may also be preferred to NOC due to a more general preferences for bound variable readings (Reinhart 1983;, or for local (Cunnings & Sturt 2014) or recent (Cunnings, Patterson & Felser 2014) antecedents. Factors favoring NOC may include the availability of a non-local perspective-holding potential antecedent, whether OC would result in a strange interpretation (Landau 2017), attachment site of the adjunct (Landau 2013), or other factors (Green 2018).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A movement theory of adjunct control

Green

2019

Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has recently been argued (Landau 2017) that control in temporal and rationale adjuncts may be either syntactic ‘Obligatory Control’ (OC) or non-syntactic ‘Non-Obligatory Control’ (NOC), in contrast to previous assumptions that adjunct control is strictly OC. Here I demonstrate that this OC/NOC duality does not extend to all adjuncts. I outline claims that Landau would have to make in order to accommodate the wider distribution of OC and NOC in adjuncts, but argue that the account still struggles. I offer an alternative within the Movement Theory of Control.

show abstract

Variable binding and coreference in sentence comprehension: Evidence from eye movements

Cited by 34 publications

References 37 publications

The online application of binding condition B in native and non-native pronoun resolution

The online application of binding condition B in native and non-native pronoun resolution

Pupillary responses reflect ambiguity resolution in pronoun processing

A movement theory of adjunct control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About