An eye-tracking experiment investigated whether incremental interpretation applies to interclausal relationships. According to Millis and Just's (1994) delayed-integration hypothesis, interclausal relationships are not computed until the end of the second clause, because the processor needs to have two full propositions before integration can occur. We investigated the processing of causal and diagnostic sentences (Sweetser, 1990; Tversky & Kahneman, 1982) that contained the connective because. Previous research (Traxler, Sanford, Aked, & Moxey, 1997) has demonstrated that readers have greater difficulty processing diagnostic sentences than causal sentences. Our results indicated that difficulty processing diagnostic sentences occurred well before the end of the second clause. Thus comprehenders appear to compute interclausal relationships incrementally.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AaronsonD.ScarboroughH. S. (1976). Performance theories for sentence coding: Some quantitative evidence.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance2, 56–70.
2.
AltmannG. T. M.GarnhamA.DennisY. I. L. (1992). Avoiding the garden-oath: Eye movements in context.Journal of Memory and Language31, 685–712.
3.
AltmannG. T. M.SteedmanM. J. (1988). Interaction with context during human sentence processing.Cognition30, 191–238.
4.
BeckI. L.McKeownM. G.SinatraG. M.LoxtermanJ. A. (1991). Revising social studies text from a text-processing perspective: Evidence of improved comprehensibility.Reading Research Quarterly26, 251–276.
5.
BeverT. G. (1970). The cognitive basis for linguistic structures.HayesJ. R.Cognition and the development of language.New York: Wiley279–362.
6.
BolandJ. E.TanenhausM. K.GarnseyS. M.CarlsonG. N. (1995). Verb argument structure in parsing and interpretation: Evidence from wh-questions.Journal of Memory and Language34, 774–806.
7.
BrittM. A. (1994). The interaction of referential ambiguity and argument structure in the parsing of prepositional phrases.Journal of Memory and Language33, 251–283.
8.
BrittM. A.PerfettiC. A.GarrodS. C.RaynerK. (1992). Parsing in context: Context effects and their limits.Journal of Memory and Language31, 293–314.
9.
BrittonB. K.GlynnS. M.MeyerB. J. F.PenlandM. J. (1982). Effects of text structure on use of cognitive capacity during reading.Journal of Memory and Language27, 309–323.
10.
BrysbaertM.MitchellD. C. (1996). Modifier attachment in sentence parsing: evidence from Dutch.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology49A, 664–695.
11.
CaronJ.MickoH. C.ThuringM. (1988). Conjunctions and recall of composite sentences.Journal of Memory and Language27, 309–323.
12.
ChaterN.PickeringM. J.MilwardD. (1995). What is incremental interpretation?.MilwardD.SturtP.Edinburgh Working Papers in Cognitive Science.Edinburgh: Centre for Cognitive Science2–22.
13.
CliftonC.Jr. (1993). Thematic roles in sentence parsing.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology47, 222–246.
14.
CloitreM. G.BeverT. G. (1988). Linguistic anaphors, levels of representation and discourse.Language and Cognitive Processes3, 293–322.
15.
DellG. S.McKoonG.RatcliffR. (1983). The activation of antecedent information during the processing of anaphoric reference in reading.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior22, 121–132.
16.
DowtyD. R.WallR. E.PetersS. (1981). Introduction to Montague SemanticsDordrecht: Reidel.
17.
EhrlichK. (1983). Eye movements in pronoun assignment: A study of sentence integration.RaynerEye movements in reading: Perceptual and language processes.New York: Academic Press.
18.
EhrlichK.RaynerK. (1983). Pronoun as signment and semantic integration during reading: Eye movements and immediacy of processing.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior22, 75–87.
19.
FerreiraF.CliftonC.Jr. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing.Journal of Memory and Language25, 348–368.
20.
FerreiraF.HendersonJ. (1990). Use of verb information in syntactic parsing: Evidence from eye movements and word-by-word self-paced reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition16, 555–568.
21.
FischlerI.BloomP. (1979). Automatic and attentional processes in the effects of sentence contexts on word recognition.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior18, 1–20.
22.
FrazierL. (1979). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategiesBloomington, IN: Indiana University Linguistics Club.
23.
FrazierL.RaynerK. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences.Cognitive Psychology14, 178–210.
24.
FrazierL.RaynerK. (1990). Taking on semantic commitments: Processing multiple meanings vs. multiple senses.Journal of Memory and Language29, 181–200.
25.
GarnseyS. M.TanenhausM. K.ChapmanR. (1989). Evoked potentials and the study of sentence comprehension.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research18, 51–60.
26.
GarrodS. C.FreudenthalG.BoyleE. (1994). The role of different types of anaphor in the on-line resolution of sentences in a discourse.Journal of Memory and Language33, 39–68.
27.
GarrodS. C.SanfordA. J. (1994). Resolving sentences in a discourse context: How discourse representation affects language understanding.GernsbacherM. A.Handbook of psycholinguistics.San Diego, CA: Academic Press675–698.
28.
GernsbacherM. A. (1989). Mechanisms that improve referential access.Cognition32, 99–156.
29.
GevaE.RyanE. B. (1985). Use of conjunctions in expository texts by skilled and less skilled readers.Journal of Reading17, 331–346.
30.
GlucksbergS.KreuzR. J.RhoS. H. (1986). Context can constrain lexical access: Implications for models of language comprehension.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition12, 323–335.
31.
GoldmanS. R.MurrayJ. D. (1992). Knowledge of connectors as cohesion devices in text: A comparative study of native English and ESL speakers.Journal of Educational Psychology84, 504–519.
32.
GreenD. W.MitchellD. C.HammondE. J. (1981). The scheduling of text integration processes in reading.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology33A, 455–464.
33.
HaberlandtK. (1982). Reader expectations in text comprehension.Le NyJ. F.KintschW.Language and Comprehension.Amsterdam: North Holland.
34.
HallidayM. A. K.HassanR. (1976). Cohesion in EnglishLondon: Longman.
35.
HemforthB.KoniecznyL.ScheepersC.StrubeG. (1994). First analysis, reanalysis, and repairFreiburg, Germany: Institut fur Informatik und Gesellschaft.
36.
HolmesV. M.StoweL.CupplesL. (1989). Lexical expectations in parsing complement-verb sentences.Journal of Memory and Language28, 668–689.
37.
HyonaJ. (1995). Do irregular letter combinations attract readers’ attention? Evidence from fixation locations in words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance21, 68–81.
38.
JustM. A.CarpenterP. A. (1980). A theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension.Psychological Review87, 329–354.
39.
KintschW. (1988). Role of knowledge in discourse comprehension.Psychological Review95, 163–182.
40.
KintschW.van DijkT. A. (1978). Towards a model of text comprehension and productions.Psychological Review85, 363–394.
41.
KnottA.DaleR. (1995). Using linguistic phenomena to motivate a set of coherence relations.Discourse Processes18, 35–62.
42.
Liver sedgeS. P.PickeringM. J.TraxlerM. J.A comparative analysis of qualitatively different eye movement measuresPoster presented at the CUNY Sentence Processing Conference.New YorkMarch21-231996.
43.
LomanN. L.MayerR. E. (1983). Signaling techniques that increase the understandability of expository prose.Journal of Educational Psychology75, 402–412.
44.
LorchR. F. (1989). Text signaling devices and their effects on reading and memory processes.Educational Psychology Review1, 209–234.
45.
MacDonaldM. C.MacWhinneyB. (1990). Measuring inhibition and facilitation for pronouns.Journal of Memory and Language29, 469–492.
46.
MarshallN.GlockM. D. (1978). Comprehension of connected discourse: A study into the relationships between the structure of text and information recalled.Reading Research Quarterly14, 10–56.
47.
Marslen-WilsonW. D. (1973). Linguistic structure and speech shadowing at very short latencies.Nature244, 522–523.
48.
Marslen-WilsonW. D. (1975). Sentence perception as an interactive parallel process.Science189, 226–228.
49.
Marslen-WilsonW. D. (1987). Functional parallelism in spoken word-recognition.Cognition25, 71–102.
50.
Marslen-WilsonW. D.TylerL. K.KosterC. (1994). Integrative processes in utterance resolution.Journal of Memory and Language33.
51.
MeyerB. J. F.BrandtD. M.BluthG. J. (1980). Use of top-level structure in text: Key for reading comprehension of ninth-grade students.Reading Research Quarterly16, 72–103.
52.
MillisK. K.GraesserA. C.HaberlandtK. (1993). The impact of connectives on memory for expository texts.Applied Cognitive Psychology7, 317–339.
53.
MillisK. K.JustM. A. (1994). The influence of connectives on sentence comprehension.Journal of Memory and Language33, 128–147.
54.
MitchellD. C.GreenD. W. (1978). The effects of context and content on immediate processing in reading.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology30, 609–636.
55.
MitchellD. C.HolmesV. M. (1985). The role of specific information about the verb in parsing sentences with local structural ambiguity.Journal of Memory and Language24, 542–559.
56.
MurrayJ. D. (1995). Logical connectives and causal coherence.LorchR. F.Jr.O'BrienE. J.Sources of coherence in reading.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc107–125.
57.
NoordmanL. G. M.VonkW.KempffH. J. (1992). Causal inference during the reading of expository texts.Journal of Memory and Language31, 573–590.
58.
O'BrienE. J.DuffyS. A.MyersJ. L. (1986). Anaphoric inference during reading.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition12, 346–352.
59.
PickeringM. J. (1993). Direct association and sentence processing: A reply to Gorrell and to Gibson and Hickok.Language and Cognitive Processes8, 163–196.
60.
PickeringM. J. (1994). Processing local and unbounded dependencies: A unified account.Journal of Psycholinguistic Research23, 323–352.
61.
RaynerK.CarlsonM.FrazierL. (1983). The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior22, 358–374.
62.
RaynerK.DuffyS. A. (1986). Lexical complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical ambiguity.Memory and Cognition14, 191–201.
63.
RaynerK.MorrisR. K. (1992). Eye movement control in reading: Evidence against semantic preprocessing.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance18, 163–172.
64.
RaynerK.PollatsekA. (1989). The psychology of readingEnglewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
65.
SandersT. J. M.SpoorenW. P. M.NoordmanL. G. M. (1992). Towards a taxonomy of coherence relations.Discourse Processes15, 1–35.
66.
SegalE. M.DuchonJ. F.ScottP. J. (1991). The role of interclausal connectives in narrative structuring: Evidence from adults’ interpretations of simple stories.Discourse Processes14, 27–54.
67.
SeidenbergM. S.TanenhausM. K.LeimanJ. M.BienkowskiM. (1982). Atutomatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based processing.Cognitive Psychology14, 489–537.
68.
ShillcockR. C. (1982). The on-line resolution of pronominal anaphora.Language and Speech4, 385–402.
69.
Spivey-KnowltonM.TrueswellJ.TanenhausM. (1993). Context and syntactic ambiguity resolution.Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology47, 276–309.
70.
StevensonR. J.The time course of pronoun comprehensionProceedings of the Eighth Annual Cognitive Science Meetings.Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, IncHillsdale, NJ1986.
71.
StoweL. (1989). Thematic structures and sentence comprehension.CarlsonG. N.TanenhausM. K.Linguistic structure in language processing.Dordrecht: Kluwer.
72.
SweetserE. (1990). From etymology to pragmatics: Metaphorical and cultural aspects of semantic structureCambridge: Cambridge University Press.
73.
SwinneyD. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re)consideration of context effects.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior15, 681–689.
74.
TraxlerM. J.PickeringM. J. (1996). Plausibility and the processing of unbounded dependencies: An eye-tracking study.Journal of Memory and Language35, 454–475.
75.
TraxlerM. J.SanfordA. J.AkedJ. P.MoxeyL. M. (1997). Processing causal and diagnostic statements in discourse.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition23, 88–101.
76.
TrueswellJ.TanenhausM.GarnseyS. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic disambiguation.Journal of Memory and Language33, 285–318.
77.
TrueswellJ.TanenhausM. K.KelloC. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition19, 528–553.
78.
TverskyA.KahnemanD. (1982). Causal schemas in judgments under uncertainty.KahnemanD.SlovicP.TverskyA.Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press117–128.
79.
TylerL. K.Marslen-WilsonW. D. (1977). The on-line effects of semantic context on syntactic processing.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior16, 683–692.
80.
TylerL. K.Marslen-WilsonW. D. (1982). The resolution of discourse anaphors: Some on-line studies.Text2, 263–291.
81.
UnderwoodG.BloomfieldR.ClewsS. (1989). Information influences the pattern of eye fixations during sentence comprehension.Perception17, 267–278.
