Recent studies demonstrating that multiple meanings of an ambiguous word are initially accessed even when only one reading is syntactically appropriate with the preceding context can be criticized on at least two grounds. First, many of the syntactic contexts used were not truly restrictive, and, secondly, subjects may not have had time to integrate the context before processing the ambiguous word. In the present study, subjects listened to a sentence ending in an ambiguous word and then made a lexical decision to a target related to either the appropriate or inappropriate reading. Contexts were completely restrictive, and a pause was introduced between the context and the ambiguous word. Multiple access still obtained, providing further support for the claim that lexical access is not guided by syntactic context.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ElmanJ. L.McClellandJ. (in press). Speech perception as a cognitive process: The interactive activation model.LassSpeech and language.New York: Academic PressVol. 10.
2.
ForsterK. I. (1976). Accessing the mental lexicon.WalesR. J.WalkerE.New approaches to language mechanism.Amsterdam: North-Holland.
3.
ForsterK. I. (1979). Levels of processing and the structure of the language.CooperW. E.WalkerE. C. T.Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett.Hillsdale, N. J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
4.
GoodmanG. O.McClellandJ. C.GibbsR. W.Jr. (1981). The role of syntactic context in word recognition.Memory & Cognition9, 580–586.
5.
LukatelaG.KosticA.FeldmanL. B.TurveyM. T. (1983). Grammatical priming of inflected nouns.Memory & Cognition11, 59–63.
6.
McClellandJ.RumelhartD. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception, Part 1: An account of basic findings.Psychological Review89, 375–407.
7.
Marslen-WilsonW. D.TylerL. K. (1980). The temporal structure of spoken language understanding.Cognition8, 1–71.
8.
Marslen-WilsonW. D.WelshA. (1978). Processing interactions and lexical access during word recognition in continuous speech.Cognitive Psychology10, 29–63.
9.
MitchellD. C. (1982). The process of reading: A cognitive analysis of fluent reading and learning to readChichester: John Wiley & Sons.
10.
OniferW.SwinneyD. A. (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias.Memory & Cognition9, 225–236.
11.
RyderJ.WalkerE. (1982). Two mechanisms of lexical ambiguity.MehlerJ.WalkerE. C. T.GarrettM.Perspectives on mental representation.Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
12.
SamuelsA. G. (in press). The role of the lexicon in speech perception.ScholesE. C.NusbaumH. C.Perception of speech and visual form: Theoretical issues, models, and research.New York: Academic Press.
13.
SchwanenflugelP. J.ShobenE. J. (1982). Differential context effects in the comprehension of abstract and concrete verbal materials.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition8, 82–102.
14.
SeidenbergM. S.TanenhausM. K. (in press). Modularity and lexical access.GopnikI.Proceedings of the McGill Cognitive Science Workshops.Norwood, N. J.: Ablex Publishing Corp.
15.
SeidenbergM. S.TanenhausM. K.LeimanJ. M.BienkowskiM. A. (1982). Automatic access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based processing.Cognitive Psychology14, 489–537.
16.
SeidenbergM. S.WatersG. S.SandersM.LangerP. (in press). Pre- and post-lexical loci in priming.Memory & Cognition.
17.
ShillockR. (1982). The on-line resolution of pronominal anophora.Language and Speech25, 385–401.
18.
ShulmanH. G.HornakR.SandersE. (1978). The effects of graphemic, phonetic and semantic relationships on access to lexical structures.Memory & Cognition6, 115–123.
19.
StanovichE. E.WestR. F. (1983). On priming by a sentence context.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General112, 1–36.
20.
SwinneyD. A. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension. (Re) consideration of context effects.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior18, 645–660.
21.
TanenhausM. K.CarlsonG. N.SeidenbergM. S. (in press). Do listeners compute linguistic representations?.DowtyD.KartunnenL.ZwickyA.Natural language parsing: Theoretical, psychological and computational perspectives.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22.
TanenhausM. K.LeimanJ. M.SeidenbergM. S. (1979). Evidence for multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic context.Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior18, 427–441.
WestR. F.StanovichK. E. (1982). Source of inhibition in experiments on the effect of sentence context on word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition8, 385–399.
