STAGES OF COMPREHENSION discourse modelling semantic analysis syntactic “parsing” lexical access phonemic analysis sensory processing.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Prosody and Verb Placement Research question: Do Explicit Prosody and Verb Placement modulate listeners PP-attachment preferences in the processing of.
Advertisements

School of something FACULTY OF OTHER School of Computing FACULTY OF ENGINEERING Chunking: Shallow Parsing Eric Atwell, Language Research Group.
Computational language: week 10 Lexical Knowledge Representation concluded Syntax-based computational language Sentence structure: syntax Context free.
SYNTAX 4 DAY 33 – NOV 13, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
Marslen-Wilson Big Question: “What processes take place during the period that the sensory information is accumulating for the listener” during spoken.
Eye Movements and Spoken Language Comprehension: effects of visual context on syntactic ambiguity resolution Spivey et al. (2002) Psych 526 Eun-Kyung Lee.
Intro to NLP - J. Eisner1 Human Sentence Processing.
Sentence Processing III Language Use and Understanding Class 12.
Psycholinguistics 06.
Syntax-Semantics Mapping Rajat Kumar Mohanty CFILT.
Are the anterior negativities to grammatical violations indexing working memory? Manuel Martin-Loeches, Francisco munoz, Pilar Casado, A. Melcon, C. Fernandez-frias,
Sentence Processing 1: Encapsulation 4/7/04 BCS 261.
Prosodic facilitation and interference in the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguity Kjelgaard & Speer 1999 Kent Lee Ψ 526b 16 March 2006.
Language and Cognition Colombo, June 2011 Day 2 Introduction to Linguistic Theory, Part 4.
Spoken Word Recognition 1 Language Use and Understanding.
Using prosody to avoid ambiguity: Effects of speaker awareness and referential context Snedeker and Trueswell (2003) Psych 526 Eun-Kyung Lee.
9/22/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Semantic Priming (Phenomenon & Tool)...armkitchentree Related prime >doctoractor < Unrelated prime nurse floor...
Phrasing and Fluent Reading: What will it take?.
Language Perception and Comprehension
Introduction and Jurafsky Model Resource: A Probabilistic Model of Lexical and Syntactic Access and Disambiguation, Jurafsky 1996.
SYNTAX 1 DAY 30 – NOV 6, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
Drawing Trees & Ambiguity in Trees. Some Phrase Structure Rules of English S’ -> (Comp) S S’ -> (Comp) S S -> {NP/S’} (T) VP S -> {NP/S’} (T) VP VP 
Multiple constraints in action
Psy1302 Psychology of Language Lecture 10 Ambiguity Resolution Sentence Processing I.
PSY 369: Psycholinguistics Language Comprehension: Sentence comprehension.
Mental Lexicon Body of knowledge we hold in our minds about words Includes pronunciation, spelling, meaning syntactic roles Recognition of words—whether.
1 Introduction to Computational Linguistics Eleni Miltsakaki AUTH Spring 2006-Lecture 4.
PSY 369: Psycholinguistics Language Comprehension: Sentence comprehension.
Some definitions Morphemes = smallest unit of meaning in a language Phrase = set of one or more words that go together (from grammar) (e.g., subject clause,
PSY 369: Psycholinguistics Language Comprehension: The role of memory.
Understanding Sentences. Two steps back: What is linguistic knowledge? Phonological Syntactical Morphological Lexical Semantic.
Artificial Intelligence 2004 Natural Language Processing - Syntax and Parsing - Language Syntax Parsing.
Understanding a Sentence
PSY 369: Psycholinguistics Language Comprehension: Sentence comprehension.
Intro to Psycholinguistics What its experiments are teaching us about language processing and production.
Amira Al Harbi.  Psycholinguistics is concerned with language and the brain.  To be a perfect psycholinguistist, you would need to have a comprehensive.
Chapter 4 Syntax Part II.
Lecture 12: 22/6/1435 Natural language processing Lecturer/ Kawther Abas 363CS – Artificial Intelligence.
SYNTAX 8 ON-LINE PROCESSING DAY 37 – NOV 22, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
WORD SEMANTICS 4 DAY 29 – NOV 4, 2011 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University.
Ferreira and Henderson (1990)
Speech Comprehension: Decoding meaning from speech.
PERCEPTION AND PATTERN RECOGNITION Making sense of sensation –Local vs. Global scope –Data-driven (sensory, bottom-up) vs. Concept-driven (knowledge, “top-down”)
1 Language processing in the mind Linguistics lecture #5 November 9, 2006.
PS: Introduction to Psycholinguistics Winter Term 2005/06 Instructor: Daniel Wiechmann Office hours: Mon 2-3 pm Phone:
Avoiding the Garden Path: Eye Movements in Context
Linguistic Essentials
Lexicalized and Probabilistic Parsing Read J & M Chapter 12.
Review of basic concepts.  The knowledge of sentences and their structure.  Syntactic rules include: ◦ The grammaticality of sentences ◦ Word order.
N400-like semantic incongruity effect in 19-month-olds: Processing known words in picture contexts Manuela Friedrich and Angela D. Friederici J. of cognitive.
PSY270 Michaela Porubanova. Language  a system of communication using sounds or symbols that enables us to express our feelings, thoughts, ideas, and.
Natural Language - General
Dec 11, Human Parsing Do people use probabilities for parsing?! Sentence processing Study of Human Parsing.
Drawing Trees & Ambiguity in Trees
CS460/IT632 Natural Language Processing/Language Technology for the Web Lecture 13 (17/02/06) Prof. Pushpak Bhattacharyya IIT Bombay Top-Down Bottom-Up.
PSY 369: Psycholinguistics Language Comprehension: Sentence comprehension.
NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING
Syntactic Priming in Sentence Comprehension (Tooley, Traxler & Swaab, 2009) Zhenghan Qi.
1 Applying Principles To Reading Presented By Anne Davidson Michelle Diamond.
Incremental parsing and ambiguous sentences - each incoming materials are attached immediately - a single analysis is pursed - given the uncertainty,
Chapter 11 Language. Some Questions to Consider How do we understand individual words, and how are words combined to create sentences? How can we understand.
10/31/00 1 Introduction to Cognitive Science Linguistics Component Topic: Formal Grammars: Generating and Parsing Lecturer: Dr Bodomo.
Child Syntax and Morphology
Statistical NLP: Lecture 3
Sentence Comprehension and Memory
Psycholinguistics: the study of language processing
Natural Language Processing
Natural Language - General
Linguistic Essentials
Artificial Intelligence 2004 Speech & Natural Language Processing
Presentation transcript:

STAGES OF COMPREHENSION discourse modelling semantic analysis syntactic “parsing” lexical access phonemic analysis sensory processing

THE IMMEDIACY PRINCIPLE OF LANGUAGE COMPREHENSION comprehension involves building a “model” of meaning, based on –word type, meaning and order –prior context and prior knowledge to minimize load, build as much of this structure as possible “on line” –resolve ambiguities as they’re encountered: lexical: PLANE? syntactic: visiting relatives can be difficult this can result in “garden path” errors – the conductor stood before the audience left the hall. –after visiting his parents left.

Headline Ambiguities –Man charged with battery –Czech leader meets with opposition –Teenage prostitution problem is mounting –Lawyers let fly in court –Police: Fighting robber is foolish –The police officer saw that the lightning bolt hit the child and dialed –Bill banning nude dancing on governor’s desk –American man sentenced to 10 years in Scotland

CONTEXT AND WORD RECOGNITION SPEED Fischler & Bloom, 1979 Task: read sentence context frames, “As soon as they entered the room, they turned on the.. “ then make word-nonword decision to: TYPE OFspeed of COMPLETIONexamplelexical decision expectedLIGHT600 msec unexpectedSWITCH650 msec incongruousSNAKE800 msec nonwordSNOBE910 msec

CONTEXT EFFECTS AND THE “N400” (Kutas & Hillyard, 1981) task: read sentences while EEG is recorded and later averaged: semantically unexpected completions elicit a negative “wave” peaking at 400 msec after word onset (N400) differences can be seen as early as 250 msec after onset

DOES CONTEXT AFFECT “LEXICAL ACCESS?” Swinney, 1979 task: listen to spoken sentences, watch for word/nonword strings “.. the electronic detector found a bug in the... “ SPYANTPENWID 200 msec 700 msec or or or at 200 msec, both SPY and ANT faster than PEN (so: access of both meanings of homophone) at 700 msec, only SPY is faster than PEN (so: rapid selection of appropriate meaning)

SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE AND SENTENCE PROCESSING perceived location of “click” drifts toward clause boundaries: –“.. the man who cheated lost the hand.” actualreported perception of rapidly shown sentences better if words are grouped in syntactic constituent “chunks”: –The manThe who cheatedvsman who in classcheated in lostclass lost

SYNTAX, EFFORT, AND EEG (King & Kutas, 1995) subject-relative: “The secretary who gladly married the senator typed the letter” object-relative: “The secretary who the senator gladly married typed the letter”

A “MINIMAL ATTACHMENT STRATEGY” FOR BUILDING SYNTAX (Frazier, 1979) attach each new phrase to the current “node” if possible (“late closure”) as in (A): VP PP NP V NP The spy saw the cop with the binoculars.. but not in (B): VP NP NP V NP PP The spy saw the cop with the revolver.. (B) takes longer to read (Rayner & Frazier, ‘83) - though (A) is ambiguous

SYNTACTIC STRUCTURE AND SEMANTIC PROCESSING Meaning can constrain parsing: The bird saw the cop with the binoculars Read as quickly as (A) above (C) The cop [that was] arrested by the detective was guilty of taking bribes (D) The crook [that was] arrested by the detective was guilty of taking bribes (C) Is read more slowly; (D) no more difficult than the “unreduced” version – why? [McRae et al, 1998]