SYNTAX 5 ON-LINE PROCESSING DAY 34 – NOV 15, 2013 Brain & Language LING NSCI Harry Howard Tulane University

Course organization The syllabus, these slides and my recordings are available at If you want to learn more about EEG and neurolinguistics, you are welcome to participate in my lab. This is also a good way to get started on an honor's thesis. The grades are posted to Blackboard. 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 2

REVIEW 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 3

Linguistic model, Fig. 2.1 p /15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 4 Discourse model Syntax Sentence prosody Morphology Word prosody Segmental phonology perception Segmental phonology perception Acoustic phonetics Feature extraction Segmental phonology production Segmental phonology production Articulatory phonetics Speech motor control INPUT Sentence level Word level

My favorite attachment ambiguity One morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas. What an elephant was doing in my pajamas, I'll never know. I [[shot an elephant] in my pajamas] I shot an [[elephant] in my pajamas] 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 5

Garden path sentences 1. The old man the boat. 2. The man whistling tunes pianos. 3. The cotton clothing is made of grows in Mississippi. 4. The complex houses married and single soldiers and their families. 5. The author wrote the novel was likely to be a best- seller. 6. The tomcat curled up on the cushion seemed friendly. 7. The horse raced past the barn fell. 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 6

SENTENCE COMPREHENSION AND SYNTACTIC PARSING Ingram I, §13 On-line processing, working memory and modularity 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 7

Models of sentence processing Traditional generative model A separate mental module parses sentences just like we just did. Lexical access happens first. Then one syntactic hypothesis is considered at a time. There is no influence of meaning. More recent interactive model There is no separate module for parsing Lexical access, syntactic structure assignment, and meaning assignment happen at the same time (in parallel). Several syntactic hypotheses can be considered at a time. How to decide? On-line processing 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 8

Two types of processing on-line Happens in real time. Instructions for an experiment to test it: You will read a sentence, one word at a time. Push a key after each word. off-line Happens after the fact. Instructions for an experiment to test it: You will read a sentence. Point to the picture that describes it best. 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 9

Working memory 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 10 How would you solve this arithmetic problem? = ? (1 + 1) + 1 = ? = 3 So you need to store the second half of the problem as you calculate the first half. The prototypical example is keeping a telephone number in mind as you dial it: This sort of storage is known as working memory, and has been variously characterized as: a scratch pad, a temporary work space, a buffer.

Working memory span or capacity The amount of material that you can keep on your ‘scratch pad’ is known as your working memory span or capacity. How much is it? Miller’s number: 7 ± 2 It varies a little from person to person and even from domain to domain in the same person. That’s the meaning of the “± 2” Working memory span can be impaired in brain injury. It has recently been shown to be correlated with fluid intelligence. 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 11

Short-term memory There is also something called short-term memory, which I can never understand how it is different from working memory. 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 12

Fluid vs. crystallized intelligence Fluid (Gf) and crystallized (Gc) intelligence are factors of general (G) intelligence. Fluid intelligence is the capacity to think logically, recognize patterns, and solve problems in novel situations. Crystallized intelligence is the ability to use skills, knowledge, and experience. It improves somewhat with age, as experiences tend to expand one's knowledge. 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 13

Back to syntax 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 14 Parsing a sentence also exercises working memory. [ S [ NP a cat] [ VP is [ PP on [ NP the couch]]]] S NP a cat VP V is PP on the couch

One or two working memories? There is some debate over whether the working memory needed for parsing is part of a general purpose working memory or constitutes its own specialized store of working memory. Evidence for the latter Some patients who share severe deficits of general purpose working memory as assessed by attention span tests are still able to understand complex spoken sentences. Individual differences in working memory are usually not implicated in on-line language understanding. HH: does this mean that language is more an aspect of crystalized intelligence than fluid intelligence? Evidence for the former Individual differences in working memory are implicated in strategies for understanding complex spoken sentences. Ingram says it’s a tie. I am going to try to test this in the next experiment. 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 15

Some relevant tasks Sentence processing Self-paced reading: A sentence is presented as a series of words on a computer monitor, and the subject presses a key on the keyboard after each word. The horse raced past the barn fell. Working memory Attention span How many digits can the subject remember and recall in normal or reverse sequence? Verbal working memory ~ reading/listening span The subject reads/hears a series of sentences presented as a block. How many sentences can the subject recall the last word of? This span correlates highly with verbal SAT scores. 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 16

Syntax vs. pragmatics: Ferreira & Clifton Modified from Ingram p. 271; see Figure 13.1 Sentence Relative clause SubjectLatency at by 1. The evidence examined by the lawyer shocked the jury. reducedinanimatesame as 3 2. The evidence that was examined by the lawyer shocked the jury. unreducedinanimatequicker than 1 3. The defendant examined by the lawyer shocked the jury. reducedanimatesame as 1 4. The defendant that was examined by the lawyer shocked the jury. unreducedanimatequicker than 3 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 17 The fact that there is no garden path at by in (3) shows that syntax can perform the parse without access to pragmatics.

Just & Carpenter see Figure 13.2 Low reading span Latency at by unreduced relative clause reduced relative clause inanimate subject ~450 ms~500 ms animate subject ~450 ms~500 ms High reading span Latency at by 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 18 unreduced relative clause reduced relative clause inanimate subject ~350 ms~400 ms animate subject ~425 ms~475 ms Same as before: no competition from pragmatics to confuse (and slow down) syntactic parse Different: latency is indeed longer in bottom cell than top cell of reduced relative clause > pragmatics creates a garden path

Why? ‘Cognitive capacity’ Low span readers only have enough capacity to process syntactic cues; nothing is left over to process pragmatics > modular processing (syntax first). High span readers have enough capacity to process syntactic cues and pragmatics > interactive processing (all cues considered simultaneously). 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 19

NEXT TIME Q10 Continue with Ingram §13, On-line processing, working memory and modularity 11/15/13Brain & Language - Harry Howard - Tulane University 20