10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 More on predicting word properties in context Dikker, Rabagliati, Farmer, & Pylkkanen (2010) Psych Science MagnetoEncephaloGraphy (MEG) study –MEG better than EEG for source localization –BESA (Brain Electrical Source Analyzer) software Words have form properties correlated with syntactic category (Farmer et al., 2006; Monaghan et al., 2007) –Function morphemes, but also phono/ortho properties –Words with properties more typical of their category are read faster Dikker et al. (2009) found M100 sensitive to function morphology on content words –M100 ( msec) larger when content words include salient unexpected/ungrammatical function morpheme –e.g., The discovery was in the report / reported. –Brain source = occipital (visual) cortex!!!

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Dikker, et al (2010) cont’d Is salient category-typical morphology required? Example Stimuli - Nouns w/ derivational noun morph: princess, farmer - Nouns w/ non-morph-marked but typical form: soda - Nouns w/o form-correlated properties: infant - (Form typicality derived from large corpus analysis by Farmer et al., 2006 and Monaghan et al., 2007) Presented in context that predicts: - Noun: The tasteless soda … - Participle: The tastelessly soda …

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 In participle-predicting contexts: M100 bigger for morphologically marked nouns - Replicates Dikker et al. (2009) No M100 difference for neutral nouns - Also replicates Dikker et al. (2009) M100 also bigger for nouns with more noun-like phonology/orthography - So, salient function morphology not necessary

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Probabilistic Word Prediction The more the form properties of a word are typical for its syntactic category, the bigger the M100 in a context that predicts a word from a different category - By msec (!) in visual regions sensitive to letter/non-letter distinctions (!) - Dikker argues it’s visual word form properties that don’t match prediction, NOT syntactic category per se

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Issues in Sentence Comprehension Parallel vs Serial –Parallel = Construct multiple interpretations & wait for evidence about which is right –Serial = Construct only 1 interpretation at first, & then try another only if that turns out to be wrong (two stages) Which makes more sense depends on whether easier to –Construct multiple interpretations & hold onto them long enough to avoid making a mistake –Or construct just one interpretation & hope it’s right –If first choice usually right, serial approach could be more efficient

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Modular vs Interactive –Modular = Take only syntactic properties of words (N, V, Prep, etc.) & phrase structure options into account at first –Interactive = Take word meaning, context, & general knowledge into account all along Again, which makes more sense depends on whether it’s easier to –Make quick first guesses based on just syntactic categories of words & some basic phrase structure patterns –Or combine syntax, meaning, context, & knowledge fast enough in first place

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Garden Path Model (Frazier, Rayner, Clifton, F. Ferreira) Influential serial (two-stage) modular parsing model –Name comes from claim that we frequently garden- path during comprehension But only become aware of it occasionally Minimal Attachment Strategy –Whenever multiple structural options, start with simplest one i.e. one requiring adding fewest nodes to phrase structure tree at that point in sentence

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Structural Ambiguity S VP VP NP NP V NP PP NP V NP PP A thief shot the cop in the park. A thief shot the cop in the park. Attachment ambiguity Minimal Nonminimal

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Prediction of GP Model All sentences with Nonminimal Attachment (NMA) structures should be harder than all sentences with Minimal Attachment (MA) structures –Because always have to revise a wrong first guess in NMA sentences –That should take some time Though often not enough to become aware of problem

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Rayner, Carlson, & Frazier (1983) Measured how long people spent reading different regions of sentences using an eyetracker Stimuli: –Minimally Attached: The doctor examined the patient with the stethoscope, but he couldn’t figure out what was wrong. –Non-minimally Attached: The doctor examined the patient with the headache, but he couldn’t figure out what was wrong. Prediction of GP Model: –People should read headache & the words after it more slowly than stethoscope & the words after it

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Results – First Pass Times

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Interpretation Results support GP Model –Slower reading times after headache suggest people garden-pathed & had to reinterpret But, do Rayner et al.’s stimuli provide fair test of MA Strategy? –Temporary ambiguity starts at with –Is there anything earlier in sentence that might bias interpretation one way or other? –The verb examined, maybe? Does it lead to expectations for certain kinds of phrases following it? (Bresnan)

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Verb Argument Structure Verbs are the most important words in sentences (in English) –All other words are interpreted relative to the verb –The librarian put the book on the shelf. put requires all 3 of these arguments to be in the sentence, i.e. all 3 arguments are obligatory Subject / Agent= librarian Object / Patient (Theme)= book Location= shelf * The librarian put. * The librarian put the book. The librarian put on the shelf. Most verbs have some optional arguments –The doctor examined the patient. –The doctor examined the patient with a stethoscope. –* The doctor examined.

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Verb Bias Verbs differ in how often they are used with their optional arguments –examine is probably often used with an optional Instrument Maybe Rayner et al. happened to use lots of verbs that often take the kinds of arguments that were present in MA versions? –Would bias results in favor of MA sentences

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Taraban & McClelland (1988) Measured reading times using self-paced moving window technique Stimuli: –Used Rayner et al.’s materials –Plus just as many more like: MA: John read the article in the bathtub while he was waiting for a call. NMA: John read the article in the magazine while he was waiting for a call. Where John read the article in the... seems to lead to expectation of –something modifying article (= NMA) rather than a location where the reading event took place (= MA)

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Results

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Taraban & McClelland’s Conclusions No general Minimal Attachment Strategy People use knowledge about particular words & how they’re most likely to be used to guide their interpretation –Especially verbs? Serial vs Parallel –Supports serial model – should be no GP if fully parallel Modular/Interactive –If verb bias is syntactic, results have no consequence –If word meaning or extra-sentential context had an immediate effect, that would clearly support Interactive

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Another Kind of Temporary Structural Ambiguity “Marge Schott, managing partner of the Cincinnati Reds, at first did not want to apologize for her remark that Hitler‘was good at the beginning but he just went too far’. Under pressure, she finally said that she regretted her remarks ‘offended many people’.” - NY Times, 7/21/96, D. Tannen, I’m sorry, I won’t apologize

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 The referees warned the spectators would probably get too rowdy. against heckling the other team. - Ambiguity arises because that is optional (in English – obligatory in German, Dutch) that ^ Temporary ambiguity about relationship between the Verb - Is the noun a - Direct Object (DO) (= Minimal Attachment), or - Subject of an Embedded Clause (= NMA)? & the Noun after it

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Verb Bias Verbs differ in how often they’re used in particular sentence structures –Compare The referees warned the spectators... with The bus driver worried the passengers... warned = Direct-Object Biased Verb worried = Clause-Biased Verb Does a verb's most likely use guide initial choices about the interpretation of words following it?

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Plausibility of Noun as Direct Object Plausibility of particular Verb + Noun combos in particular relationships vary –Compare The referees warned the spectators... with The referees warned the game... –Meaning of game completely rules out DO possibility Does that lead people to expect a verb following game because it must be the beginning of an embedded clause? If yes, how long does it take to develop that expectation?

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Example Stimuli (Garnsey et al., 1997) DO-Bias Verbs (warned, discovered, heard, …) The referees warned (that) the spectators would probably get too rowdy. The referees warned (that) the game would probably go into overtime. Clause-Bias Verbs (worried, realized, suspected, …) The bus driver worried (that) the passengers were starting to get annoyed. The bus driver worried (that) the tires were starting to go flat. Equi-Bias Verbs (regretted, predicted, knew, …) The senior senator regretted (that) the decision had ever been made public. The senior senator regretted (that) the reporter had ever seen the report.

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Stimulus Norming & Control Verb Properties Verb Type FreqLengthDO-BiasCl-Biasthat-Pref DO-Bias %75%89% Equi-Bias %38%71% Clause-Bias %12%67% Ambiguous Noun Properties Plausible as DOImplausible as DO Verb Type FreqLen DO Rate Cl Rate FreqLen DO Rate Cl Rate DO-Bias Equi-Bias Clause-Bias

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 DO-Bias Verbs The referees warned the spectators would probably get too rowdy. The referees warned the game would probably go into overtime. Clause-Bias Verbs The bus driver worried the passengers were starting to get annoyed. The bus driver worried the tires were starting to go flat. Equi-Bias Verbs The senior senator regretted the decision had ever been made public. The senior senator regretted the reporter had ever seen the report. Reading Time Results (Same pattern in button-pushing moving window & eyetracking first pass) read slowly

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Verbs Rule No immediate effect of Plausibility of V + N combination when V had a strong bias But Plausibility did have an immediate effect when no V-bias So, the two factors interact, with Verb Bias dominating the interaction Consistent with Constraint-Satisfaction Models, with some kinds of constraints being more influential

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Event-Related Brain Potentials (ERPs) & Language N400 (Plausibility, Contextual fit) –Negative, 400 msec –Centro-parietal maximum, sometimes larger on right P600 (Garden-paths, grammar errors, complexity,…) –Positive, >500 msec –Centro-parietal maximum

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Stimulus Presentation in ERP Study READY 1 Therefereeswarnedthegamewouldprobablygointoovertime. Were the referees expecting a long game? QUESTION

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Verbs still rule. Why? Principled reasons: –They provide the most useful information –Information about them may be simply retrieved, while plausibility requires combining information from multiple words More accidental reasons: –They precede the critical nouns in these sentences [ but, see Trueswell (1996) ] –They generally appear early in English sentences, leading English speakers to rely on them

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Back to Usual Issues Effect of plausibility supports Interactive Constraint- Satisfaction Models With some kinds of info outweighing &/or available earlier than others Any evidence about Serial vs Parallel? Reliable correlations between RT at disambiguation & strength of bias toward less preferred structure when plausibility supported the less-preferred structure Clause-bias V + Plausible-as-DO N: - Difficulty increased as DO-bias strength of V increased (r = +.53) DO-bias V + Implausible-as-DO N: - Difficulty decreased as Cl-bias strength of V increased (r = -.58) Strongly suggests weighing both options = parallelism

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 GP Modelers’ Response Studies show various factors make easier the structures predicted by GP Model to be hard –So, all of these effects COULD be during 2 nd stage reanalysis, since should only try harder option when forced to reanalyze To be definitive, need to show that same factors can make harder the structures predicted by GP Model to be easier –Then effects can’t be due to reanalysis, since no reanalysis should be necessary according to GP Model

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Wilson & Garnsey (2009) Are sentences with DO structures made harder by having a Clause-bias verb? Sentences with either Clause or DO structures DO-bias V The ticket agent admitted the mistake might not have been caught. The ticket agent admitted the mistake because she had been caught. Clause-bias V The CIA director confirmed the rumor could mean a security leak. The CIA director confirmed the rumor when he testified to Congress.

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Moving Window RT Results at disambiguating region

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Eyetracking First Pass Times at disambiguating region

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Regression-Path Times at disambiguating region (also called Right-Bounded or Go-Past Times) Time from when: - First enter a region - Until leave that region with forward-going saccade -Includes time regressing back to previous regions

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Back to Usual Issues So, evidence supports both Parallelism & Interaction of multiple within-sentence constraints And shows Verb Bias effects in sentences that should not require any reanalysis according to GP –But Verb Bias effects could be part of 1 st stage, since may be a kind of syntactic knowledge –And N+V plausibility effects are only testable in sentences with Clause structure, so could be due to reanalysis What about constraints from outside sentence?

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 The Role of Prosody Embedded Clause / Direct Object sentences can be disambiguated with prosodic phrasing Acoustic correlates: –Pause –Pre-boundary lengthening –Pitch contour –Pitch reset –…

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 How does this kind of prosodic boundary marking influence sentence interpretation? Example of DO Prosody –The basketball star accepted the contract … … because it paid so well. Example of Clause Prosody - The basketball star accepted … … the contract required him to play every game.

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Do speakers produce different prosody in DO and Clause structures? Gahl & Garnsey (2004)

10/6/10Psyc / Ling / Comm 525 Fall 10 Boundaries marked more strongly when Structure not consistent with Verb Bias