1 / 106

Immediate Constraint Application

Immediate Constraint Application. Self-Paced Reading, Gender Mismatch Paradigm. Jessica … Russell …. While she …. While she was taking classes full-time, Jessica was working two jobs to pay the bills. While she was taking classes full-time, Russell was working two jobs to pay the bills.

suchi
Download Presentation

Immediate Constraint Application

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Immediate Constraint Application Self-Paced Reading, Gender Mismatch Paradigm Jessica …Russell … While she … While she was taking classes full-time, Jessica was working two jobs to pay the bills. While she was taking classes full-time, Russell was working two jobs to pay the bills. while Jessica …while Russell … She … She was taking classes full-time while Jessica was working two jobs to pay the bills. She was taking classes full-time while Russell was working two jobs to pay the bills. (Kazanina, Lau, Lieberman, Phillips, & Yoshida, submitted)

  2. Results GME at the 2nd NP in non-PrC pair while while Jessica Russell (Kazanina et al., submitted)

  3. Results GME at the 2nd NP in non-PrC pair NO GME at the 2nd NP in PrC pair while while Jessica Russell Condition C – immediate (Kazanina et al., submitted)

  4. Incrementality in Production

  5. Incrementality in Production • Different domains • Speech errors • Flexibility and incrementality • Look-ahead in planning

  6. Broca’s Aphasia

  7. Message FunctionalProcessing a. Lexical selectionb. Function assignment PositionalProcessing a. Constituent assemblyb. Inflection Kay Bock PhonologicalEncoding Pim Levelt Adapted from Bock & Levelt (1994)

  8. Speech Errors

  9. “…the most slippable units are the most basic units in languageproduction […] each of these - the word, the morpheme, and thephoneme - is the basic building block for a particular linguisticlevel.” (Dell 1995, p. 190)

  10. Word Errors - Category Constraint

  11. Incrementality in Production

  12. Message FunctionalProcessing a. Lexical selectionb. Function assignment PositionalProcessing a. Constituent assemblyb. Inflection PhonologicalEncoding Adapted from Bock & Levelt (1994)

  13. “…the main job will be to do as muchas can be done with strictly incrementalproduction. This is a time-honoredprinciple in psycholinguistics. Wundt(1900) said that word order follows thesuccessive apperception of the parts ofa total conception [Gesamtvorstellung].Of course, Wundt added that this canonly hold to the degree that word orderis free in a language.” (Levelt 1989, p. 26). Wilhelm Wundt (1832-1920)

  14. V. Ferreira 1996 • Incremental models predict easier production with syntactic flexibility for two reasons • All structures are freely available to be filled • Strict incremental construction permits the most active lexical representation (rather than syntactic competition) to determine structural decisions.

  15. 250ms + 500ms I gave 1500ms 250ms toys children to Until button press I gave toys to the children. I gave the children toys. I donated toys to the children. *I donated the children toys.

  16. She gave it to the child. *She gave the child it. She gave the box to him. She gave him the box.

  17. 250ms confused 1500ms 1000ms him story Until button press The story confused John. John rejected the story. John was confused by the story. The story was rejected by John. The story confused him. He rejected the story. *Him was confused by the story. *The story was rejected by he.

  18. confused rejected

  19. Ferreira & Dell 2000 • “Production proceeds more efficiently if syntactic structures are used that permit quickly selected lemmas to be mentioned as soon as possible. We call this the principle of immediate mention.” (Ferreira & Dell, 2000, p. 299) • Availability effects • The coach knew (that) you missed practice. • ‘that’ omitted more frequently the more accessible the embedded subject is.

  20. Ferreira & Dell 2000 • Repetition • I knew (that) I had booked a flight for tomorrow. • You knew (that) I had booked a flight for tomorrow. • I knew (that) you had booked a flight for tomorrow. • You knew (that) you had booked a flight for tomorrow.

  21. Ferreira & Dell 2000

  22. Ferreira & Dell 2000

  23. Ferreira & Dell 2000

  24. Picture-Word Interference

  25. Picture-Word Interference

  26. Picture-Word Interference cat cat cat

  27. Picture-Word Interference duck duck duck

  28. Picture-Word Interference rice rice rice

  29. Levels of Encoding • Task: picture description • Conjunctions: “the arrow and the bag” • Simple sentences “the arrow is next to the bag” • Auditory distractor: semantic, phonological, unrelated • Interference effects - delay in utterance onset latencies • Semantic NP1 NP2 • Phonological NP1 (Meyer 1996)

  30. Look-Ahead • “Is the verb an obligatory part of the advance planning unit?” • Task - simple scene description + distractors • Intransitive: verb + subject • Transitive: verb + subject + object • Prompts • Auf dem nächsten Bild sieht man wie… S (O) Vin the next pic. sees one how… • Und auf dem nächsten Bild… V S (O)and on the next pic. … • Distractors: SEM, UNREL, SYN, IDENT, NONE (Schriefers et al., 1998)

  31. Look-Ahead (Schriefers et al., 1998)

  32. Look-Ahead • “The production system does not have to wait for successful retrieval of the verb lemma when it occurs late in the utterance.” (Schriefers et al., 1998)

  33. Look-Ahead Distractor onsets after 200ms (Schriefers et al., 1998)

  34. Look-Ahead • “It appears that speakers can assign syntactic functions without knowing the verb lemma and its subcategorization frame and argument structure, and they do so if the verb does not occur in utterance initial position.” (Schriefers et al., 1998)

  35. Look-Ahead Expt. 5 - simple main clauses, no prompts“…the verb is only part of the grammatical advance planningunit if it occurs in utterance initial position.” (Schriefers et al., 1998)

  36. More Production

  37. Summary so far… • Evidence for incremental grammatical encoding • V. Ferreira (1996): give/donate alternation - opportunistic choice of word order • Schriefers et al. (1998): lack of picture-word interference effects on verb in S (O) V structures • V. Ferreira & Dell (2000): modulation of use of that.

  38. Arithmetic • Add the following • 21 + 4 = • 4 + 21 = (Dutch, French speakers) (Brysbaert et al., 1998)

  39. Arithmetic • Language contrast • Dutch: 51ms advantage for 4 + 21 order • French: 56ms advantage for 21 + 4 order • Radically incremental account • “the Dutch speakers try to get access to the unit of the response first, because they can start programming the pronunciation of the answer as soon as the value of the unit is known. In contrast, the French speakers have to capitalise on the value of the ten, which they must know before the response execution can be started” (p. 67) (Brysbaert et al., 1998)

  40. Arithmetic • Say the following • 24 + 31 • “[…]” • “[…] is the sum” • “the sum is […]” (Ferreira & Swets, 2002)

More Related