汉语词类歧义解决初探

采用自定步速移动窗口阅读实验范式,考察汉语词类歧义解决过程。阅渎材料为含有单字词类歧义词的句子,歧义词前面的语境不提供明确的偏向性信息．后语境提供解歧信息。结果发现,主要用法和次要用法的句子都在解歧区比控制句阅读时间加长,表明汉语词类歧义解决没有即时受到歧义词两种用法的相对频率影响,而是在歧义词处暂时不进行完全的句法分配,延迟到获得充分解歧信息的时候才分配句法角色。这一结果支持词类歧义解决的延迟模型。     

话语参照语境条件下汉语歧义短语的加工

采用移动窗口和眼动记录两种范式 ,以符合“VP +N1+的 +N2”格式的均衡型和述宾型两类汉语歧义短语为背景 ,在两个实验中 ,考察了话语参照语境影响歧义短语句法分析的机制以及时间进程。结果发现 ,在早于解歧区 1的区段上就开始出现话语语境效应。这些发现表明话语参照语境可以通过概念期望机制起作用 ,而并非仅仅通过参照前提机制起作用。此外 ,实验还证明了话语参照语境在句子加工早期的作用。这一结果为句法歧义消解的参照理论和基于制约的模型提供了证据 ,而对宣称最初的句法分析独立于话语语境的花园路径模型 ,提出了质疑     

句法歧义消解影响因素、认知机制及其神经基础

句法歧义消解主要是指人们在面临多种句法分析可能性的情况下,句法分析器抑制不正确的句法分析而选择正确句法分析的认知过程。研究表明,该过程受到工作记忆、认知控制能力、语言分布频率、语境、韵律等因素的影响。为有效说明人们是如何完成句法歧义消解的,研究者们建构了诸如花园路径模型、约束满意理论、弱交互作用句法分析理论等相关模型。另外,基于脑成像技术研究表明,左侧额下回、左侧颞叶后部、中部和前部在句法消歧任务中都有显著激活。未来研究当围绕着句法消歧中的语义效应、句法和词汇歧义消解机制的异同、句法消歧中抑制能力的效应等方面展开。     

汉语名-动兼类效应的神经机制研究

文章运用ERP技术,考察了汉语名-动兼类词在语法语境下的脑神经机制。实验结果显示,名-动兼类词与非兼类的名词和动词所诱发的P600成分没有显著差异,只有在动词语境下,名-动兼类词才在额区和中央区诱发出一个更小的N400成分;与动词语境中的名-动兼类词相比,名词语境中的名-动兼类词诱发出更大的P600成分,这与非兼类名词、动词相互分离的神经机制相同。根据实验结果认为,与相应的非兼类名词和动词相比,从语法角度划分的汉语名-动兼类词没有特异的脑神经机制。     

汉语动/名词词类歧义消解初探

采用自控速度的移动窗口技术,在1个实验中考察由动/名词类歧义词引发的句法歧义的消解机制。阅读材料为含有双字词类歧义词的句子。结果表明:Gibson乘法模型和新再分析模型结合在一起比竞争模型和不受限竞赛模型能够更好地预测和解释由汉语动/名词类歧义词引发的句法歧义的消解。     

语法语境下汉语名动分离的ERP研究

运用ERP技术,从语法角度,通过词语搭配判断任务,考察汉语名词和动词加工的脑神经机制。实验结果显示,在适合的语法语境中,名词、动词和动名兼类词所诱发出ERP差异主要反应在P200、N400和P600三个ERP成分上。在正确的语境中,名词诱发出更大的P200,而动词则诱发出比名词更大的N400和减小的P600;当动名兼类词分别用作名词和动词时,虽然二者的N400没有显著差异,但前者诱发出一个增大的P600。根据实验结果认为：汉语名词和动词具有不同的神经表征和加工机制,名词和动词的语法功能在汉语名动分离中起了重要的作用     

汉语名词、动词和动名兼类词语义加工的偏侧化现象——来自ERP的研究

将ERP技术和半视野技术相结合,采用词汇判断任务,对汉语名词、动词和动名兼类词在左脑和右脑中的加工机制进行了考察。实验结果显示,名词和动词的N400仅在左视野/右脑存在差异,名词和动词的N400在左视野/右脑和右视野/左脑中都比偏（动）和偏（名）更负。不同词类的LPC在右视野/左脑中没有显著差异;偏（名）和偏（动）的LPC在左视野/右脑中比名词和动词更正。实验结果表明,在没有语境条件下,汉语名词和动词的差异主要在具体性上,动名兼类词体现出不同于名词、动词的加工机制。     

句子结构与控制动词类型对题元角色指派的影响

扩展论元依存模型认为：语序固定语言的题元角色指派依赖论元的语序线索; 论元线索与动词论元表征不一致时, 题元角色再分析会产生额外的加工负荷。为检验该模型, 本研究采用眼动记录方法, 实验为2 (句子结构：居中、前置) × 2 (控制动词类型：主语控制、宾语控制)被试内设计。通过操纵句子结构, 考察汉语读者对语序线索的依赖性; 通过操纵控制动词类型, 考察汉语论元线索与动词论元表征的一致性对题元角色指派的影响。结果发现：(1)前置结构的句子在名词1、名词2和动词区域的阅读时间和回视次数多于居中结构的句子; (2)宾语控制动词条件在动词和动词后区域的第二遍阅读时间和总回视次数多于主语控制动词条件; (3)在居中结构中, 宾语控制动词条件在名词2和动词区域的阅读时间和回视次数多于主语控制动词条件; 在前置结构中, 宾语控制动词条件在动词后区域的阅读时间多于主语控制动词条件。结果支持扩展论元依存模型。     

语境和动词信息对主题角色指派的影响

以大学生为被试,采用DMDX系统,运用自控速的逐词意义判断法,探讨语境和动词的限定信息在主题角色指派中的作用。结果发现：被试能够根据语境和动词的限定信息对动词后的主项进行预期。当语境中引进的先行词能够成为动词后的合理主项时,被试可以利用语境信息和动词的限定信息,在句法明确的做出角色指派以前,给语境中引进的先行词指派角色。     

语义约束还是句法约束——汉语简单和复合反身代词的母语加工研究

本研究使用两个自控步速阅读实验和两个问卷测试,探讨句法约束原则和先行词有生性语义特征对汉语母语者简单和复合反身代词指代消解的在线影响。研究发现,有生性语义信息能够调节反身代词指代消解的加工进程,当只有一个有生性先行词,两类反身代词都优先指向该有生名词;当有两个有生性先行词,简单反身代词倾向于近距离先行词,复合反身代词倾向于远距离先行词。该结论支持以特征约束为基础、句法和语义等因素竞争的内容可及性加工机制。     

Misinterpretations of Garden-Path Sentences: Implications for Models of Sentence Processing and Reanalysis

Theories of sentence comprehension have addressed both initial parsing processes and mechanisms responsible for reanalysis. Three experiments are summarized that were designed to investigate the reanalysis and interpretation of relatively difficult garden-path sentences (e.g., While Anna dressed the baby spit up on the bed). After reading such sentences, participants correctly believed that the baby spit up on the bed; however, they often confidently, yet incorrectly, believed that Anna dressed the baby. These results demonstrate that garden-path reanalysis is not an all-or-nothing process and that thematic roles initially assigned for the subordinate clause verb are not consistently revised. The implications of the partial reanalysis phenomenon for Fodor and Inoue's (1998) model of reanalysis and sentence processing are discussed. In addition, we discuss the possibility that language processing often creates good enough structures rather than ideal structures.     

汉语偏正/述宾歧义短语加工初探

操纵短语续接方向及歧义性,采用移动窗口范式,考察了均衡型、偏正型和述宾型三类歧义短语的加工,结果发现,偏正型歧义短语按述宾结构续接以及述宾型歧义短语按偏正结构续按时,在解歧区２上都有明显的加工困难,说明实验所采用的方法是敏感的。实验还发现,均衡型歧义短语按述宾结构续接时,在解歧区２上仍有加工上的困难,述宾型歧义短语按偏正结构续按时,在解歧区３上仍能看到加工上的困难,这表明歧义消解具有相对分散的特点。更重要的是,实验发现,均衡型歧义短语按述宾结构续接时,在解歧区１上就出现了加工困难,表明被试实际上按偏正结构来分析这种短语。该文从句法分析原则、语言分布知识的使用以及动词论题结构与语义完整性等角度对这一发现进行了讨论。     

The influence of prosodic structure on the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguities

This paper investigates the influence of prosodic structure on the process of sentence comprehension, with a specific focus on the relative contributions of syntactic and prosodic information to the resolution of temporary syntactic closure ambiguities. We argue that prosodic structure provides an initial memory representation for spoken sentences, and that information from this prosodic representation is available to inform syntactic parsing decisions. This view makes three predictions for the processing of temporary syntactic ambiguity: 1. When prosodic and syntactic boundaries coincide, syntactic processing should be facilitated. 2. When prosodic boundaries are placed at misleading points in syntactic structure, syntactic processing should show interference effects. 3. The processing difficulties that have been reliably demonstrated in reading experiments for syntactically complex sentences should disappear when those sentences are presented with a felicitous prosodic structure in listening experiments. These predictions were confirmed by series of experiments measuring end-of-sentence comprehension time and cross-modal naming time for sentences with temporary syntactic closure ambiguities. Sentences with coinciding or conflicting prosodic and syntactic boundaries were compared to a prosodic baseline condition.This research was supported in part by NIMH grant R29 MH51768 to the first author and NIMH grant T32 MH19729 to the Northeastern University Psychology Department.     

Young children's use of prosody in sentence parsing

Korean children's ability to use prosodic phrasing in sentence comprehension was studied using two types of ambiguity. First, we examined a word-segmentation ambiguity in which placement of the phrasal boundary leads to different interpretations of a sentence. Next, we examined a syntactic ambiguity in which the same words were differently grouped into syntactic phrases by prosodic demarcation. Children aged 3 or 4 years showed that they could use prosodic information to segment utterances and to derive the meaning of ambiguous sentences when the sentences only contained a word-segmentation ambiguity. However, even 5- to 6-year-old children were not able to reliably resolve the second type of ambiguity, an ambiguity of phrasal grouping, by using prosodic information. The results demonstrate that children's difficulties in dealing with structural ambiguity are not due to their inability to use prosodic information.     

句法预测对句子理解影响的眼动实验

实验采用眼动技术实时考察了句子阅读理解过程中的句法预测效应和并列句的结构表征特点。眼动数据分析发现：(1)有无句法预测没有明显影响名词短语区域的加工, 不同眼动指标差异不显著; (2)有无句法预测显著影响被试对包含暂时局部歧义的关键区和具有解歧作用的关键后区域的阅读理解, 首次注视时间、第一遍阅读时间、回视路径时间和第一遍回视率明显减少。眼动研究表明, 暂时局部歧义句子阅读理解过程中表现出明显的句法预测效应, 有句法预测降低了局部歧义区域和解歧区域早期和晚期加工的难度; 和英语的短语并列优先法则不同, 汉语并列句子的结构表征出现分离现象, 即短语并列和句子并列。     

Ambiguity in the brain: what brain imaging reveals about the processing of syntactically ambiguous sentences

Two fMRI studies investigated the time course and amplitude of brain activity in language-related areas during the processing of syntactically ambiguous sentences. In Experiment 1, higher levels of activation were found during the reading of unpreferred syntactic structures as well as more complex structures. In Experiments 2A and 2B higher levels of brain activation were found for ambiguous sentences compared with unambiguous sentences matched for syntactic complexity, even when the ambiguities were resolved in favor of the preferred syntactic construction (despite the absence of this difference in previous reading time results). Although results can be reconciled with either serial or parallel models of sentence parsing, they arguably fit better into the parallel framework. Serial models can admittedly be made consistent but only by including a parallel component. The fMRI data indicate the involvement of a parallel component in syntactic parsing that might be either a selection mechanism or a construction of multiple parses.     

Effect of ambiguity and lexical availability on syntactic and lexical production

Speakers only sometimes include the that in sentence complement structures like The coach knew (that) you missed practice. Six experiments tested the predictions concerning optional word mention of two general approaches to language production. One approach claims that language production processes choose syntactic structures that ease the task of creating sentences, so that words are spoken opportunistically, as they are selected for production. The second approach claims that a syntactic structure is chosen that is easiest to comprehend, so that optional words like that are used to avoid temporarily ambiguous, difficult-to-comprehend sentences. In all experiments, speakers did not consistently include optional words to circumvent a temporary ambiguity, but they did omit optional words (the complementizer that) when subsequent material was either repeated (within a sentence) or prompted with a recall cue. The results suggest that speakers choose syntactic structures to permit early mention of available material and not to circumvent disruptive temporary ambiguities.     

Single-Stage Prediction Models Do Not Explain the Magnitude of Syntactic Disambiguation Difficulty

The disambiguation of a syntactically ambiguous sentence in favor of a less preferred parse can lead to slower reading at the disambiguation point. This phenomenon, referred to as a garden-path effect, has motivated models in which readers initially maintain only a subset of the possible parses of the sentence, and subsequently require time-consuming reanalysis to reconstruct a discarded parse. A more recent proposal argues that the garden-path effect can be reduced to surprisal arising in a fully parallel parser: words consistent with the initially dispreferred but ultimately correct parse are simply less predictable than those consistent with the incorrect parse. Since predictability has pervasive effects in reading far beyond garden-path sentences, this account, which dispenses with reanalysis mechanisms, is more parsimonious. Crucially, it predicts a linear effect of surprisal: the garden-path effect is expected to be proportional to the difference in word surprisal between the ultimately correct and ultimately incorrect interpretations. To test this prediction, we used recurrent neural network language models to estimate word-by-word surprisal for three temporarily ambiguous constructions. We then estimated the slowdown attributed to each bit of surprisal from human self-paced reading times, and used that quantity to predict syntactic disambiguation difficulty. Surprisal successfully predicted the existence of garden-path effects, but drastically underpredicted their magnitude, and failed to predict their relative severity across constructions. We conclude that a full explanation of syntactic disambiguation difficulty may require recovery mechanisms beyond predictability.     

Processing the noun phrase versus sentence coordination ambiguity: thematic information does not completely eliminate processing difficulty

When faced with the noun phrase (NP) versus sentence (S) coordination ambiguity as in, for example, The thief shot the jeweller and the cop ..., readers prefer the reading with NP-coordination (e.g., "The thief shot the jeweller and the cop yesterday") over one with two conjoined sentences (e.g., "The thief shot the jeweller and the cop panicked"). A corpus study is presented showing that NP-coordinations are produced far more often than S-coordinations, which in frequency-based accounts of parsing might be taken to explain the NP-coordination preference. In addition, we describe an eye-tracking experiment investigating S-coordinated sentences such as Jasper sanded the board and the carpenter laughed, where the poor thematic fit between carpenter and sanded argues against NP-coordination. Our results indicate that information regarding poor thematic fit was used rapidly, but not without leaving some residual processing difficulty. This is compatible with claims that thematic information can reduce but not completely eliminate garden-path effects.