Constraint satisfaction as a theory of sentence processing

Various problems with the constraint satisfaction model are discussed. It is argued that the empirical evidence presented in support of the model does not concern predictions of the model that diverge from those of depth-first (one analysis at a time) models. Several methodological problems are also noted. As a theory of sentence processing, the model is inadequate. It fails to account for the assignment of local structure, global structure, structure involving discontinuous dependencies, long-distance dependencies, and adjunct phrases. It makes incorrect predictions about the timing of syntactic analysis. Further, because syntactic structure is available only through activation of syntactic projections stored in the lexical entry of words, the model leaves entirely unexplained the myriad psycholinguistic findings demonstrating independence of lexical and syntactic structure (in Event Related Potential studies, code-switching, pure syntactic priming, etc). Finally, the model is not restrictive or explanatory, providing an account that largely consists ofpost hoc correlations between frequency counts or subjects ratings of sentences and processing time data for the same sentences.The present paper is an excerpt from Sentence (Re-)Analysis presented at the 1994 CUNY Conference. It was supported by NIH Grant HD18708 to Clifton and Frazier and DBS9121375 to Rayner and Frazier. I am very grateful to Chuck Clifton and to an anonymous reviewer for comments on an earlier draft of this paper.