|
CNL Lunch
Talks
Alison
Austin, Ellen Lau, Clare Stroud
The Role of
Structural Expectations in Detecting Structural Violations
Thursday April 15th, 2004, 12:30 PM, 3416 Marie Mount Hall
|
Electrophysiological studies of sentence processing have revealed a
family of response components associated with different types of
syntactic and semantic violations. Our studies seek to clarify the
factors that distinguish early syntax-related ERP components (e.g.
Early Left Anterior Negativity or ELAN, ~150-250ms) from later
syntax-related components (e.g. P600).
In English, the ELAN has been reported only in response to sequences
such as "...Max's of...". A number of different factors may be
responsible for the earliness of violation-detection in this context:
ill-formedness at the level of lexical categories, the violation of a
strong expectation that the word following the possessor will be a
noun, or the high-frequency of the function word "of".
In the first study, we used ellipsis to create contexts for the
traditional ELAN comparison ('Max's proof of' vs. Max's of proof?) in
which the expectation for a noun following the possessor was
eliminated or weakened. If a strong structural expectation is crucial
to the ELAN effect, we predict that we will see an ELAN only in the
non-ellipsis conditions.
In the follow-up study, we once again manipulated the context
surrounding 'of', this time using subcategorization to create
grammatical/ungrammatical sentence pairs. This yields a comparison
similar to the original Neville study, in which 'of' renders the
sentence ungrammatical, but no longer violates a prediction.
A final comparison was done which tested whether the parser would
register a mismatch to even grammatical sentences which violated the
strongest prediction, e.g. an adjective after the possessive:
The woman examined Max's very careful
proof.
Based on our results, we will provide the beginning of an explanation
which accounts for both the timeframe and limited distribution of the
ELAN in terms of the ease of identifying ungrammaticality.
|
|
|