Locating Wh-Traces

  • Howard S. Kurtzman
  • Loren F. Crawford
  • Caylee Nychis-Florence
Part of the Studies in Linguistics and Philosophy book series (SLAP, volume 44)


This chapter is an initial report of research in progress. It addresses a topic of considerable interest in recent psycholinguistics: the process by which humans locate Wh-traces in the course of word-by-word parsing of incoming sentences (Fodor, 1978; Stowe, 1986; Carlson and Tanenhaus, 1988; Clifton and Frazier, 1989).


Direct Object Final Word Thematic Role Transitive Verb Stimulus Sentence 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Aaronson, D. and H. Scarborough: 1976, ‘Performance Theories for Sentence Coding: Some Quantitative Evidence’, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 2, 56–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernstein, T.: 1977, Dos, don’ts and maybes of English usage, Times Books, New York.Google Scholar
  3. Boland, J., M. Tanenhaus, G. Carlson, and S. Garnsey: 1989, ‘Lexical Projection and the Interaction of Syntax and Semantics in parsing’, unpublished manuscript, University of Rochester, Rochester, New York.Google Scholar
  4. Carlson, G. and M. Tanenhaus: 1988, ‘Thematic Roles and Language Comprehension’, in W. Wilkins (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 21: Thematic Relations, Academic Press, New York, pp. 263–288.Google Scholar
  5. Clifton, C. and L. Frazier: 1989, ‘Comprehending Sentences with Long-Distance Dependencies’, in G. Carlson and M. Tanenhaus (eds.), Linguistic Structure in Language Processing, Kluwer, Dordrecht, Holland, pp. 273–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Clifton, C., L. Frazier, and C. Connine: 1984, ‘Lexical Expectations in Sentence Comprehension’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 23, 696–708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Connine, C., F. Ferreira, C. Jones, C. Clifton, and L. Frazier: 1984, ‘Verb Frame Preferences: Descriptive Norms’, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 13, 307–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Copperud, R.: 1980, American Usage and Style: The Consensus, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.Google Scholar
  9. Crain, S. and M. Steedman: 1985, ‘On Not Being Led Up the Garden Path: The Use of Context by the Psychological Parser’, in D. Dowty, L. Kartunnen and A. Zwicky (eds.), Natural Language Parsing, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, pp. 320–358.Google Scholar
  10. Erteschik-Shir, N.: 1979, ‘Discourse Constraints on Dative Movement’, in T. Givon (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 12, Academic Press, New York, pp. 441–467.Google Scholar
  11. Fodor, J.D.: 1978, ‘Parsing Strategies and Constraints on Transformations’, Linguistic Inquiry 9, 427–473.Google Scholar
  12. Ford, M.: 1983, ‘A Method for Obtaining Measures of Local Parsing Complexity Throughout Sentences’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 22, 203–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Frauenfelder, U., J. Segui, and J. Mehler, J.: 1980, ‘Monitoring Around the Relative Clause’, Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19, 328–337.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Frazier, L.: 1987, ‘Syntactic Processing: Evidence from Dutch’, Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 5, 515–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Frazier, L. and C. Clifton: 1989, ‘Successive Cyclicity in the Grammar and the Parser’, Language and Cognitive Processes 4, 93–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gorrell, P.: 1987, Studies of Human Syntactic Processing: Ranked-Parallel Versus Serial Models, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut.Google Scholar
  17. Grimshaw, J.: 1981, ‘Form, Function, and the Language Acquisition Device’, in C. Baker and J. McCarthy (eds.), The Logical Problem of Language Acquisition, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 165–187.Google Scholar
  18. Hakes, D., J. Evans and L. Brannon: 1976, ‘Understanding Sentences With Relative Clauses’, Memory and Cognition 4, 283–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Heny, F.: 1973, ‘Sentence and Predicate Modifiers in English’, in J. Kimball (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 2, Seminar Press, New York, pp. 217–246.Google Scholar
  20. Hornstein, N. and A. Weinberg: 1981, ‘Case Theory and Preposition Stranding’, Linguistic Inquiry 12, 55–91.Google Scholar
  21. Jackendoff, R.: 1983, Semantics and Cognition, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  22. Just, M. and C. Carpenter: 1980, ‘A Theory of Reading: From Eye Fixations to Comprehension’, Psychological Review 87, 329–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Keenan, E. and B. Comrie: 1977, ‘Noun Phrase Accessibility and Universal Grammar’, Linguistic Inquiry 8, 63–99.Google Scholar
  24. Keppel, G.: 1982, Design and Analysis (2nd edition), Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey.Google Scholar
  25. Kurtzman, H.: 1985, Studies in Syntactic Ambiguity Resolution Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Psychology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts (also available from Indiana University Linguistics Club, Bloomington, Indiana).Google Scholar
  26. Kurtzman, H.: 1989a, ‘Extraction of Indirect Objects’, In K. de Jong and Y. No (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth East Coast Conference on Linguistics, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, pp. 173–181.Google Scholar
  27. Kurtzman, H.: 1989b, ‘Sex Bias in Language Stimuli’, unpublished manuscript, Department of Psychology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York.Google Scholar
  28. Pesetsky, D.: 1983, Paths and Categories, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Linguistics and Philosophy, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  29. Shapiro, L., E. Zurif, and J. Grimshaw: 1987, ‘Sentence Processing and the Mental Representation of Verbs’, Cognition 27, 219–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Stowe, L.: 1986, ‘Parsing WH-constructions: Evidence for On-Line Gap Location’, Language and Cognitive Processes 2, 227–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Tanenhaus, M., S. Garnsey, and J. Boland: 1991, ‘Combinatory Lexical Information and Language Comprehension’, in G. Altmann (ed.), Computational Approaches to Speech and Language, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 383–408.Google Scholar
  32. Taraban, R. and J. McClelland: 1988, ‘Constituent Attachment and Thematic Role Assignment in Sentence Processing: Evidence For Content-Based Expectations’, Journal of Memory and Language 27, 597–632.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wanner, E. and M. Maratsos: 1978, ‘An ATN Approach to Comprehension’, in M. Halle, J. Bresnan and G. Miller (eds.), Linguistic Theory and Psychological Reality, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, pp. 119–161.Google Scholar
  34. Woolford, E.: 1984, ‘Dative Verbs with Unspecified Objects’, The Linguistic Review 3, 389–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1991

Authors and Affiliations

  • Howard S. Kurtzman
    • 1
  • Loren F. Crawford
    • 2
  • Caylee Nychis-Florence
    • 1
  1. 1.Uris Hall, Department of PsychologyCornell UniversityNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Neurosciences Training ProgramUniversity of Wisconsin at MadisonMadisonUSA

Personalised recommendations