Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Linking Syntactic Functions with Thematic Roles: Psych-Verbs and the Resolution of Subject-Object Ambiguity

  • Chapter
German Sentence Processing

Part of the book series: Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics ((SITP,volume 24))

Abstract

Subject-object ambiguities like in (1a-d), where the first NP can either be interpreted as the subject or as the direct object of the sentence, are one of the most intensively studied phenomena of German sentence processing, as is reflected by the number of contributions on this topic in the current volume (cf. the chapters of Markus Bader, Paul Gorrell, Lars Konieczny et al., and Matthias Schlesewsky et al.).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Abney, S. (1989). A computational model of human parsing. Journal of Psycholinguists Research, 18(1), 129–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bader, M., Bayer, J., Hopf, J.-M., & Meng, M. (1996). Case-assignment in processing German verb-final clauses. Proceedings of the NELS Workshop on Sentence Processing (Occasional papers in linguistics, Vol. 9). Cambridge: MIT Press, 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bader, M., & Lasser, I. (1994). German verb-final clauses and sentence processing: Evidence for immediate attachment. In C. Clifton, L. Frazier & K. Rayner (Eds.), Perspectives in sentence processing (pp. 225–242). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crocker, M. (1993). Properties of the principle-based sentence processor. Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, June, 18–21, 1993. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 371–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Vincenzi, M. (1991). Syntactic parsing strategies in Italian: The minimal chain principle (Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics, Vol. 12). Dordrecht, NL: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Ferreira, F., & Clifton, C. (1986). The independence of syntactic processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 25, 348–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, M., Bresnan, J., & Kaplan, R. M. (1982). A competence-based theory of syntactic closure. In J. Bresnan (Ed.), The mental representation of grammatical relations (pp. 727–796). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L. (1987a). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), The psychology of reading (pp. 559–586). Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L. (1987c). Theories of sentence processing. In J. Garfield (Ed.), Modularity in knowledge representation and natural-language understanding (pp. 291–308). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L. (1990). Exploring the architecture of the language processing system. In Gerry TM. Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing (pp. 409–433). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frey, W. (1993). Syntaktische Bedingungen für die semantische Interpretation: über Bindung, implizite Argumente und Skopus. Berlin: Akademie Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, E. (1991). A computational theory of human linguistic processing: memory limitations and processing breakdown. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorrell, P. (1995). Syntax and parsing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Grimshaw, J. (1990). Argument structure. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimshaw, J. (1991). Extended projections. Unpublished manuscript, Brandeis University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grimshaw, J. (1993). Minimal projection, heads, and optimality (Tech. Rep. No. 4). Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University, Center for Cognitive Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haider, H. (1993). Deutsche Syntax — generativ: Vorstudien zur Theorie einer projektiven Grammatik. Tübingen: Narr.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, J. A. (1990). A parsing theory of word order universais. Linguistic Inquiry, 21, 223–261.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hemforth, B. (1993). Kognitives Parsing: Repräsentation und Verarbeitung sprachlichen Wissens. Sankt Augustin: Infix.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keenan, E., & Comrie, B. (1977). Noun phrase accessibility and universal grammar. Linguistic Inquiry, 8, 63–99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konieczny, L. (1996). Human sentence processing: A semantics-oriented parsing approach (IIG-Bericht Nr. 3/96). Freiburg: Universität Freiburg, Institut für Informatik und Gesellschaft.

    Google Scholar 

  • Konieczny, L., & Hemforth, B., Scheepers, C, & Strube, G. (1997). The role of lexical heads in parsing: Evidence from German. Language and Cognitive Processes, 12, 307–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kurtzman, H. S., & MacDonald, M. C. (1993). Resolution of quantifier scope ambiguities. Cognition, 48, 243–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, M., Pearlmutter, N., & Seidenberg, M.S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101 (4), 676–703.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mecklinger, A., Schriefers, H., Steinhauer, K., & Friederici, A. (1995). Processing relative clauses varying on syntactic and semantic dimensions: An analysis with event-related potentials. Memory and Cognition, 23, 477–494.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meng, M.(1996). Processing wh-questions in German and Dutch: Differential effects of disambiguation and their interpretation. Unpublished manuscript, Friedrich-Schiller Universität, at Jena.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pechmann, T., Uszkoreit, H., Engelkamp, J., & Zerbst, D. (1994). Word order in the German middle field: Linguistic theory and psycholinguistic evidence (Report No. 43). Saarbrücken: Universität des Saarlandes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, C., & Sag, I. A. (1987). Information-based syntax and semantics. Vol. 1 (CSLI Lecture Notes No. 13). Stanford: Center for the Study of Language and Information.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollard, C., & Sag, I. A. (1994). Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago, London: University of Chicago Press and CSLI Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pritchett, B. (1992). Grammatical competence and parsing performance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheepers, C. (1996). Menschliche Satzverarbeitung: Syntaktische und thematische Aspekte der Wortstellung im Deutschen. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Freiburg, Germany.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scheepers, C., Konieczny, L., & Hemforth, B. (1997, March). The influence of sentence type and constituent order on parsing difficulty in German. Poster presented at the 10th Annual CUNY-Conference on Human Sentence Processing, Los Angeles, California.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stechow, A. von, & Sternefeld, W. (1988). Bausteine syntaktischen Wissens. Opladen: Westdeutscher Verlag.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, S. (1993). A constrained active attachment model for resolving syntactic ambiguities in natural language parsing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M., Carlson, G., & Trueswell, J. C. (1989). The role of thematic structures in interpretation and parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 211–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M. K., Boland, J., Mauner, G., & Carlson, G. (1993). More on combinatory lexical information: thematic structure in parsing and interpretation. In G. T. M. Altmann & R. Shillcock (Eds.), Cognitive models of speech processing: The Second Sperlonga Meeting (pp. 297–319). Hove: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanenhaus, M. K., Garnsey, S. M., & Boland, J. (1990). Combinatory lexical information and language comprehension. In G. T. M. Altmann (Ed.), Cognitive models of speech processing: Psycholinguistic and computational perspectives (pp. 383–408). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taraban, R., & McClelland, J. L. (1988). Constituent attachment and thematic role assignment in sentence processing: Influence of content-based expectations. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 597–632.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trueswell, J.C., Tanenhaus, M.K., & Garnsey, S.M. (1994). Semantic influences on parsing: Use of thematic role information in syntactic ambiguity resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 285–318.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Uszkoreit, H. (1986). Constraints on order. Linguistics, 24, 883–906.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Glasgow, UK

    Christoph Scheepers

  2. University of Freiburg, Germany

    Barbara Hemforth

  3. Saarland University, Germany

    Lars Konieczny

Authors
  1. Christoph Scheepers
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara Hemforth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Lars Konieczny
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Freiburg University, Freiburg, Germany

    Barbara Hemforth

  2. Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany

    Lars Konieczny

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Scheepers, C., Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L. (2000). Linking Syntactic Functions with Thematic Roles: Psych-Verbs and the Resolution of Subject-Object Ambiguity. In: Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L. (eds) German Sentence Processing. Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics, vol 24. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9618-3_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9618-3_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5373-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-015-9618-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation