Summary
In this paper, we will discuss accounts of cross-linguistic differences in attachment preferences for relative clauses. In the first section, we will present an overview of data from two-site attachment ambiguities like (1). We will argue for a modular model of sentence processing where a discourse-based preference for a salient antecedent of the relative pronoun and a syntax-based recency preference contribute to empirically observable attachment preferences.
-
(1)
the daughter of the teacher who lived in France
In the second section, we will extend this account to three-site ambiguities like (13,3) which were first investigated by Gibson et al. (1996a, b), based on three German questionnaire experiments.
-
(2)
the lamp near the painting in the house that was damaged in the flood (Gibson et al., 1996a)
-
(3)
the customer with the child with the dirty face and
-
the wet diaper
-
the one with the wet diaper
-
the one with the baby with the wet diaper
-
For English and Spanish, Gibson et al. (1996a) found an NP3 over NP1 over NP2 attachment preferences for relative clauses which could also be established for English conjoined NPs. We will show that attachment preferences in comparable German constructions are highly similar to the preferences established for English (and Spanish where available). We will present evidence for a change in the preference pattern if the relative clause is extraposed leading
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Brysbaert, M., & Mitchell, D. (1996, June). Modifier attachment in Dutch: Deciding between garden-path, construal, and statistical tuning accounts of parsing. Paper presented at the Workshop on Computational Psycholin-guistics, Wassenaar, NL.
Brysbaert, M., & Mitchell, D. (1996). Modifier attachment in sentence parsing: evidence from Dutch. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 49A, 664–695.
Böring, D., & Hartmann, K. (1995). All right! In U. Lutz & J. Pafel (Eds.), On extraction and extraposition in German (pp. 179–212). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Carreiras, M., & Clifton, Jr., C. (1993). Relative clause interpretation preferences in Spanish and English. Language and Speech, 36(4), 353–372.
Cuetos, F., & Mitchell, D. (1988). Cross linguistic differences in parsing: Restrictions on the issue of the late closure strategy in Spanish. Cognition, 30, 73–105.
De Vincenzi, M., & Job, R. (1995). An investigation of late closure: The role of syntax, thematic structure and pragmatics in initial and final interpretation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 27(5), 1303–1321.
Fodor, J. D., & Frazier, L. (1980). Is the HSPM an ATN? Cognition, 8, 417–459.
Frazier, L. (1979). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Bloomington, IN: IULC.
Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), The psychology of reading. (Attention and Performance Vol. 12) (pp. 559–586). Hove/London/Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (1997). Construal: Overview, motivation, and some new evidence. Journal of Psycholinguistic research, 26(3), 277–296.
Garrod, S., & Sanford, A. J. (1985). On the real-time character of interpretation during reading. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1, 43–59.
Gibson, E. (1997). Syntactic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Unpublished manuscript, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Gibson, E., Pearlmutter, N., Canseco-Gonzalez, E., & Hickock, G. (1996). Recency preference in the human sentence processing mechanism. Cognition, 59, 23–59.
Gibson, E., Schütze, C. T., & Salomon, A. (1996). The relationship between the frequency and the processing complexity of linguistic structure. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 25(1), 59–92.
Gilboy, E., Sopena, J., Frazier, L., & Clifton, C. (1995). Argument structure and association preferences in Spanish and English complex NPs. Cognition, 54, 131–167.
Haider, H. (1995). Downright down to the right. In U. Lutz & J. Pafel (Eds.), On extraction and extraposition in German (pp. 245–272). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., & Scheepers, C. (1994, October). Probabilistic or universal approaches to sentence processing: How universal is the human language processor? In H. Trost (Ed.), KONVENS94 (pp. 161–170). Berlin: Springer.
Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., & Scheepers, C. (in press). Syntactic attachment and anaphor resolution: Two sides of relative clause attachment. In M. Crocker, M. Pickering & C. Clifton, Jr., (Eds.), Architectures and mechanisms for language processing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kamide, Y., & Mitchell, D. (1996, March). Relative clause attachment: evidence from Japanese. Poster presented at the 9th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, New York.
Kamide, Y, Mitchell, D., & Scheepers, C. (1997, September). Argument structure requirements and recency preference in the resolution of thematic attachment ambiguities. Paper presented at the 3rd Conference on Architectures and Mechanisms of Language Processing (AMLaP), Edinburgh.
Kayne, R. (1994). The antisymmetry of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
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.
Meng, M. (1997). Die Verarbeitung von W-Fragen im Deutschen: Präferenzen und Reanalyseeffekte. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Jena.
Mitchell, D. C. (1996, June). Empirical facts on human parsing: findings to be explained in viable models of the process. Talk presented at the Workshop on Computational Psycholinguistics, NIAS, Wassenaar, Holland.
Mitchell, D. C., Cuetos, F., & Zagar, D. (1990). Reading in different languages: Is there a universal mechanism for parsing sentences? In D. Balota, G. B. Flores d’Arcais & K. Rayner (Eds.), Comprehension processes in reading (pp. 285–302). Hillsdale. NJ: Erlbaum.
Müller, G. (1995). On extraposition and successive cyclicity. In U. Lutz & J. Pafel (Eds.), On extraction and extraposition in German (pp. 213–244). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Pynte, J., & Frenck-Mestre, C. (1996, September). Evidence for early-closure attachments on first-pass reading times in French: A replication. Poster presented at the 2nd Conference on Architectures and Mechanisms for Language Processing in Turino, Italy.
Sanford, T., & Garrod, S. (1981). Understanding written language. Chicester: Wiley.
Schafer, A., Carter, J., Clifton, C., Jr, Frazier, L. (1996). Focus in relative clause construal. Language and Cognitive Processes, 11, 135–164.
Traxler, M. J., Pickering, M. J., & Clifton, C. (1996, September). Architectures and mechanisms that process prepositional phrases and relative clauses. Paper presented at the AMLaP-96 Conference, Turino, Italy.
Walter, M., & Hemforth, B. (1997, September). Relative clause attachment and syntactic boundaries. Paper presented at the 3rd Conference on Architectures and Mechanisms of Language Processing (AMLaP) in Edinburgh.
Wanner, E. (1980). The ATN and the sausage machine: Which one is baloney? Cognition, 8, 209–225.
Wilder, C. (1995). Rightward movement as leftward deletion. In U. Lutz & J. Pafel (Eds.), On extraction and extraposition in German (pp. 273–310). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Co.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2000 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L., Scheepers, C. (2000). Modifier Attachment: Relative Clauses and Coordinations. 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_6
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9618-3_6
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-5373-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-015-9618-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive