Prosodic disambiguation of syntactic structure: for the speaker or for the addressee?

Department of Psychology, State University of New York at Stony Brook, Stony Brook, NY 11794-2500, United States.
Cognitive Psychology (Impact Factor: 3.57). 04/2005; 50(2):194-231. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.08.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Evidence has been mixed on whether speakers spontaneously and reliably produce prosodic cues that resolve syntactic ambiguities. And when speakers do produce such cues, it is unclear whether they do so "for" their addressees (the audience design hypothesis) or "for" themselves, as a by-product of planning and articulating utterances. Three experiments addressed these issues. In Experiments 1 and 3, speakers followed pictorial guides to spontaneously instruct addressees to move objects. Critical instructions (e.g., "Put the dog in the basket on the star") were syntactically ambiguous, and the referential situation supported either one or both interpretations. Speakers reliably produced disambiguating cues to syntactic ambiguity whether the situation was ambiguous or not. However, Experiment 2 suggested that most speakers were not yet aware of whether the situation was ambiguous by the time they began to speak, and so adapting to addressees' particular needs may not have been feasible in Experiment 1. Experiment 3 examined individual speakers' awareness of situational ambiguity and the extent to which they signaled structure, with or without addressees present. Speakers tended to produce prosodic cues to syntactic boundaries regardless of their addressees' needs in particular situations. Such cues did prove helpful to addressees, who correctly interpreted speakers' instructions virtually all the time. In fact, even when speakers produced syntactically ambiguous utterances in situations that supported both interpretations, eye-tracking data showed that 40% of the time addressees did not even consider the non-intended objects. We discuss the standards needed for a convincing test of the audience design hypothesis.

1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Investigations of how we produce and perceive prosodic patterns are not only interesting in their own right but can inform fundamental questions in language research. We here argue that functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) in general - and the functional localization approach in particular (e.g., Kanwisher et al., 1997; Saxe et al., 2006; Fedorenko et al., 2010; Nieto-Castañon & Fedorenko, 2012) - has the potential to help address open research questions in prosody research and at the intersection of prosody and other domains. Critically, this approach can go beyond questions like "where in the brain does mental process x produce activation" and toward questions that probe the nature of the representations and computations that subserve different mental abilities. We describe one way to functionally define regions sensitive to sentence-level prosody in individual subjects. This or similar "localizer" contrasts can be used in future studies to test hypotheses about the precise contributions of prosody-sensitive brain regions to prosodic processing and cognition more broadly.
    Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 30(1-2):120-148. DOI:10.1080/01690965.2013.861917 · 1.93 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We investigated the processing of ambiguous double-PP constructions in Hebrew. Selection restrictions forced the first prepositional phrase (PP1) to attach low, but PP2 could attach maximally high to VP or maximally low to the NP inside PP1. A length contrast in PP2 was also examined. This construction affords more potential locations for prosodic boundaries, and has a sharper structural contrast between the two attachment sites, than the single-PP construction which has yielded mixed results in previous work. A combined production-comprehension task showed more productions of pre-PP2 prosodic boundaries for long-PP2 than short-PP2. In comprehension, high PP2-attachment was favored by a prosodic boundary before PP2, regardless of PP2 length. This study provides performance data supporting the interplay of phrase lengths with structure-sensitivity as posited in the linguistics literature on the syntax-prosody interface, and supports the claim that readers are sensitive to the structural implications of the prosody they project onto sentences.
    Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 03/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10936-015-9358-2 · 0.59 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A standard assumption in psycholinguistic research on pronoun interpretation is that production and interpretation are guided by the same set of contextual factors. A line of recent research has suggested otherwise, however, arguing instead that pronoun production is insensitive to a class of semantically driven contextual biases that have been shown to influence pronoun interpretation. The work reported in this paper addresses three fundamental questions that have been left unresolved by this research. First, research demonstrating the insensitivity of production to semantic biases has relied on referentially unambiguous settings in which the comprehender's ability to resolve the pronoun is not actually at stake. Experiment 1, a story continuation study, demonstrates that pronoun production is also insensitive to semantic biases in settings in which a pronoun would be referentially ambiguous. Second, previous research has not distinguished between accounts in which production biases are driven by grammatical properties of intended referents (e. g., subject position) or by information-structural factors (specifically, topichood) that are inherently pragmatic in nature. Experiment 2 examines this question with a story continuation study that manipulates the likelihood of potential referents being the topic while keeping grammatical role constant. A significant effect of the manipulation on rate of pronominalisation supports the claim that pronoun production is influenced by the likelihood that the referent is the current topic. Lastly, the predictions of Kehler et al.'s Bayesian analysis of the relationship between production and interpretation have never been quantitatively examined. The results of both experiments are shown to support the analysis over two competing models.
    06/2013; 29(8):912-927. DOI:10.1080/01690965.2013.854918


Available from