Length Matters: Informational Load in Ambiguity Resolution

In this paper, we will compare prosodic and pragmatic approaches to the role of constituent length in attachment ambiguities. Lengthening a constituent affects its informativity: longer constituents are usually less predictable (Levy & Florian, 2007) and demand a higher processing load than shorter ones (Almor, 1999). Following neo-Gricean accounts (Levinson, 1987 and 1991), increased informational load needs to be justified. This justification is achieved more easily when the long constituent conveys new information and when it relates to central elements of the utterance. Informational load is, however, not a simple question of length in numbers of characters or syllables but more likely a question of amount of information. In three off-line experiments using a cloze task, we will compare the effect of lengthening ambiguous prepositional phrases as in [1a/b/c] either by lengthening a city name or by adding information about the city. We will show that only lengthening by adding information increases attachment to a more central element of the utterance. These results will be discussed based on prosodic and pragmatic factors explaining the role of constituent length for attachment ambiguities.[1] Peter met the doctor of the lawyer from a. Apt. / b. Aix-en-Provence / c. the beautiful city of Apt.

[1]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Informative Prosodic Boundaries , 2002, Language and speech.

[2]  Jennifer E. Arnold,et al.  The Concomitant Effects of Phrase Length and Informational Content in Sentence Comprehension , 2000, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[3]  S. Gries Grammatical variation in English: A question of 'structure vs. function'? , 2003 .

[4]  Christoph Scheepers,et al.  Syntactic Attachment and Anaphor Resolution: The Two Sides of Relative Clause Attachment , 1999 .

[5]  Matthew P. Aylett,et al.  The dissociation of deaccenting, Givenness, and syntactic role in spontaneous speech. , 1999 .

[6]  Richard Wiese,et al.  The Phonology of German , 1996 .

[7]  Jennifer E. Arnold,et al.  Heaviness vs. newness: The effects of structural complexity and discourse status on constituent ordering , 2015 .

[8]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[9]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[10]  S. Jun,et al.  Prosodic Phrasing and Attachment Preferences , 2003, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[11]  Duane G. Watson,et al.  Making Sense of the Sense Unit Condition , 2004, Linguistic Inquiry.

[12]  Stephen C. Levinson,et al.  Minimization and conversational inference , 1987 .

[13]  Lars Konieczny,et al.  Modifier Attachment in German: Relative Clauses and Prepositional Phrases , 2000 .

[14]  Janet D. Fodor,et al.  The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model , 1978, Cognition.

[15]  Michael Niv Right Association Revisited , 1992, ACL.

[16]  Kenneth Wexler,et al.  On the grammatical basis of null subjects in child language , 1993 .

[17]  C. Clifton,et al.  Relative clause attachment in German, English, Spanish and French: Effects of position and length , 2015 .

[18]  Edward Gibson,et al.  Intonational phrasing is constrained by meaning, not balance , 2011 .

[19]  Michael Speriosu,et al.  The role of prosody in the English dative alternation , 2010 .

[20]  Roger Levy,et al.  Speakers optimize information density through syntactic reduction , 2006, NIPS.

[21]  S. Levinson Pragmatic reduction of the Binding Conditions revisited , 1991, Journal of Linguistics.

[22]  Juliette Thuilier,et al.  Contraintes préférentielles et ordre des mots en français , 2012 .

[23]  John Whitman,et al.  --; CHARLES CLIFTON; and JANET RANDALL. 1983. Filling gaps: Decision principles and structure in sentence comprehension. Cognition 13.187-222. , and JANET FODOR. 1978. The sausage machine: A new two-stage parsing model. Cognition , 1997 .

[24]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R, 1st Edition , 2008 .

[25]  D. Bates,et al.  Linear Mixed-Effects Models using 'Eigen' and S4 , 2015 .

[26]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Parsing modifiers: Special purpose routines in the human sentence processing mechanism? , 1990 .

[27]  E. Bard,et al.  Controlling the Intelligibility of Referring Expressions in Dialogue , 2000 .

[28]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  Sentence processing: A tutorial review. , 1987 .

[29]  Jan Svartvik,et al.  A __ comprehensive grammar of the English language , 1988 .

[30]  Marta Pirnat-Greenberg,et al.  A Comprehensive Grammar , 2002 .

[31]  C. Clifton,et al.  Tracking the what and why of speakers’ choices: Prosodic boundaries and the length of constituents , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[32]  A. Inoue,et al.  Information-paced parsing of Japanese , 1995 .

[33]  Janet Dean Fodor Psycholinguistics Cannot Escape Prosody , 2002 .

[34]  Mari Ostendorf,et al.  TOBI: a standard for labeling English prosody , 1992, ICSLP.

[35]  C. Clifton,et al.  Prosodic Boundaries in Adjunct Attachment , 2001 .

[36]  P. Resnik Treebanks : Building and Using Parsed Corpora , 2022 .

[37]  Alexandra Kinyon,et al.  Building a Treebank for French , 2000, LREC.

[38]  Frank Wijnen The implicit prosody of Jabberwocky and the relative clause attachment riddle , 2004 .

[39]  Joël Pynte,et al.  Decoupling syntactic parsing from visual inspection: The case of relative clause attachment in French , 2000 .

[40]  Christoph Scheepers,et al.  Modifier Attachment: Relative Clauses and Coordinations , 2000 .

[41]  Joël Pynte,et al.  Reading as a Perceptual Process , 2000 .

[42]  Joel Pynte,et al.  Phrasing Effects in Comprehending PP Constructions , 2006, Journal of psycholinguistic research.

[43]  Janet Dean Fodor,et al.  Learning To Parse? , 1998 .

[44]  Eva M. Fernández Bilingual Sentence Processing: Relative clause attachment in English and Spanish , 2003 .

[45]  A. Almor,et al.  Noun-phrase anaphors and focus: the informational load hypothesis. , 1999, Psychological review.

[46]  Elisabeth Dévière,et al.  Analyzing linguistic data: a practical introduction to statistics using R , 2009 .