Children's Interpretation of Ambiguous Focus in Sentences With "Only"

We report 3 studies investigating children's and adults' interpretation of ambiguous focus in sentences containing the focus-sensitive quantifier only. In each experiment, child and adult participants compared sentences with only in a preverbal position and counterpart sentences without only against a series of pictures depicting events that matched or mismatched with the sentence meaning. The sentences with only were ambiguous between an analysis with contrastive focus assigned to the verb phrase (VP) and one with contrastive focus assigned to the direct object. The results indicate that both children and adults interpreted sentences with only as excluding the possibility of events that formed a contrast with VP constituents. Children also appeared to interpret sentences without only as excluding the possibility of these events despite the absence of grammatical cues that might indicate contrastive focus. We consider these results in relation to a processing account of focus interpretation (Crain, Ni, and Conway (1994)).

[1]  K. Kiss.  Identificational focus versus information focus , 1998 .

[2]  Stephen Crain,et al.  Children's insensitivity to contrastive stress in sentences with only , 2003 .

[3]  C. Clifton,et al.  Effects of the Focus Particle Only and Intrinsic Contrast on Comprehension of Reduced Relative Clauses , 2000 .

[4]  Janet D. Fodor.  Prosodic disambiguation in silent deading , 2002 .

[5]  K. Drozd.  Language acquisition and conceptual development: Children's weak interpretations of universally quantified questions , 2001 .

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

[7]  Kevin B Paterson,et al.  The Influence of only on Syntactic processing of “Long” Relative Clause Sentences , 2002, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[8]  Weijia Ni,et al.  Sidestepping garden paths: Assessing the contributions of syntax, semantics and plausibility in resolving ambiguities , 1996 .

[9]  Julie C. Sedivy,et al.  Invoking Discourse-Based Contrast Sets and Resolving Syntactic Ambiguities ☆ , 2002 .

[10]  Arnim von Stechow,et al.  Topic, Focus and Local Relevance , 1981 .

[11]  Joachim Jacobs,et al.  The Syntax of Focus and Adverbials in German , 1986 .

[12]  Mark Steedman,et al.  On not being led up the garden path : The use of context by the psychological syntax processor , 1985 .

[13]  Simon P. Liversedge,et al.  Parsing with focus particles in context: Eye movements during the processing of relative clause ambiguities , 2005 .

[14]  Manfred Krifka,et al.  A Compositional Semantics for Multiple Focus Constructions , 1991 .

[15]  Elisabeth Selkirk,et al.  Sentence Prosody: Intonation, Stress and Phrasing , 1996 .

[16]  Stephen Crain,et al.  Rapid relief of stress in dealing with ambiguity , 2005 .

[17]  Tanya Reinhart,et al.  The processing cost of reference-set computation: guess patterns in acquisition , 1999 .

[18]  Siobhan Chapman.  Logic and Conversation , 2005 .

[19]  Mats Rooth.  A theory of focus interpretation , 1992, Natural Language Semantics.

[20]  Arnim von Stechow,et al.  De re belief generalized , 1982 .

[21]  Ray Jackendoff,et al.  Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar , 1972 .

[22]  Stephen Crain,et al.  Quantification Without Qualification , 1996 .

[23]  Kevin B Paterson,et al.  Children's comprehension of sentences with focus particles , 2003, Cognition.

[24]  Simon P. Liversedge,et al.  The Influence of Focus Operators on Syntactic Processing of Short Relative Clause Sentences , 1999 .

[25]  Lyn Frazier,et al.  On Sentence Interpretation , 1999 .