Can the maze task be even more amazing?

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 366-383
Author(s):  
Jordan Gallant ◽  
Gary Libben
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Target Sentence ◽  
Sentence Context ◽  
Maze Task ◽  
Sentence Reading ◽  
Lexical Effects ◽  
Processing Effects

Abstract The maze task (Forster, Guererra & Elliot, 2009; Forster, 2010) is designed to measure focal lexical and sentence processing effects in a highly controlled manner. We discuss how this task can be modified and extended to provide a unique opportunity for the investigation of lexical effects in sentence context. We present results that demonstrate how the maze task can be used to examine both facilitation and inhibition effects. Most importantly, it can do this while leaving the target sentence unchanged across conditions. This is an advantage that is not available with other paradigms. We also present new versions of the maze task that allow for the isolation of specific lexical effects and that enhance the measurement of lexical recognition through visual animation. Finally, we discuss how the maze task brings to the foreground the extent to which complex multi-layered priming and inhibition are intrinsic to sentence reading and how the maze task can tap this complexity.

Limits on semantic prediction in the processing of extraction from adjunct clauses

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dustin Alfonso Chacón
Keyword(s):  
Real Time ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Judgment Task ◽  
Main Clause ◽  
Top Down ◽  
Maze Task ◽  
Serial Search ◽  
Conceptual Semantic ◽  
Syntactic Islands ◽  
Acceptability Judgment

Processing filler-gap dependencies (‘extraction’) depends on complex top-down predictions. This is observed in comprehenders’ ability to avoid resolving filler-gap dependencies in syntactic island contexts, and in the immediate sensitivity to the plausibility of the resulting interpretation. How complex can these predictions be? In this paper, we examine the processing of extraction from adjunct clauses. Adjunct clauses are argued to be syntactic islands, however, extraction is permitted if the adjunct clause and main clause satisfy specific compositional and conceptual semantic criteria. In an acceptability judgment task, we found that this generalization is robust. Additionally, our results show that this is a property specific to adjunct clauses by comparing adjunct clauses to conjunct VPs, which are similarly argued to permit extraction depending on semantic factors. However, in an A-Maze task, we found no evidence that this knowledge is deployed in real-time sentence processing. Instead, we found that comprehenders attempted to resolve a filler-gap dependency in an adjunct clause regardless of its island status. We propose that this is because deploying this linguistic constraint depends on a second-order serial search over event schemata, which is likely costly and time-consuming. Thus, comprehenders opt for a riskier strategy and attempt resolution into adjunct clauses categorically.

L1 effects on the emergence of ESL sentence processing skills of Chinese and Korean ESL learners

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Fender
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Word Order ◽  
Relative Clause ◽  
English Sentence ◽  
Reading Task ◽  
Verb Phrase ◽  
Sentence Reading ◽  
On Line ◽  
Esl Learners ◽  
Chinese Esl Learners

This study examines the emergence of lower-level ESL sentence processing skills involved in integrating English words into predicate structures on-line. The aim of the present study is to examine how the L1 phrase structure and corresponding L1 word integration skills of ESL learners influence their corresponding ESL sentence processing skills in an on-line English sentence reading task. The study examined the English predicate and verb phrase processing skills of a group of Chinese ESL learners whose language has right-branching L1 verb phrase structures (head-complement word order) and a group of proficiency-matched Korean ESL learners whose native language only allows left-branching L1 verb phrase structures (i.e., complement-head word order). The Chinese ESL group (n = 20) was significantly faster than the Korean ESL group (n = 18) in reading and integrating direct object nouns into English predicate phrase structures, though there were no significant differences comprehending the sentences. In addition, the Chinese ESL group was significantly more accurate in reading and comprehending transitive sentences in which the direct objects had an embedded relative clause. The results suggest that L1 word integration skills influence and shape the emergence of on-line ESL word integration

scholarly journals Comparing gated and simple recurrent neural network architectures as models of human sentence processing

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Aurnhammer ◽  
Stefan L. Frank
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Language Model ◽  
Cell Types ◽  
Recurrent Network ◽  
Cognitive Models ◽  
Language Models ◽  
Model Quality ◽  
Sentence Reading ◽  
Human Sentence Processing

The Simple Recurrent Network (SRN) has a long tradition in cognitive models of language processing. More recently, gated recurrent networks have been proposed that often outperform the SRN on natural language processing tasks. Here, we investigate whether two types of gated networks perform better as cognitive models of sentence reading than SRNs, beyond their advantage as language models.This will reveal whether the filtering mechanism implemented in gated networks corresponds to an aspect of human sentence processing.We train a series of language models differing only in the cell types of their recurrent layers. We then compute word surprisal values for stimuli used in self-paced reading, eye-tracking, and electroencephalography experiments, and quantify the surprisal values' fit to experimental measures that indicate human sentence reading effort.While the gated networks provide better language models, they do not outperform their SRN counterpart as cognitive models when language model quality is equal across network types. Our results suggest that the different architectures are equally valid as models of human sentence processing.

Using a maze task to track lexical and sentence processing

2010 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 347-357 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenneth I. Forster
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Simple Technique ◽  
The Other ◽  
Decision Task ◽  
Maze Task ◽  
Successive Frame ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Trial Basis ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Two Alternatives

A word maze consists of a sequence of frames, each containing two alternatives. Subjects are required to select one of those alternatives according to some criterion defined by the experimenter. This simple technique can be used to investigate a wide range of issues. For example, if one alternative is a word and the other is a nonword, the subject may be required to press a key to indicate where the word is. This provides an interesting variant of the lexical decision task, since the difficulty of the lexical discrimination can be manipulated on a trial-by-trial basis by varying the properties of the nonword alternative. On the other hand, a version of a self-paced reading task is created if each successive frame contains a word that can continue a sentence, and the subject is required to identify which word that is. Once again, by manipulating the properties of the incorrect alternative one may be able to control the mode of processing adopted by the subject. Although this is a highly artificial form of reading, it does allow one to study the sentence processing under more tightly controlled conditions.

Bilingual sentence processing

2007 ◽  
pp. 370-384
Author(s):  
Arturo E. Hernández ◽  
Eva M. Fernández ◽  
Noemí Aznar-besé
Keyword(s):  
Language Acquisition ◽  
Language Proficiency ◽  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Semantic Processing ◽  
Syntactic Processing ◽  
Human Language ◽  
Processing Effects

Bilinguals live in two linguistic worlds. Given the different demands of each language, one might think that each system functions independently. However, bilinguals do not behave like two monolingual speaker/listeners housed in a single brain. Instead, the evidence to date suggests that the characteristics of bilingual language processing may appear to be “in between” the individual's two codes. Studies in bilingual sentence processing have focused on phenomena related to how semantic or syntactic representations are built. This article reviews data consistent with the view of interdependence between the two languages of the bilingual, using evidence from the literature on bilingual sentence processing. Studies of both semantic processing and syntactic processing show that bilinguals almost always use a unitary mechanism which accesses two separately represented grammars. The study of bilingual sentence processing can also offer insights into our understanding of human language processing in general, because bilinguals offer opportunities to examine sentence processing effects in within-participant designs, impossible to carry out with monolinguals. In addition to the above, this article explores parsing, the age of language acquisition, and language proficiency.

scholarly journals An fMRI Study of Syntactic Adaptation

2004 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 702-713 ◽  
Author(s):  
U. Noppeney ◽  
C. J. Price
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Reading Time ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Blood Oxygenation ◽  
Behavioral Measure ◽  
Syntactic Structures ◽  
Sentence Reading ◽  
Fmri Study ◽  
Oxygenation Level ◽  
Mri Study

It is easier to produce and comprehend a series of sentences when they have similar syntactic structures. This “syntactic priming” effect was investigated during silent sentence reading using (i) blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) response as a physiological measure in an f MRI study and (ii) reading time as a behavioral measure in a complementary selfpaced reading paradigm. We found that reading time and left anterior temporal activation were decreased when subjects read sentences with similar relative to dissimilar syntactic forms. Thus, syntactic adaptation during sentence comprehension is demonstrated in a neural area that has previously been linked to both lexical semantic and sentence processing.

scholarly journals Lingering misinterpretation in native and nonnative sentence processing: Evidence from structural priming

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-30
Author(s):  
Hiroki Fujita ◽  
Ian Cunnings
Keyword(s):  
Eye Tracking ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Priming Effect ◽  
Target Sentence ◽  
Structural Priming ◽  
Correct Interpretation ◽  
Priming Effects ◽  
L1 And L2 ◽  
Accuracy Rates ◽  
Comprehension Accuracy

Abstract Native (L1) and nonnative (L2) speakers sometimes misinterpret temporarily ambiguous sentences like “When Mary dressed the baby laughed happily.” Recent studies suggest that the initially assigned misinterpretation (“Mary dressed the baby”) may persist even after disambiguation, and that L2 speakers may have particular difficulty discarding initial misinterpretations. The present study investigated whether L2 speakers are more persistent with misinterpretation compared with L1 speakers during sentence processing, using the structural priming and eye tracking while reading tasks. In the experiment, participants read prime followed by target sentences. Reading times revealed that unambiguous but not ambiguous prime sentences facilitated processing of the globally correct interpretation of ambiguous target sentences. However, this priming effect was only observed when the prime and target sentence shared the same verb. Comprehension accuracy rates were not significantly influenced by priming effects but did provide evidence of lingering misinterpretation. We did not find significant L1/L2 differences in either priming effects or persistence of misinterpretation. Together, these results suggest that initially assigned misinterpretations linger in both L1 and L2 readers during sentence processing and that L1 and L2 comprehension priming is strongly lexically mediated.

scholarly journals Do we rely on good-enough processing in reading under auditory and visual noise?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nina Zdorova ◽  
Svetlana Malyutina ◽  
Anna Laurinavichyute ◽  
Anastasiia Kaprielova ◽  
Kromina Anastasia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Language Processing ◽  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Sentence Comprehension ◽  
Channel Model ◽  
Reading Speed ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Target Sentence ◽  
Visual Noise ◽  
Noisy Channel ◽  
Qualitative Effect

Noise, as part of real-life communication flow, degrades the quality of linguistic input and affects language processing. According to predictions of the noisy-channel model, noisemakes comprehenders rely more on word-level semantics and good-enough processing instead of actual syntactic relations. However, empirical evidence of such qualitative effect of noise on sentence processing is still lacking. For the first time, we investigated the qualitative effect of both auditory (three-talker babble) and visual (short idioms appearing next to target sentence on the screen) noise on sentence reading within one study in two eye-trackingexperiments. In both of them, we used the same stimuli — unambiguous grammatical Russian sentences — and manipulated their semantic plausibility. Our findings suggest that although readers relied on good-enough processing in Russian, neither auditory nor visualnoise qualitatively increased reliance on semantics in sentence comprehension. The only effect of noise was found in reading speed: only without noise, semantically implausible sentences were read slower than semantically plausible ones, as measured by both early and late eye-movement measures. These results do not support the predictions of the noisy-channel model. With regard to quantitative effects, we found a detrimental effect ofauditory noise on overall comprehension accuracy, and an accelerating effect of visual noise on sentence processing without accuracy decrease.

Effects of contrastive focus on lexical predictability during sentence reading: The case of not only. . .but also constructions

2020 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-186
Author(s):  
Matthew W Lowder ◽  
Gwynna Ryan ◽  
Jaclyn Opie ◽  
Emily Kaminsky
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Processing ◽  
Syntactic Structure ◽  
Contrastive Focus ◽  
Sentence Reading ◽  
First Pass ◽  
Focus Condition ◽  
Linguistic Focus ◽  
Reading Experiment ◽  
Main Effects ◽  
Online Sentence Processing

Previous research suggests that language comprehenders are sensitive to the presence of focus-sensitive particles—words like only and not that are effective at marking the focus of the sentence. In addition to signalling linguistic focus, these words can also establish a semantic contrast between the focused element and an alternate set. For example, the phrase not only the bride places linguistic focus on the bride and may also prompt comprehenders to anticipate a set of upcoming entities that stand in semantic contrast to the bride. We tested this possibility in an eyetracking-while-reading experiment that systematically crossed structure (focus vs. noun-phrase coordination) with predictability of an upcoming target noun (predictable vs. unpredictable). Whereas first-pass reading time showed a robust predictability effect for the coordination condition, the effect was eliminated for the focus condition. Later eyetracking measures revealed main effects of both predictability and syntactic structure. Overall, the results suggest that language comprehenders rapidly make use of the cue not only and may use this cue to begin anticipating a set of upcoming sentence continuations during online sentence processing.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document