Article published In:
The Mental LexiconVol. 18:1 (2023) ► pp.41–93
The time-course of contextual modulation for underspecified meaning
An eye-movement study
Sentences like (1) “The singer began the album” are ambiguous between an agentive reading (The singer began recording/playing/etc. the album) and a constitutive reading (The singer’s song was the first track). The ambiguity is rooted in the meaning specification of the aspectual-verb class, which demands its complement be construed as a structured individual along a dimension (e.g., spatial, informational, eventive). In (1), the complement can be construed as a set of eventualities (eventive) or musical content (informational). Processing aspectual-verb sentences is shown to involve (a) exhaustive lexical-function retrieval and (b) construal of multiple dimension-specific structured individuals, leading to multiple compositions with agentive and constitutive readings. The ultimate interpretation depends on the biased dimensions in context. Our eye-tracking study comparing sentences in different contexts (agentive vs. constitutive-biasing) shows not only the aspectual-verb composition effect, previously reported for the agentive readings, but also a comparable processing profile for the constitutive readings, a novel finding supporting the unified linguistic analysis and processing implementation of the two readings. Regardless of reading, the composition effect is observable even after the complement has been retrieved, indicating that the fundamental lexico-semantic compositional processes must take place before context can serve as a constraining force.
Keywords: semantic underspecification, context, aspectual verbs, complement coercion, semantic ambiguity, sentence processing, eye-tracking, structured individual
Article outline
- The current study
- Methods
- Materials
- Participants
- Apparatus & procedures
- Data analysis
- Results
- Discussion
- The processing cost of aspectual verb composition (> controls)
- No immediate effect of biasing context
- Conclusion
- Notes
-
References
References
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J.
(2013) Random
effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of memory and
language,
68
(3), 255–278. 
Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S.
(2015) Fitting
linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical
Software,
67
(1), 1–48.
Braze, D., Shankweiler, D., Ni, W., & Palumbo, L. C.
(2002) Readers’
eye movements distinguish anomalies of form and content. Journal of psycholinguistic
research,
31
(1), 25–44.
Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A.
(1983) What
your eyes do while your mind is reading. In Eye movements in
reading (pp. 275–307). Elsevier.
Clark, H. H., Brennan, S. E., et al.
(1991) Grounding
in communication. Perspectives on socially shared
cognition,
13
1(1991), 127–149.
Clifton, C., Staub, A., & Rayner, K.
(2007) Eye
movements in reading words and sentences. In Eye
movements (pp. 341–371). Elsevier.
Delogu, F., Crocker, M. W., & Drenhaus, H.
(2017) Teasing
apart coercion and surprisal: Evidence from eye-movements and
erps. Cognition,
161
1, 46–59.
DiNardo, L.
(2015) Competing
analyses of complement coercion: new evidence from behavioral and electropsychophysiological
methods. Senior thesis.
Duffy, S. A., Morris, R. K., & Rayner, K.
(1988) Lexical
ambiguity and fixation times in reading. Journal of memory and
language,
27
(4), 429–446.
Elston-Güttler, K. E., & Friederici, A. D.
(2005) Native
and l2 processing of homonyms in sentential context. Journal of Memory and
Language,
52
(2), 256–283.
Ferreira, F., & Bailey, K. G.
(2004) Disfluencies
and human language comprehension. Trends in cognitive
sciences,
8
(5), 231–237.
Ferreira, F., Bailey, K. G., & Ferraro, V.
(2002) Good-enough
representations in language comprehension. Current directions in psychological
science,
11
(1), 1115.
Ferreira, F., & Patson, N. D.
(2007) The
‘good enough’ approach to language comprehension. Language and Linguistics
Compass,
1
(1–2), 71–83.
Field, A., Miles, J., & Field, Z.
(2012) Discovering
statistics using r. Sage publications.
Frazier, L.
(1999) On
sentence interpretation (Vol. 221). Springer Science & Business Media.
Frazier, L., Pacht, J. M., & Rayner, K.
(1999) Taking
on semantic commitments, ii: collective versus distributive
readings. Cognition,
70
(1), 87–104.
Frazier, L., & Rayner, K.
(1990) Taking
on semantic commitments: Processing multiple meanings vs. multiple senses. Journal of memory
and
language,
29
(2), 181.
Frisson, S.
(2009) Semantic
underspecification in language processing. Language and Linguistics
Compass,
3
(1), 111–127.
Frisson, S., & McElree, B.
(2008) Complement
coercion is not modulated by competition: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental
Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition,
34
(1), 1.
Frisson, S., & Pickering, M. J.
(1999) The
processing of metonymy: evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning, Memory, and
Cognition,
25
(6), 1366.
(2001) Obtaining
a figurative interpretation of a word: Support for underspecification. Metaphor and
Symbol,
16
(3–4), 149–171.
Hanna, J. E., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Trueswell, J. C.
(2003) The
effects of common ground and perspective on domains of referential interpretation. Journal of
Memory and
Language,
49
(1), 43–61.
Horton, W. S., & Keysar, B.
(1996) When
do speakers take into account common
ground? Cognition,
59
(1), 91–117.
Husband, E. M., Kelly, L. A., & Zhu, D. C.
(2011) Using
complement coercion to understand the neural basis of semantic composition: Evidence from an fmri
study. Journal of Cognitive
Neuroscience,
23
(11), 3254–3266.
Inhoff, A. W., & Rayner, K.
(1986) Parafoveal
word processing during eye fixations in reading: Effects of word frequency. Perception &
psychophysics,
40
(6), 431–439.
Jackendoff, R.
(1997) The
architecture of the language faculty. MIT Press.
Just, M. A., & Carpenter, P. A.
(1980) A
theory of reading: From eye fixations to comprehension. Psychological
review,
87
(4), 329.
Karimi, H., & Ferreira, F.
(2016) Good-enough
linguistic representations and online cognitive equilibrium in language processing. Quarterly
journal of experimental
psychology,
69
(5), 1013–1040.
Katsika, A., Braze, D., Deo, A., & Piñango, M. M.
(2012) Complement
coercion: Distinguishing between type-shifting and pragmatic inferencing. The mental
lexicon,
7
(1), 58–76.
Klepousniotou, E., Pike, G. B., Steinhauer, K., & Gracco, V.
(2012) Not
all ambiguous words are created equal: An eeg investigation of homonymy and polysemy. Brain and
language,
123
(1), 11–21.
Kliegl, R., Grabner, E., Rolfs, M., & Engbert, R.
(2004) Length,
frequency, and predictability effects of words on eye movements in reading. European Journal of
Cognitive
Psychology,
16
(1–2), 262–284.
Kuperberg, G. R., Choi, A., Cohn, N., Paczynski, M., & Jackendoff, R.
(2010) Electrophysiological
correlates of complement coercion. Journal of cognitive
neuroscience,
22
(12), 2685–2701.
Lai, Y.-Y., Lacadie, C., Constable, T., Deo, A., & Piñango, M. M.
(2017) Complement
coercion as the processing of aspectual verbs: evidence from self-paced reading and
fmri. In Compositionality and concepts in linguistics and
psychology (pp. 191–222). Springer.
Lai, Y.-Y., Lacadie, C., Deo, A., & Piñango, M. M.
(2020) Subject
animacy and underspecified meaning: The conceptual and cortical underpinnings. Journal of
Neurolinguistics,
56
1, 100912.
Lai, Y.-Y., & Piñango, M. M.
(2019) Searching
for specific sentence meaning in context: the conceptual relation between
participants. Language and
Cognition,
11
(4), 582–620.
Love, T., & Swinney, D.
(1996) Coreference
processing and levels of analysis in object-relative constructions; demonstration of antecedent reactivation with the
cross-modal priming paradigm. Journal of Psycholinguistic
Research,
25
(1), 524.
McElree, B., Pylkkänen, L., Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J.
(2006) A
time course analysis of enriched composition. Psychonomic Bulletin &
Review,
13
(1), 53–59.
McElree, B., Traxler, M. J., Pickering, M. J., Seely, R. E., & Jackendoff, R.
(2001) Reading
time evidence for enriched
composition. Cognition,
78
(1), B17–B25.
Onifer, W., & Swinney, D. A.
(1981) Accessing
lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual
bias. Memory &
Cognition,
9
(3), 225–236.
Pickering, M. J., & Frisson, S.
(2001) Processing
ambiguous verbs: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and
Cognition,
27
(2), 556.
Pickering, M. J., McElree, B., & Traxler, M. J.
(2005) The
difficulty of coercion: A response to de almeida. Brain and
Language,
93
(1), 1–9.
Piñango, M. M., & Deo, A.
(2016) Reanalyzing
the complement coercion effect through a generalized lexical semantics for aspectual
verbs. Journal of
Semantics,
33
(2), 359–408.
Piñango, M. M., Zurif, E., & Jackendoff, R.
(1999) Real-time
processing implications of enriched composition at the syntax-semantics interface. Journal of
psycholinguistic
research,
28
(4), 395–414.
Pustejovsky, J.
(1995) The
generative lexicon. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
Pylkkänen, L., & McElree, B.
(2007) An
meg study of silent meaning. Journal of Cognitive
Neuroscience,
19
(11), 1905–1921.
R Core Team
(2015) R: A language
and environment for statistical computing [Computer software
manual]. Vienna, Austria. Retrieved from [URL]
Rayner, K.
(1998) Eye
movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological
bulletin,
124
(3), 372.
Rayner, K., & Duffy, S. A.
(1986) Lexical
complexity and fixation times in reading: Effects of word frequency, verb complexity, and lexical
ambiguity. Memory &
cognition,
14
(3), 191–201.
Rayner, K., & Frazier, L.
(1989) Selection
mechanisms in reading lexically ambiguous words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and
Cognition,
15
(5), 779.
Rayner, K., & Raney, G. E.
(1996) Eye
movement control in reading and visual search: Effects of word frequency. Psychonomic Bulletin
&
Review,
3
(2), 245–248.
Rayner, K., Sereno, S., & Raney, G.
(1996, 11). Eye
movement control in reading: A comparison of two types of models. Journal of experimental
psychology. Human perception and
performance,
22
1, 1188–200.
RStudio Team
(2016) Rstudio:
Integrated development environment for r [Computer software
manual]. Boston, MA. Retrieved from [URL]
Sanford, A. J., & Sturt, P.
(2002) Depth
of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in cognitive
sciences,
6
(9), 382–386.
Seidenberg, M. S., Tanenhaus, M. K., Leiman, J. M., & Bienkowski, M.
(1982) Automatic
access of the meanings of ambiguous words in context: Some limitations of knowledge-based
processing. Cognitive
psychology,
14
(4), 489–537.
Shapiro, L. P., Zurif, E. B., & Grimshaw, J.
(1989) Verb
processing during sentence comprehension: Contextual impenetrability. Journal of
psycholinguistic
research,
18
(2), 223–243.
Shetreet, E., Linzen, T., & Friedmann, N.
(2016) Against
all odds: exhaustive activation in lexical access of verb complementation options. Language,
Cognition and
Neuroscience,
31
(9), 1206–1214.
Starr, M. S., & Rayner, K.
(2001) Eye
movements during reading: Some current controversies. Trends in Cognitive
Sciences,
5
(4), 156–163.
Swinney, D., Prather, P., & Love, T.
(2000) The
time-course of lexical access and the role of context: Converging evidence from normal and aphasic
processing. In Language and the
brain (pp. 273–292). Elsevier.
Swinney, D. A.
(1979) Lexical
access during sentence comprehension:(re) consideration of context effects. Journal of verbal
learning and verbal
behavior,
18
(6), 645–659.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Garnsey, S. M., & Boland, J.
(1990) Combinatory
lexical information and language comprehension. In G. T. M. Altmann (Ed.), Acl
mit press series in natural language processing. cognitive models of speech processing: Psycholinguistic and computational
perspectives (p.
pp. 383–408). Cambridge, MA, US: The MIT Press.
Traxler, M. J., McElree, B., Williams, R. S., & Pickering, M. J.
(2005) Context
effects in coercion: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and
Language,
53
(1), 1–25.
Traxler, M. J., Pickering, M. J., & McElree, B.
(2002) Coercion
in sentence processing: Evidence from eye-movements and self-paced reading. Journal of Memory
and
Language,
47
(4), 530–547.
Tunstall, S. L.
(1998) The
interpretation of quantifiers: semantics & processing (Unpublished doctoral
dissertation). University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
Vasishth, S., von der Malsburg, T., & Engelmann, F.
(2013) What
eye movements can tell us about sentence comprehension. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews:
Cognitive
Science,
4
(2), 125–134.
von der Malsburg, T., & Angele, B.
(2017) False
positives and other statistical errors in standard analyses of eye movements in
reading. Journal of memory and
language,
94
1, 119–133.
Winter, B.
(2013) Linear
models and linear mixed effects models in r with linguistic applications. ar Xiv preprint
arXiv:1308.5499.
Zarcone, A., McRae, K., Lenci, A., & Padó, S.
(2017) Complement
coercion: The joint effects of type and typicality. Frontiers in
psychology,
8
1 1987