Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T12:15:40.666Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

One word at a time: Mental representations of object shape change incrementally during sentence processing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2014

Manami Sato,
Amy J. Schafer and
Benjamin K. Bergen
Manami Sato
Affiliation:
Okinawa International University. E-mail: manamisato@gmail.com
Amy J. Schafer
Affiliation:
University of Hawai‘i, Mānoa
Benjamin K. Bergen
Affiliation:
University of California, San Diego
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the 'Save PDF' action button.

We report on two experiments that ask when and under what linguistic conditions comprehenders construct detailed shape representations of mentioned objects, and whether these can change over the course of a sentence when new information contradicts earlier expectations. We used Japanese because the verb-final word order of Japanese presented a revealing test case where information about objects can radically change with a subsequent verb. The results show that language understanders consistently generate a distinct and detailed shape for an object by integrating the semantic contributions of different sentential elements. These results first confirm that the tendency to generate specific shape information about objects that are involved in described events is not limited to English, but is also present in Japanese, a typologically and genetically distinct language. But more importantly, they shed light on the processing mechanism of object representation, showing that mental representations are initiated sentence medially, and are rapidly revised if followed by a verb that implies a change to an object shape. This work contributes to ongoing research on incremental language processing – comprehenders appear to construct extremely detailed semantic representations early in a sentence, and modify them as needed.

Keywords

sentence processingincremental processingJapanesemental representation

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Language and Cognition , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , December 2013, pp. 345 - 373
Copyright
Copyright © UK Cognitive Linguistics Association 2013

References

Altmann, G. T. M. & Kamide, Y.. 1999. Incremental interpretation at verbs: Restricting the domain of subsequent reference. Cognition 73. 247–264.Google Scholar
Altmann, G. T. M. & Steedman, M. J.. 1988. Interaction with context during human sentence processing. Cognition 30. 191–238.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Aoshima, S. 2003. The grammar and parsing of wh-dependencies. College Park, MD: University of Maryland dissertation.Google Scholar
Aoshima, S., Phillips, C. & Weinberg, A.. 2004. Processing filler-gap dependencies in a head-final language. Journal of Memory and Language 51. 23–54.Google Scholar
Aoshima, S., Yoshida, M. & Phillips, C.. 2009. Incremental processing of coreference and binding in Japanese. Syntax 12. 93–134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barclay, J. R., Bransford, J. D., Franks, J. J., McCarrell, N. S. & Nitsch, K.. 1974. Comprehension and semantic flexibility. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 13. 471–481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22. 577–660.Google Scholar
Barsalou, L. W. 2008. Grounded cognition. Annual Review of Psychology 59. 617–645.Google Scholar
Byrne, R. M. J. & Johnson-Laird, P. N.. 2002. Conditionals: A theory of meaning, inference, and pragmatics. Psychological Review 109. 646–678.Google Scholar
Byrne, R. M. J. & Johnson-Laird, P. N.. 2009. ‘If’ and problems of conditional reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 13. 282–287.Google Scholar
Chao, L. L. & Martin, A.. 2000. Representation of manipulable man-made objects in the dorsal stream. NeuroImage 12. 478–484.Google Scholar
Choi, S. & Gopnik, A.. 1995. Early acquisition of verbs in Korean: A cross-linguistic study. Journal of Child Language 22. 497–529CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J. F. & Ferreira, F.. 2001. Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology 42. 368–407Google Scholar
Clifton, C. Jr., 1993. Thematic roles in sentence parsing. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology 47. 222–246.Google Scholar
Connell, L. 2007. Representing object colour in language comprehension. Cognition 102. 476–485.Google Scholar
Connell, L. & Lynott, D.. 2007. Is a bear white in the woods? Parallel representations of implied object color during language comprehension. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 16(3). 573–577.Google Scholar
Dahan, D. & Tanenhaus, M. K.. 2004. Continuous mapping from sound to meaning in spoken-language comprehension: Immediate effects of verb-based thematic constraints. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 30(2). 498–513.Google Scholar
Ditman, T., Brunyé, T. T., Mahoney, C. R. & Taylor, H. A.. 2010. Simulating an enactment effect: Pronouns guide action simulation during narrative comprehension. Cognition 115. 172–178.Google Scholar
Frazier, L. 1982. Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In Coltheart, M. (ed.), The psychology of reading (Attention and Performance 7), 559–586. London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Frazier, L. & Rayner, K.. 1982. Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: Eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology 14. 178–210.Google Scholar
Gennari, S. P. & MacDonald, M. C.. 2008. Semantic indeterminacy and relative clause comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 58. 161–187.Google Scholar
Gentner, D. 1982. Why nouns are learned before verbs: Linguistic relativity and natural partitioning. In Kuczaj, S. A. (ed.), Language, thought and culture (Language Development 2), 301–334. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Glenberg, A. M. & Kaschak, M. P.. 2002. Grounding language in action. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 9. 558–565.Google Scholar
Kamide, Y., Altmann, G. T. M. & Haywood, S. L.. 2003. The time-course of prediction in incremental sentence processing: Evidence from anticipatory eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 49. 133–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kamide, Y., Scheepers, C. & Altmann, G. T. M.. 2003. Integration of syntactic and semantic information in predictive processing: Cross-linguistic evidence from German and English. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 32(1). 37–55.Google Scholar
Kaup, B., Lüdtke, J. & Zwaan, R. A.. 2006. Processing negated sentences with contradictory predicates: Is a door that is not open mentally closed? Journal of Pragmatics 38. 1033–1050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knoeferle, P., Crocker, M. W., Scheepers, C. & Pickering, M. J.. 2005. The influence of the immediate visual context on incremental thematic role-assignment: Evidence from eye movements in depicted events. Cognition 95. 95–127.Google Scholar
Levy, R. 2008. Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition 106. 1126–1177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
MacWhinney, B. 1999. The emergence of language from embodiment. In MacWhinney, B. (ed.), Emergence of language, 23–256. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
MacWhinney, B. 2005. The emergence of linguistic form in time. Connection Science 17. 191–211.Google Scholar
Mazuka, R. & Itoh, K.. 1995. Can Japanese speakers be lead down the garden path? In Mazuka, R. & Nagai, N. (eds.), Japanese sentence processing, 295–329. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Mazuka, R., Itoh, K. & Kondo, T.. 2002. Cost of scrambling in Japanese sentence processing. In Nakayama, M. (ed.), Sentence processing in East Asian languages, 131–166. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Miyagawa, S. 1997. Against optional scrambling. Linguistic Inquiry 28. 1–25.Google Scholar
Miyamoto, E. T. & Takahashi, S.. 2002. Sources of difficulty in the processing of scrambling in Japanese. In Nakayama, M. (ed.), Sentence processing in East Asian languages, 167–188. Stanford, CA: CSLI.Google Scholar
Nakatani, K. & Gibson, E.. 2010. An on-line study of Japanese nesting complexity. Cognitive Science 34. 94–112.Google Scholar
Sedivy, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., Chambers, C. G. & Carlson, G. N.. 1999. Achieving incremental semantic interpretation through contextual representation. Cognition 71. 109–147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanfield, R. A. & Zwaan, R. A.. 2001. The effect of implied orientation derived from verbal context on picture recognition. Psychological Science 12. 153–156.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tabossi, P. 1988. Accessing lexical ambiguity in different types of sentential context. Journal of Memory and Language 27. 324–340.Google Scholar
Talmy, L. 1991. Path to realization: A typology of event conflation. Berkeley Linguistics Society 17. 480–519.Google Scholar
Taylor, L. J. & Zwaan, R. A.. 2008. Motor resonance and linguistic focus. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 61. 896–904.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M. & Sedivy, J. C.. 1995. Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science 268. 1632–1634.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Traxler, M. J., Bybee, M. D. & Pickering, M. J.. 1997. Influence of connectives on language comprehension: Eye-tracking evidence for incremental interpretation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 50A(3). 481–497.Google Scholar
Tucker, M. & Ellis, R.. 1998. On the relations between seen objects and components of potential actions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance 24. 830–846.Google Scholar
Tucker, M. & Ellis, R.. 2004. Action priming by briefly presented objects. Acta Psychologica 116. 185–203.Google Scholar
Vasishth, S. & Lewis, R.. 2006. Argument-head distance and processing complexity: Explaining both locality and antilocality effects. Language 82. 767–794.Google Scholar
Yamashita, H. 1997. The effects of word-order and case marking information on the processing of Japanese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 26. 163–188.Google Scholar
Yaxley, R. H. & Zwaan, R. A.. 2007. Simulating visibility during language comprehension. Cognition 105. 229–238.Google Scholar
Zeelenberg, R., Pecher, D., Shiffrin, R. M. & Raaijmakers, J. G. W.. 2003. Semantic context effects and priming in word association. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 10. 653–660.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. 2004. The immersed experiencer: Toward an embodied theory of language comprehension. In Ross, B. H. (ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation, 35–62. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. & Radvansky, G. A.. 1998. Situation models in language and memory. Psychological Bulletin 123. 162–185.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A. & Taylor, L. J.. 2006. Seeing, acting, understanding: Motor resonance in language comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 135(1). 1–11.Google Scholar
Zwaan, R. A., Stanfield, R. A. & Yaxley, R. H.. 2002. Language comprehenders mentally represent the shape of objects. Psychological Science 13. 168–171.Google Scholar