Reanalysis and semantic persistence in native and non-native garden-path recovery

REFERENCES

• Allan, D. (2004). The Oxford placement test. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• 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. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
   Google Scholar
• Christianson, K., Hollingworth, A., Halliwell, J. F., & Ferreira, F. (2001). Thematic roles assigned along the garden path linger. Cognitive Psychology, 42, 368–407. doi: 10.1006/cogp.2001.0752
   Google Scholar
• Christianson, K., & Luke, S. (2011). Context strengthens initial misinterpretations of text. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15, 136–166. doi: 10.1080/10888431003636787
   Google Scholar
• Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006a). Continuity and shallow structures in language processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 107–126. doi: 10.1017/S0142716406060206
   Google Scholar
• Clahsen, H., & Felser, C. (2006b). Grammatical processing in language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics, 27, 3–42. doi: 10.1017/S0142716406060024
   Google Scholar
• Clifton, C. Jr. (1993). Thematic roles in sentence parsing. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47, 222–246. doi: 10.1037/h0078817
   Google Scholar
• Clifton, C., Staub, A., & Rayner, K. (2007). Eye movements in reading words and sentences. In R. van Gompel (Ed.), Eye movements: A window on mind and brain (pp. 341–372). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
   Google Scholar
• Dussias, P. E., & Cramer Scaltz, T. R. (2008). Spanish–English L2 speakers’ use of subcategorization bias information in the resolution of temporary ambiguity during second language reading. Acta Psychologica, 128, 501–513. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2007.09.004
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., Bailey, K., & Ferraro, V. (2002). Good enough representations in language comprehension. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 11, 11–15. doi: 10.1111/1467-8721.00158
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., Christianson, K., & Hollingworth, A. (2001). Misinterpretations of garden-path sentences: Implications for models of sentence processing and reanalysis. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 30(1), 3–20. doi: 10.1023/A:1005290706460
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. M. (1991). Recovery from misanalyses of garden-path sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 725–745. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(91)90034-H
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Henderson, J. M. (1998). Syntactic reanalysis, thematic processing, and sentence comprehension. In J. D. Fodor & F. Ferreira (Eds.), Reanalysis in sentence processing (pp. 73–100). Dordrecht, the Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, F., & Patson, N. D. (2007). The “good enough” approach to language comprehension. Language and Linguistics Compass, 1, 71–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-818X.2007.00007.x
   Google Scholar
• Fodor, J. D., & Inoue, A. (1994). The diagnosis and cure of garden-paths. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23(5), 407–434. doi: 10.1007/BF02143947
   Google Scholar
• Fodor, J. D., & Inoue, A. (2000). Garden path reanalysis: Attach (anyway) and revision as last resort. In M. De Vincenzi & V. Lombardo (Eds.), Proceedings of AMLaP-96 (pp. 21–61). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, L. (1987). Sentence processing: A tutorial review. In M. Coltheart (Ed.), Attention and performance XII: The psychology of reading (pp. 559–586). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Frazier, L. & Clifton, C. Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   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. doi: 10.1016/0010-0285(82)90008-1
   Google Scholar
• Frenck-Mestre, C., & Pynte, J. (1997). Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in a second and native language. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 50, 119–148. doi: 10.1080/027249897392251
   Google Scholar
• Friederici, A. D. (1997). Diagnosis and reanalysis: Two processing steps the brain may differentiate. In J. D. Fodor & F. Ferreira (Eds.), Reanalysis in sentence processing (pp. 177–200). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
   Google Scholar
• Friederici, A. D., Mecklinger, A., Spencer, K. M., Steinhauer, K., & Donchin, E. (2001). Syntactic parsing preferences and their on-line revisions: A spatio-temporal analysis of event-related brain potentials. Cognitive Brain Research, 11, 305–323. doi: 10.1016/S0926-6410(00)00065-3
   Google Scholar
• Hopp, H. (2006). Syntactic features and reanalysis in near-native processing. Second Language Research, 22, 369–397. doi: 10.1191/0267658306sr272oa
   Google Scholar
• Hopp, H. (2013). Individual differences in the L2 processing of object-subject ambiguities. Applied Psycholinguistics. Advance online publication. doi:10.1017/S0142716413000180.
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, C. N. (2008). Proficiency level and the interaction of lexical and morphosyntactic information during L2 sentence processing. Language Learning, 58, 875–909. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00481.x
   Google Scholar
• Jaeger, T. F. (2008). Categorial data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformations or not) and towards logit mixed models. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 434–446. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007
   Google Scholar
• Jackson, C. N., & Roberts, L. (2010). Animacy affects the processing of subject-object ambiguities in the L2: Evidence from self-paced reading with German L2 learners of Dutch. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 671–691. doi: 10.1017/S0142716410000196
   Google Scholar
• Jegerski, J. (2012). The processing of temporary subject–object ambiguities in native and near-native Mexican Spanish. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 721–735. doi: 10.1017/S1366728911000654
   Google Scholar
• Juffs, A. (1998). Main verb vs reduced relative clause ambiguity resolution in second language sentence processing. Language Learning, 48, 107–147. doi: 10.1111/1467-9922.00034
   Google Scholar
• Juffs, A. (2004). Representation, processing, and working memory in a second language. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102, 199–225. doi: 10.1111/j.0079-1636.2004.00135.x
   Google Scholar
• Juffs, A., & Harrington, M. (1996). Garden path sentences and error data in second language processing research. Language Learning, 46, 283–323. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb01237.x
   Google Scholar
• Kaschak, M. P., & Glenberg, A. M. (2004). This construction needs learned. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 450–467. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.3.450
   Google Scholar
• Kim, A., & Osterhout, L. (2005). The independence of combinatory semantic processing: Evidence from event-related potentials. Journal of Memory and Language, 52, 205–225. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2004.10.002
   Google Scholar
• Konieczny, L., Hemforth, B., & Scheepers, C. (1994). Reanalyses vs. internal repairs: Nonmonotonic processes in sentence perception. In B. Hemforth, L. Konieczny, C. Scheepers, & G. Strube (Eds.), First analysis, reanalysis, and repair (pp. 1–22). IIG-Report 8/94, University of Freiburg.
   Google Scholar
• Lim, J.-H. & Christianson, K. (2013). Second language sentence processing in reading for comprehension and translation. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 16, 518–537. doi: 10.1017/S1366728912000351
   Google Scholar
• MacDonald, M. C., Pearlmutter, N. J., & Seidenberg, M. S. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676–703. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.101.4.676
   Google Scholar
• McRae, K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., & Tanenhaus, M. K. (1998). Modeling the influence of thematic fit (and other constraints) in on-line sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 38, 283–312. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1997.2543
   Google Scholar
• Meng, M., & Bader, M. (2000). Mode of disambiguation and garden-path strength: An investigation of subject-object ambiguities in German. Language and Speech, 43, 43–74. doi: 10.1177/00238309000430010201
   Google Scholar
• Meseguer, E., Carreiras, M., & Clifton, C. Jr. (2002). Overt reanalysis strategies and eye movements during the reading of mild garden path sentences. Memory & Cognition, 30, 551–561. doi: 10.3758/BF03194956
   Google Scholar
• Pan, H.-Y., & Felser, C. (2011). Referential context effects in L2 ambiguity resolution: Evidence from self-paced reading. Lingua, 121, 221–236. doi: 10.1016/j.lingua.2010.08.003
   Google Scholar
• Papadopoulou, D., & Clahsen, H. (2003). Parsing strategies in L1 and L2 sentence processing: A study of relative clause attachment in Greek. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 501–528.
   Google Scholar
• Pickering, M. J., & Traxler, M. J. (1998). Plausibility and recovery from garden paths: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24, 940–961.
   Google Scholar
• Rah, A., & Adone, D. (2010). Processing of the reduced relative clause vs main verb ambiguity in L2 learners at different proficiency levels. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32, 79–109. doi: 10.1017/S027226310999026X
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, L., & Felser, C. (2011). Plausibility and recovery from garden paths in second language sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32, 299–331. doi: 10.1017/S0142716410000421
   Google Scholar
• Slattery, T. J., Sturt, P., Christianson, K., Yoshida, M., & Ferreira, F. (2013). Lingering misinterpretations of garden path sentences arise from competing syntactic representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 104–120. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2013.04.001
   Google Scholar
• Sturt, P. (2007). Semantic re-interpretation and garden path recovery. Cognition, 105, 477–488. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2006.10.009
   Google Scholar
• Sturt, P., Pickering, M. J., & Crocker, M. W. (1999). Structural change and reanalysis difficulty in language comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 136–150. doi: 10.1006/jmla.1998.2606
   Google Scholar
• Tabor, W., & Hutchins, S. (2004). Evidence for self-organized sentence processing: Digging in effects. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 30, 431–450.
   Google Scholar
• Townsend, D., & Bever, T. (2001). Sentence comprehension: The integration of habits and rules. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Trueswell, J. C., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Kello, C. (1993). Verb-specific constraints in sentence processing: Separating effects of lexical preference from garden-paths. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 19, 528–553.
   Google Scholar
• Van Dyke, J. A., & Lewis, R. L. (2003). Distinguishing effects of structure and decay on attachment and repair: A cub-based parsing account of recovery from misanalyzed ambiguities. Journal of Memory and Language, 49, 285–316. doi: 10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00081-0
   Google Scholar
• van Gompel, R. P. G., Pickering, M., Pearson, J., & Jacob, G. (2006). The activation of inappropriate analyses in garden-path sentences: Evidence from structural priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 335–362. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2006.06.004
   Google Scholar
• Warner, J., & Glass, A. L. (1987). Context and distance-to-disambiguation effects in ambiguity resolution: Evidence from grammaticality judgments of garden path sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 714–738. doi: 10.1016/0749-596X(87)90111-2
   Google Scholar
• Williams, J. N. (2006). Incremental interpretation in second-language processing. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9(1), 71–88. doi: 10.1017/S1366728905002385
   Google Scholar
• Witzel, J., Witzel, N., & Nicol, J. (2012). Deeper than shallow: Evidence for structure-based parsing biases in L2 sentence processing. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33, 419–456. doi: 10.1017/S0142716411000427
   Google Scholar