-1-

COE Workshop Session 1, Friday 13:45-14:25
Using the Moses Illusion to investigate the external speech monitor
Jessica W. CHEVALIER (University of California, Santa Cruz) & Jean E. FOX TREE
(University of California, Santa Cruz)
jchevali@ucsc.edu
Abstract
In speaking, people inevitably make mistakes that need to be corrected. Two points at
which errors can be caught are just before words are produced (pre-articulatory speech)
and just after words are produced (post-articulatory speech). Levelt (1983, 1989) called
these the internal and external monitors.
Both comprehension and self-correction are crucial to any interpersonalcommunication. Knowing how to optimize understanding and correct errors has
potential applications to classroom teaching techniques, business communication, andany other setting where rapid or complete understanding is important.
A great deal of research has been done to investigate the internal loop (e.g.
Hartsuiker & Kolk, 2001; Morgan & Wheeldon, 2003; Oomen & Postma, 2002;
Wheeldon & Morgan, 2002). In one of the earliest studies, researchers demonstrated
that people alter what they say to avoid taboo words, even though autonomic measuresdemonstrate that they were thinking about the taboo word (their skin sweats; Motley,
Camden, & Baars, 1982).
In contrast to the internal monitor, little has been done to explore the workings of theexternal monitor. We tested how speaking versus writing affected detection of errors in
the production system. In addition, we explored how hearing versus reading affected
detection of anomalous questions in the comprehension system. We also explored therelationship between the communication skill of participants and the error rate ofquestions answered.
The questions we used for this experiment were a combination of valid questions
testing common knowledge and versions of the Moses illusion (Erickson & Mattson,
1981; Hannon & Daneman, 2001). In this illusion, listeners fail to detect anomalous
information that is semantically similar to the correct information. Even though it iscommon knowledge that Noah, not Moses, took animals on the ark, participants usually
respond "two" to the question "How many animals of each kind did Moses take on theark?" Participants were instructed to identify anomalous questions and answer valid
questions, with permission to change their answers if they wanted to.
Results indicate that participants are much more likely to correct spoken responses
than written ones. Participants also tend to make fewer changes when they read thequestions as compared to hearing questions. There is also a positive correlation
between communicative skill and number of correct responses overall.

-2-

COE Workshop Session 1, Friday 14:25-15:05
A Memory-based sentence processing model
Kei TAKAHASHI (Graduate School of International Cultural Studies(GSICS)/ Center forInterdisciplinary Research(CIR), Tohoku University) & Kei YOSHIMOTO (Graduate
School of International Cultural Studies(GSICS)/ Center for the Advanced Higher
Education(CAHE), Tohoku University)
kei-ta@linguist.jp
Abstract
In the syntactic literature, the hierarchical analyses based on phrase structure havesucceeded in accounting for various linguistic phenomena. However, there are somelinguistic phenomena which involve linear order and are difficult for structure-based
accounts, such as topicalization of a `that'-clause. In Lexical Functional Grammar(LFG),
it is succeeded in accounting for the topicalization example in terms of grammatical
function and LFG-unique mechanism. However, LFG fails in predicting the(un)acceptability of the coordination of an NP and a `that'-clause and Right Node
Raising since LFG treats the conjuncts as a set. Other frameworks such as Head-driven
Phrase Structure Grammar(HPSG) and Categorial Grammar(CG) analyze thecoordination of unlikes: the coordination such that the heads of the conjuncts differ intheir syntactic categories. However, these fails in predicting the (un)acceptabilities if theorder of conjuncts is changed when the an NP and `that'-clause iscoordinated. .Furthermore, there are even data which are beyond the scope of revisingsyntactic theories.In our presentation, we first provide evidences that the linear order infact affects the (un)acceptabilities of sentences and show the problems forgrammar-based accounts. Second, we observe the “linear order effect” which thesyntactic constraints imposed by the head are exerted only when the argument is “nearenough” to its head. This observational generalization is supported by an insertion of apause or a phrase between the head and its complement headed by the category which
is not allowed to appear; insertion exerts an influence on the (un)acceptabilities without
using the syntactic structure. We claim that these data cannot be accounted forsyntactically, but should be dealt with in terms of parsing. Then, we propose amemory-based sentence processing model in which the syntactic information is
decayed or deactivated as (i) the processing goes on, and (ii) as thepredicate-argument structure is seemed to be constructed. This idea is motivated by theassumption that the syntactic information is used only to gain the semantic content andthat the working memory is severely limited. We formalize the model and also
demonstrate how our model can explain the above-mentioned difficulties and thegarden-path effect in an uniform manner.

-3-

COE Workshop Session 1, Friday 15:05-15:45
Attributes of language use explained by activities of neurons
Shinji KARASAWA (Miyagi National College of Technology)
shinji-karasawa@cup.ocn.ne.jp
Abstract
The paradigm of activity throws light on the natural intelligence. It is a new realistic
concept where every part of body is considered as a tool for activities. That is, a brain orneuron or gene is a tool for activity. A human being exchanges information to do
activities in the future. The origin of those activities can trace back to the birth of a firstlife. Single-cell organisms have continued to evolve the biochemical reaction about
three billion years. If a creature makes action, the surroundings change. The creaturemust change the action for the life conservation. The creature interacts with thesurroundings, and it adapts its behavior to the situation that changed. A creature
possesses many biochemical reactions, and the subset of reactions is operated
according to the demand of the situation. The meeting of supply and demand is thecondition of activity that holds true in every creature. A creature does the adaptive
biochemical reaction that accompanies materialization of the activity. A nerve system
and a genetic system are the results of materialization, and those are tools for intelligent
activities from the viewpoint of activity.
The nerve circuit that make possible to replay is formed at the activity in the real world.
The knowledge is the information that expresses activities of the nerve circuits. The real
meaning is effects on the real world. There are two subsets of activities in a brain. One
is semantic activity in a brain and the other is a subset of activities for expression. There
are linkages between two subsets of activities. Since a nerve cell unifies many activities
into one activity, each subset of activities forms a hierarchical structure. Since the nerve
system is organized by use of existing circuits, a growth of intelligence is achieved byadding a new circuit. This principle of extension economizes the circuits for activities.
Although the contents of speech are activities of nerve network in which includes
parallel connections, the speech is uttered by means of serial activities of a vocal organ.
Therefore, the attributes of language originate from 1) real world, 2) brain mechanism,and 3) vocal organ. The language faculty of human is acquired through language use in
the real world. So, the so-called universal grammar is mainly based on the attributes of
the real world.

-4-

COE Workshop Session 2, Friday 16:00-16:40
JFL learners’ reading NPs in sentences and isolation
Mineharu NAKAYAMA (Ohio State University) &Akiko KASHIWAGI (Ohio StateUniversity)
mnakayam@yahoo.com (or nakayama.1@osu.edu)
Abstract
Kashiwagi and Nakayama (2005) (hereafter K&N). investigated American JFL learners’
processing of Japanese sentences with 3-morae, 6-morae, and 6-morae NPs with the
NP-Genitive-NP structure, as in Teraki-san-wa
kyoojyu-ga
dorama-o/hoomudorama-o/ kuji-no-dorama-o mita to itta. ‘Teraki said that the professor saw
the drama/serial drama/9 o’ clock drama.’
Their results of a self-paced reading experiment showed that: a) the NP-Genitive-NP
evoked significantly slower reading times than the 3- and 6-morae NPs among thenative speakers; b) the 3-morae and the NP-Genitive NPs exhibited significantly
different reading times among the JFL learners at the higher proficiency (with more than
600 hours of classroom instruction); and c) the three types of NPs were not significantly
different among the JFL learners at the lower proficiency (with about 580 hours ofclassroom instruction). These differences were interpreted as indicating how differently
native and non-native speakers utilized their resources, especially working memory, inreading. In this paper, we compare their lower proficiency JFL learners' data on the 6
mora words with the lexical access times of those at the same language level.
An experiment with the lexical decision task was given to five JFL learners who arenative speakers of English (the same conditions as those in the K&N study above). 150
words and non-words each were presented by a modified Psyscope (Cohen et al.,1993) in Macintosh G3 to the subjects from the same American university. The
percentage of correct responses on words was 95.64% and the residual response time
(RRT) of the 6-mora words (e.g., hoomudorama) was 431.75 msec. Though this RRT
includes both lexical access and decision making times, let us simply compare it with
the K&N RRT (2657.52 msec.), which included the lexical access and parsing times.
The 6 mora RRT in sentence processing took the longest among the three types of NPs
and was 2.4 times as long as the RRT of the embedded subject (e.g., kyooju-ga).
Although K&N concluded that the JFL learners consumed much of their working
memory in decoding each phrase, the present finding that the lexical RRT of the 6 mora
words was 9.94 times as long as the RRT (-48.3 msec.) of the subject word (i.e., kyooju)
suggests that the JFL learners actually consumed more of their working memory in
structure building, especially, when they processed the subject NPs, which created newclauses.

-5-

COE Workshop Session 2, Friday 16:40-17:20
Structural priming as a window to the human linguistic representations
Hiroko YAMASHITA (Rochester Institute of Technology)
hxygsl@rit.edu
Abstract
Structural priming is a tendency for speakers to reuse previously-produced structures intheir later utterances (e.g., Bock & Loebell, 1990; Hartsuiker & Westenberg, 2000).
For example, a semantic proposition of a pharmacist giving a medicine to a customer
can be realized in two structures in English, namely, the Prepositional Object (PO)Structure or the Direct Object (DO) Structure, as shown in (1). After speakers
comprehend or produce a sentence in one structure, PO structure for example, theirtendency of using the PO structure in producing ditransitive sentence increases despite
the sentence is semantically unrelated to the earlier one, as in (2).
(1)

(2)

a. Prepositional Object Structure[S The pharmacist [VP [V gave] [NP the medicine] [PP to the customer]]].
b. Direct Object Structure[S The pharmacist [VP [V gave] [NP the customer] [NP the medicine]]].
[S The magician [VP [V showed] [NP the rabbit] [PP to the girl]]].

Researchers investigated the source of such effect, that is, whether the priming
originates from the phonological representation, thematic roles, phrasal categories
associated with lexical items, or syntactic structures (e.g., Bock & Loebell, 1990;
Scheepers, 2003; cf, Chang, Bock, & Goldberg, 2004). Overall it is concluded that
abstract syntactic representations play a significant role.
The phenomenon of structural priming is intriguing, and more crucially useful as a toolthat carves out the linguistic representations involved in the processes of humanlanguage production and comprehension. A comparison can be made between
children's structural representations and those in adult grammar (e.g., Conwell and
Demuth, to appear). The nature of structural representations in second language
learners, in contrast to those in native speakers, can also be examined (e.g., Loebell &Bock, 2003; Yamashita & Matsumoto, in preparation).
In this talk, recent
developments in the study of human linguistic representation with structural priming are
introduced and examined.
References
Bock, K., & Loebell, H. (1990). Framing sentences. Cognition, 35, 1-39.
Conwell, E., & Demuth, K. (in press). Early syntactic productivity: Evidence from dative
shift. Cognition.
Chang, F., Bock, K., & Goldberg, A. (2004). Can thematic roles leave traces in theirplaces? Cognition, 90-1, 29-49.
Hartsuiker, R. J., & Westenberg, C. (2000). Word order priming in written and spoken
sentence production. Cognition, 75, 1-13.
Loebell, H., & Bock, K. (2003). Structural priming across languages. Linguistics,
41-5, 791-824.
Scheepers, C. (2003). Syntactic priming of relative clause attachments: Persistence ofstructural configuration in sentence production. Cognition, 89, 179-205.
Yamashita, H. & Matsumoto, M. (in preparation). Linguistic representations inforeign language production.

-6-

COE Workshop Session 2, Friday 17:20-18:00
The processing of English number agreement
Jeffrey D. WITZEL (University of Arizona) & Janet L. NICOL (University of Arizona)
jdwitzel@email.arizona.edu
Abstract
Three experiments were conducted to examine the comprehension processes
underlying English reflexive agreement (RA) and subject-verb agreement (SVA). In
sentence production, experiments by e.g. Bock, Eberhard, & Cutting (2005) suggest
similarities between SVA and pronoun (reflexive and tag-question pronoun) agreement.
Agreement errors occur more often when participants complete sentence fragments
containing mismatching head and local nouns in subject NPs (as in 2 below) than when
they complete fragments with number-matching nouns in subject NPs (as in 1 below). A
similar mismatch effect has been found for SVA in comprehension experiments. For
example, Nicol, Forster, and Veres (1997) tested sentences like the following with anacceptability judgment task:
1. SS The author of the speech was rewarded.
2. SP The author of the speeches was rewarded.
3. PP The authors of the speeches were rewarded.
4. PS The authors of the speech were rewarded.
The results revealed longer reading/judgment times for SP sentences than for SS
sentences.
Our experiments sought to (a) replicate Nicol et al. and (b) extend its findings to thecomprehension of RA. In Experiment 1, the same task as in Nicol et al. was used to test
the above conditions for both SVA and RA sentences. The results for SVA replicatedNicol et al. The RA sentences, however, showed a different pattern of results: SP
sentences produced longer reading times than SS sentences (a mismatch effect);
however, PP sentences showed longer reading times than PS sentences. Two
follow-up experiments were conducted to (a) clarify the results for RA sentences and (b)investigate the time course of processing in RA and SVA sentences. Both experiments
used a phrase-by-phrase, moving-window reading task. Experiment 2 tested RA
sentences under the four conditions above. Experiment 3 tested SS and SP versions of
SVA and RA sentences. Preliminary results from Experiment 3 suggest that themismatch effect (as evidenced by processing slowdown) has a different time course in
RA and SVA sentences, appearing at the agreement target in RA sentences, but after
the agreement target in SVA sentences. The complete results (under analysis) from
Experiments 2 and 3 will be presented. Comprehension and production processes –and the extent to which representations and agreement mechanisms may be sharedacross the two modalities – will be discussed.

-7-

COE Workshop Session 3, Saturday 11:20-12:00
Anatomy of acceptability judgments
Yoshihisa KITAGAWA (Indiana University) and Yuki HIROSE (The University of Tokyo)
kitagawa@indiana.edu
Abstract
1

Background — Prosody-scope Matches and Mismatches in Wh-questions:

Deguchi and Kitagawa (2002) and Ishihara (2002, 2003) pointed out prosody-scopecorrelation of Wh-interrogatives in Tokyo as illustrated in (1): (bold capital = focus /H ircle = unreduced H-tone to mark the end of focus
shading = post-focal reduction / ‫ې‬
prosody / -C0Wh = Wh-interrogative complementizer / -C0Wthr = polarity interrogativecomplementizer ('whether'))(1)a.

Local Focus Prosody ⇒ Subordinate Scope:

Keisatu-wa [ kanozyo-gaỞ ano-banỞ DAre-to atteita-ka ]Ở
police-TOP

she-NOM Ở Ở that-night'Are the police still investigatingb.

i mademo shirabeteiru-no?
○

who-with seeing-C0Wh stillsearching-C0Y/N[ who1 she was with t1 that night ]?'Global Focus Prosody ⇒ Matrix Scope:

Keisatu-wa [ kanozyo-ga ano-ban DAre-to atteita-ka ]imademo shirabeteiru-no?
who-with-C0Wthr-C0Wh'Who1 is such that the police are still investigating [ whether she was with him1 that night ]?'In this work, we will present and discuss the results of two psycholinguistic
experiments, which verify the existence of the prosody-scope as in (1). In the firstexperiment, which is the extension of the pilot study presented in Kitagawa and Fodor(To appear), 12 pairs of an identical sentence accompanied by two distinct prosodic
patterns as in) and (2) were presented to the subjects, auditorily in one group and only in writingin the other, and their acceptability judgments were examined.
(2)

Local Focus Prosody ⇒ Subordinate Scope:

Kimi-wa [ Kyooko-ga

hontoo-wa

DAre-oyou-TOPactually

who-ACC-NOM

i mademo omotteiru-no?
aisiteita-to] ○loved-C0That

stillthink-C0Wh'Do you still think [ that Kyoko actually had a crush on who ]?'(2)

Global Focus Prosody ⇒ Matrix Scope:

Kimi-wa [ Kyooko-ga
you-TOP-NOM

hontoo-wa DAre-oaisiteita-to] imademoomotteiru-no?

actually

loved-C0That

think-C0Wh

who-ACC'Who do you still think [ Kyoko actually had a crush on ]?'

still

-8-

If the prosody-scope correlation in question is real, (2) should be judged unacceptablebecause of the combination of local focus prosody and a declarative C0 -to 'that' of thesubordinate clause, while (2) should be interpreted successfully as a direct Wh-question.
The experiment involving silent reading was expected to be influenced by "default
implicit prosody" according to the "Implicit Prosody Hypothesis" argued for by Fodor(1998), Hirose (2003), et al.
In the second experiment, which is currently undergoing, a small number ofsubjects who had confirmed that they could distinguish the two distinct scopeinterpretations involved in sentences like (1), were asked to read the sentences aloudfor each scope interpretation. Their recitation was recorded, phonetically analyzed,
and used as stimuli in a perception experiment, in which subjects were asked to identify
the scope interpretation induced by the auditory stimuli in each case (by selecting
between two answers — one for a direct Wh-question (e.g., Yamada-san-depsu. 'It was
Mr. Yamada.' and the other for a "yes/no" question embedding an indirect Wh-question(e.g., Hai. 'yes')).
References:
Deguchi, Masanori and Yoshihisa Kitagawa (2002) "Prosody and Wh-questions,"
Proceedings of the Thirty-second Annual Meeting of the North-Eastern LinguisticSociety, 73-92.
Fodor, Janet Dean (1998) "Learning to Parse?," Journal of Psycholinguistic Research,
7.2, 285-318.
Hirose, Yuki (2003) "Recycling Prosodic Boundaries," Journal of Psycholinguistic
Research, 32.2, 167-195.
Ishihara, Shinichiro (2002) "Invisible but Audible Wh-scope Marking: Wh-constructions
and Deaccenting in Japanese," Proceedings of the Twenty-first West Coast
Conference on Formal Linguistics, 180-193.
Kitagawa, Yoshihisa and Janet Dean Fodor (To appear) "Prosodic Influences on
Syntactic Judgments," in Fanselow, Gisbert, et al. (ed(s).), Gradience in Grammar:
Generative Perspectives, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

-9-

COE Workshop Session 3, Saturday 12:00-12:40
Input for learning Japanese:
RIKEN Japanese Mother-Infant Conversation Corpus
Reiko MAZUKA (Laboratory for Language Development, RIKEN Brain Science Institute,
Duke University), Yosuke IGARASHI (Laboratory for Language Development, RIKEN
Brain Science Institute, National Institute for Japanese Language) &Ken'ya NISHIKAWA (Laboratory for Language Development,
RIKEN Brain Science Institute, Keio University)
mazuka@brain.riken.jp
Abstract
The input for infant language learning is the speech that mothers and other adults
produce around them. In order to investigate language acquisition, it is critical tounderstand the nature of input that infants are presented with. When speaking to
infants (Infant-Directed Speech: IDS), adults modify their speech in certain ways including prosodic, phonological and lexical level changes. Although a rich literatureexists that documents various aspects of Japanese IDS properties, previous studies onphonological and prosodic aspects of Japanese IDS have been based on relatively
small sample sizes. In this talk, we will introduce a new corpus of Japanese mothers'
speech to infants. The RIKEN Japanese Mother-Infant Conversation Corpus(R_MICC) consists of 22 mothers' conversations with their 18-24 month old children as
well as with adults. The corpus consists of approximately 45 minutes of recording fromeach mother-infant dyad, totaling 14 hours. Using the coding criteria developed for the
Corpus of Spoken Japanese (2004, National Institute for Japanese Language) eachmother's speech is transcribed phonologically, and coded for further phonetic details aswell as morphological and prosodic characteristics. Analysis of this corpus will allow us
to capture the basic characteristics of Japanese infants' language input, such as
frequency of consonants and vowels, types of syllables, word types, parts of speech,
intonational characteristics etc. For purposes of illustration, we will present a
comparison of speech rates between IDS and ADS.

- 10 -

COE Workshop Session 4, Saturday 13:40-14:20
Parsing and multiple Wh-questions in Japanese
Sandiway Fong (University of Arizona) & Jason Ginsburg (University of Arizona)sandiway@email.arizona.edu
Abstract
We propose a processing-centric view for Japanese wh-questions. Given theword-order nature of Japanese, wh-arguments occur before sentence-final question
particles. Using a left-to-right parsing model, together with top-down prediction, we
explore the hypothesis that wh-arguments predict and set in advance the Q-feature
value of Comp. We show how this model can account for a range of Japanese
wh-question judgments, as discussed in (Watanabe 1992), (Saito 1994) and (Maki1995).

- 11 -

COE Workshop Session 4, Saturday 14:20-15:00
Becoming syntactic: Psycholinguistic, developmental,
and evolutionary considerations
Franklin CHANG (NTT Communication Science Laboratories)
irgendwie@gmail.com
Abstract
Even though adults process language with syntactic representations that they learned
as children, work in adult psycholinguistics and language acquisition often proceeds inisolation. A neural network model that attempts to link these two domains will bepresented (Chang, Dell, & Bock, 2006). The model makes explicit assumptions about
the nature of the learning mechanism, the architecture of the brain, and the nature ofmeaning, and these assumptions influence the model's behavior in syntactic
development and adult processing. I will present two examples where the model helps
to address issues in adult and child psycholinguistic work.
An important task for studying syntactic knowledge in adults is structural
priming. Structural priming is a tendency for speakers to repeat previously produced
sentence structures. The changes to syntactic knowledge in priming are long lasting(Bock & Griffin, 2000), and this suggests that priming could be the same mechanism as
learning. The model instantiates this hypothesis by using the same mechanism for
language acquisition and priming. One controversy in production is the question ofwhat kinds of representations are primed in these studies. One set of studies suggestthat priming is only sensitive to syntactic relations (Bock & Loebell, 1990), while otherstudies suggest that thematic roles are also involved (Chang, Bock, & Goldberg,
2003). The learning mechanism in the model suggests a way to explain theseconflicting results.
Another controversy comes from the language acquisition literature. Developing
syntactic knowledge shows different results when tested in tasks such as production(Tomasello, 2000) and preferential looking (Naigles, 2002). The production results
suggest that syntax emerges from experience, while the preferential looking supports
the existence of innate syntactic biases. Because language acquisition theories are notexplicit about the relationship between tasks and representations, it is hard to falsify
either of these theories with these experimental results. The model provides an explicit
account that can explain the data associated with both tasks, and provides somepredictions that can be used to falsify its account.
Finally, the model makes use of mechanisms that are also present in simpler forms
in other species (e.g., implicit sequencing learning, spatial processing) and hence it
provides some hypotheses about the relationship between neural systems and syntax
in evolution.

- 12 -

COE Workshop Session 4, Saturday 15:00-15:40
Effects of mathematical calculations and thinking about time on abstract thought
Jessica W. CHEVALIER (University of California, Santa Cruz)
jchevali@ucsc.edu
Abstract
Consider the ambiguous statement The meeting originally scheduled for next
Wednesday has been moved forward two days. To which day has the meeting been
moved? Whether people answer Friday or Monday depends on which time perspective
they adopt.
Reading or thinking about motion has been shown to influence time perception,
making people more likely to adopt either a moving-ego (ME) or a moving-time (MT)perspective (Boroditsky, 2000; Boroditsky & Ramscar, 2002; Matlock, Ramscar, &Boroditsky, 2005). People in the ME perspective see themselves as moving forward
through time, analogous to driving down a highway. In the MT perspective, people seethemselves as stationary with time moving towards them, like standing in a stream
flowing past them.
However, no study had examined how thinking about time itself would affect its
conceptualization. It seemed apparent that thinking about the future or past must makeone more likely to adopt ME or MT perspectives, respectively. But the apparently
obvious isn't always true, and thus is worth testing.
Another lacuna was the effect performing mathematical calculations might have on
abstract thought. Math and time are both experienced as "real" but neither has aconcrete representation, making exploration of the connection between the two
worthwhile.
Therefore, I investigated how thinking about time and performing mathematical
calculations influenced the likelihood of ME or MT perspectives. I replicated previous
findings (Matlock et al., 2005) that reading about no motion results in equal likelihood ofeither perspective, while people reading about physical motion are significantly more
likely to adopt a ME perspective (Friday).
However, my other results were surprising as the ME perspective (Friday) was
significantly more likely in all chronological and mathematical conditions; in no condition
was MT more likely. This may relate to a sense of agency (whether people view
themselves as "acting" rather than being "acted upon" in their lives), meriting further
exploration of this possible correlation.
Despite the similarity across conditions, results show some interesting differences
between native English speakers and non-native speakers. Non-native speakers weremore likely than native speakers to adopt the MT perspective in the Chronological
Backward and Addition conditions, and the ME perspective in the Physical Forward andSubtraction conditions. However, results from native speakers and those who identified
themselves as "fluent" were virtually indistinguishable. Therefore, whether this variationis due to systematic differences between languages or comprehension difficulties merits
further investigation.

- 13 -

COE Workshop Session 5, Saturday 16:00-16:40
The subsequent incremental anticipation (SIA) model for explaining theprocessing of Japanese active sentences
Katsuo TAMAOKA (Hiroshima University), Satoru MURAOKA (Kyushu University),
Yayoi MIYAOKA (Hiroshima University of Economics) &Hiromu SAKAI (Hiroshima University)
ktamaoka@hiroshima-u.ac.jp
Abstract
This presentation will examine the detailed mechanism governing how native Japanese
speakers construct incremental syntactic structures prior to seeing an ending verb.
The subsequent incremental anticipation (SIA) model assumes that noun phrases witha particular case particle anticipate subsequent elements out of a finite number ofpossible candidates. A delay in processing speed is expected to result when thisanticipation is not fulfilled. To test this processing model, four experiments wereconducted using canonical and scrambled active sentences: (1) Shorter versus longer
distance scrambling, (2) VP internal versus VP external scrambling, (3) accusative
versus dative scrambling, and (4) single versus double scrambling. Results of all
experiments supported the SIA model. Details of the SIA model and explanatory
remarks will be presented and opened for discussion.

- 14 -

COE Workshop Session 5, Saturday 16:40-17:20
Processing sandwiched dative NP in Korean via case-prosody interaction
Jieun KIAER (King’s College London) & Ruth KEMPSON (King’s College London)
jieunjoekiaer2003@yahoo.co.uk
Abstract
This paper argues that in Korean, a sandwiched dative NP as in (1) can be resolved
incrementally in on-line processing by case-prosody interaction. Based on Dynamic
Syntax (Cann et al 2005), which assumes that structure building is incremental fromleft-to-right, we argue that incremental/local parsing via constructive case is default in
Korean (See Miyamoto2002 for Japanese case).And non-local parsing is cued byprosody. We focus on Intonational Phrase boundary(IP).
Experiment1(N=35) is an off-line fragment-phrasing/completion. Subjects wereasked to phrase the fragments in (2) and to complete the sequence naturally. Results
show a strong correlation between phrasing and completion patterns, showing thatreaders use implicit prosody for syntactic disambiguation, supporting Fodor’s Implicit
Prosody
Hypothesis.
Experiment2(N=30)
isanoff-line
auditory
fragment-completion. %refers to IP boundary. After listening sequences like (3a-3b),
subjects were asked to complete the sentence naturally. Results strongly support
listeners’ use of IP boundary for syntactic disambiguation. Experiment3(N=20) is aframe-by-frame self-paced reading, adopting Hirose(2003)’s method. In parsing(4), no
significant delay was observed in region 3. This shows that in both on-line and in off-line
parsing, implicit prosody prefers to resolve dative NP as in (1a), not as in (1b).Corpus
extraction(Sejong2002,10-million words) shows similar results. 73.7% of sandwiched
datives were interpreted as in (1a) and only 26.3% as in (1b). Experiment4(N=14) is across-modal self-paced comprehension. Region1 in (5a-b) is presented auditorily andother regions are presented visually. No relative slow-down was observed between
region 3 of (5a-5b), confirming the early incorporation of IP boundary at region1.
Experiment5(N=10) is a prosodic phrasing test. Subjects were asked to read sentences
like (1) naturally. Comprehension questions were asked to confirm their dative NP
resolution. Results show that speakers use an IP boundary for early disambiguation of
sandwiched dative NPs. Final syllables before IP were measured to confirm IP
boundary in K-ToBI(Jun2000). We conclude that case-prosody interaction help
readers/listeners/speakers to build structures incrementally.
Example(1) Jina-nun Pomi-hanthey Mina-ka
sakwa-lulececwuessta-ko malhaysse.
-TOP
-DAT
–NOM apple-ACC yesterday gave-COMP saida. Jina said to Pomi that Mina gave an apple to Pomi.
(Sandwiched-Dative NP: matrix reading)b. Jina said that Mina gave an apple to Pomi.
(Sandwiched Dative NP: embedded reading)(2) Jina-TOP Pomi-DAT Mina-NOM apple-ACC yesterday....
(3) a. Jina-TOP% Pomi-DAT Mina-NOM apple-ACC yesterday....
b.Jina-TOP Pomi-DAT% Mina-NOM apple-ACC yesterday....
(4)Jina-TOP Pomi-DAT Mina-NOM apple-ACC(region1) yesterday(region2)
Heri-DAT(region3) gave-COMP (region4) said(region5)(5) a. Jina-TOP Pomi-DAT% Mina-NOM apple-ACC(region1) yesterday(region2)
Heri-DAT(region3) gave-COMP(region4) said(region5)b. Jina-TOP Pomi-DAT% Mina-NOM apple-ACC(region1) yesterday(region2)
adverb(region3) gave-COMP(region4) said(region5)

- 15 -

COE Workshop Session 5, 17:20-18:00
If wide-scope negation isn’t hard because the parser gets stuck,what does explain the problem?
Yukiko KOIZUMI (CUNY Graduate Center)ykoizumi@gc.cuny.edu
Abstract
The ‘not-because’ construction in English is ambiguous between narrow-scope
negation (BEC>NOT), as in (1a), and wide-scope negation (NOT>BEC), as in (1b):(1)
The guard dogs didn’t bark because …
a. … they’d all been drugged. BEC>NOT: For the reason stated, the dogs did not bark.
b. … they heard an intruder. NOT>BEC: The dogs barked for a reason as yet unstated.
Frazier and Clifton (1996) observed a marked processing dispreference for NOT>BEC,
and attributed this to parsing strategies encouraging persistence of the BEC>NOT
analysis that is initially assigned.
We report self-paced reading data clearly
demonstrating that NOT>BEC is not, after all, dispreferred in every syntactic context,
and argue that this necessitates an explanation couched in altogether different terms.
Our experimental design crossed two factors, Scope and Clause Type. In the firstof three successive frames, we presented constructions biased either to BEC>NOT or
to NOT>BEC, which either appeared as main clauses or were embedded in if-clauses.
Frame 2 displayed a follow-up question as a second sentence or a main clause (aftermain- and if-clause Frame 1, respectively); finally, Frame 3 offered two answer
alternatives, one of which the participant selected as fitting better. Although previous
findings of notably slower processing for NOT>BEC were replicated in the main-clausecontext, reading times for NOT>BEC and BEC>NOT did not differ in the if-clausecontext. Our finding of a Scope x Clause Type interaction (p<.001 by participants;
p<.01 by items) is incompatible with a ‘persistence’ explanation, which predicts
processing difficulty for NOT>BEC sentences, across the board.
We propose instead that the usual dispreference for NOT>BEC requires anaccount referring to its marked linguistic properties — specifically, its unusual prosody
and pragmatics — noting that these are mitigated by the if-clause context. In that
context, the major break between subordinate and main clause tends to suppress any
prosodic boundary before because, just as NOT>BEC utterances require (Hirschberg
and Avesani, 2000). At the same time, the main clause that is syntactically guaranteedby sentence-initial if promises to satisfy the need for remarks beyond the barestatement of an event’s non-reason. While determining the contributions of prosody
versus pragmatics necessitates further experimentation, the role of either or both ofthese factors in the on-line resolution of the not-because ambiguity is now clear.
References
Frazier, L., & Clifton, C., Jr. (1996). Construal. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Hirschberg, J., & Avesani, C. (2000). Prosodic disambiguation in English and Italian.
In A. Botinis (Ed.), Intonation: Analysis, Modelling and Technology. Dordrecht:
Kluwer Academic Publishers.