Processing Subject and Object Relative Clauses: Evidence from Eye Movements

By Matthew J. Traxler, Robin K. Morris, Rachel E. Seely. 2002

619 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Cognitive Neuroscience, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b9b11d607d95f8ea961ae996dc068beff5b964d1

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Consequences of the Serial Nature of Linguistic Input for Sentenial Complexity (2005, background): “ter, & Keller, 1996; King & Just, 1991; Mak, Vonk, & Schriefers, 2002; Stromswold, Caplan, Alpert, & Rauch, 1996; Traxler, Morris, & Seely, 2002; Wanner & Maratsos, 1978; Waters, Caplan, & Hildebrandt, 1987).”
How language production shapes language form and comprehension (2012, background): “…1996), comprehension difficulty is strongly influenced by the words in the sentence and therefore cannot reflect purely syntactic processes (Traxler et al., 2002; Reali and Christiansen, 2007), object relatives do contain a non-trivial amount of ambiguity directly related to comprehension…”
Object relatives made easy: A cross-linguistic comparison of the constraints influencing young children's processing of relative clauses (2007, background): “However, adult reading time studies in English and German show that this is not the case, although supporting verb semantic information appears to speed up reanalysis (e.g., Schriefers, Friederici, & Ku ¨ hn, 1995; Traxler et al., 2002, 2005 ).”
Animacy in processing relative clauses: The hikers that rocks crush (2006, methodology): “Traxler et al. (2002) have recently proposed that animacy is a factor that affects the relative difficulty of reanalysis.”
An ERP study of the processing of subject and object relative clauses in Japanese (2008, neutral): “Just, 1991; eye-tracking: Traxler, Morris, & Seely, 2002; ERPs: King & Kutas, 1995; fMRI: Caplan et al., 2001).”
The role of prominence in pronoun resolution: Active versus passive representations (2007, background): “However, we maintain that the ambiguity of the it-pronouns, and the need for reanalysis ( Traxler et al., 2002 ), provides a natural explanation for why the speed of processing was delayed for inanimate antecedent cases in Experiment 1. As well, we note that the more prominent position of the inanim”
Processing of relative clauses is made easier by frequency of occurrence (2007, background): “Their findings suggest that the presence of an inanimate noun phrase in the relative clause increases the processing difficulty in object relatives (for an extended discussion, see Mak et al., 2006; Traxler et al., 2002).”