期刊文献+

花园幽径模式行进错位的量化研究:计算语言学视角 被引量:1

Quantitative Research on the Processing Breakdown in Garden Path:A Computational Linguistic Perspective
下载PDF
导出
摘要 该文讨论了花园幽径模式行进错位过程中的困惑商指数。非对称性信息断层的存在导致解码呈现否定之否定的螺旋上升态势。行进错位的潜在效应幅度可通过困惑商指数得到测定。基于大数据语料库统计方法和在线剖析器分析方法,我们测算出优选结构困惑商指数介于(-∞,1];非优选结构困惑商指数介于[1,2];两结构临界值分别为0.72和1.28;歧义域为[0.72,1.28]。结论认为,多结构频数差异是导致困惑商指数变化的根本;行进错位的幅度和非对称性信息补偿的强度均与困惑商指数相关;基于统计的困惑商指数可对局部歧义的复杂句结构提供前瞻性解码信息。 This article discusses the confusion quotient (CQ) index in the processing breakdown of the garden path phonomenon. The presence of asymmetric information breakdown could lead to spiral upward trend of decoding which showed the pattern of double negation. The amplitude of potential effects of processing breakdown could be measured through the CQ index. Based on large data corpus statistics and online parser analytic method, we calculate the value of CQ index. CQ duration for the preferred construction lies between (-∞, 1], and for the non- preferred construction, [1,2]. The critical values for the preferred and non-preferred structures are 0.72 and 1.28 respectively, and the ambiguous domain lies in [0.72, 1.28]. It is concluded that the frequency deviation of multi-structures is a fundamental reason to lead to different CQ index. The amplitude of processing breakdown and magni- tude of asymmetry information compensation are related to CQ index. It is revealed that the statistics-based CQ index can provide the prospective information for decoding the complex structure of local ambiguity.
出处 《中文信息学报》 CSCD 北大核心 2015年第5期31-38,62,共9页 Journal of Chinese Information Processing
基金 国家社科后期资助项目(12FYY019) 中国博士后第57批一等资助项目(2015M570424)
关键词 计算语言学 花园幽径模式 行进错位 局部歧义 困惑商 computational linguistics garden path model processing breakdown local ambiguity confusion quotient
  • 相关文献

参考文献28

  • 1B L Pritchett. Garden path phenomena and the grammatical basis of language processing[J]. Language, 1988(64): 539-576.
  • 2K Rayner, M Carlson, L Frazier. The interaction of syntax and semantics during sentence processing: Eye movements in the analysis of semantically biased sentences[J]. Journal of verbal learning and verbal behavior, 1983, 22(3): 358-374.
  • 3G Altmann, A Garnham, Y Dennis. Avoiding the garden path: Eye movements in context[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 1992, 31(5): 685-712.
  • 4K G D Bailey, F Ferreira. Disfluencies affect the parsing of garden-path sentences[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 2003, 49(2): 183-200.
  • 5T G Bever. The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In Hayes, J R (ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1970: 279-352.
  • 6K Christianson. Sensitivity to syntactic changes in garden path sentences[J]. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2008, 37(6): 391-403.
  • 7J L Du, P FYu, M L Li. Machine Learning from Garden Path Sentences: The Application of computational Linguistics[J]. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning, 2014,9(6):58-62.
  • 8T J Slattery, P Sturt, K Christianson, et al. Lingering misinterpretations of garden path sentences arise from competing syntactic representations[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 2013, 69(2): 104-120.
  • 9R P G van Gompel, M J Pickering, J Pearson, et al. The activation of inappropriate analyses in garden-path sentences: Evidence from structural priming[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 2006, 55(3): 335-362.
  • 10F Ferreira, J M Henderson. Recovery from misanalyses of garden-path sentences[J]. Journal of Memory and Language, 1991, 30(6): 725-745.

二级参考文献107

共引文献47

同被引文献10

引证文献1

二级引证文献4

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部