Schlesewsky Matthias, Bornkessel Ina
Research Group Neurolinguistics, Department of Germanic Linguistics, University of Marburg, Wilhelm-Roepke-Strasse 6A, 35032 Marburg, Germany.
Brain Res. 2006 Jul 7;1098(1):139-52. doi: 10.1016/j.brainres.2006.04.080. Epub 2006 Jun 9.
Reanalysis in language comprehension provides a window on how superficially similar processes of conflict resolution may differ depending on the context in which they are initiated. Thus, previous ERP studies have shown that reanalyses towards object-initial orders in German sentences with dative-active verbs (e.g., folgen, 'to follow') engender N400 effects, while reanalyses with accusative verbs (e.g., besuchen, 'to visit') elicit P600 effects. This difference appears surprising since these two verb classes are both associated with a subject-initial base order. The present paper reports two ERP experiments designed to shed further light on the nature of the conflict resolution processes involved in each case by examining structures in which word order disambiguation is separated from verb class disambiguation. Experiment 1 contrasted dative-active verbs with accusative verbs, while Experiment 2 compared dative-active and dative object-experiencer verbs (which are associated with an object-initial base order). Our results show that the reanalysis pattern for dative-active constructions is context-dependent: when verb class disambiguation precedes word order disambiguation, an N400-P600 pattern results. By contrast, the reanalysis patterns for the other two verb types are context independent: object-experiencer verbs invariably show an N400 and accusative verbs invariably show a P600. We argue that (a) the N400 is a general marker of reanalysis in dative sentences, reflecting an argument reindexation, while (b) the P600 in accusative sentences reflects a structural recomputation. The variable pattern for dative-active sentences reflects the (in)applicability of "good-enough" representations during conflict resolution in garden path sentences.
语言理解中的重新分析为探究表面上相似的冲突解决过程如何因启动它们的上下文不同而有所差异提供了一个窗口。因此,先前的事件相关电位(ERP)研究表明,对带有与格 - 主动动词(如folgen,意为“跟随”)的德语句子中宾语在前的语序进行重新分析会产生N400效应,而对及物动词(如besuchen,意为“拜访”)进行重新分析则会引发P600效应。这种差异似乎令人惊讶,因为这两类动词都与主语在前的基本语序相关联。本文报告了两项ERP实验,旨在通过研究将词序歧义消除与动词类歧义消除分开的结构,进一步阐明每种情况下所涉及的冲突解决过程的本质。实验1对比了与格 - 主动动词和及物动词,而实验2比较了与格 - 主动动词和与格宾语 - 感受者动词(它们与宾语在前的基本语序相关联)。我们的结果表明,与格 - 主动结构的重新分析模式取决于上下文:当动词类歧义消除先于词序歧义消除时,会产生N400 - P600模式。相比之下,其他两种动词类型的重新分析模式与上下文无关:宾语 - 感受者动词总是显示N400,及物动词总是显示P600。我们认为:(a)N400是与格句子中重新分析的一般标记,反映了论元重新索引;(b)及物句子中的P600反映了结构重新计算。与格 - 主动句子的可变模式反映了在花园小径句子的冲突解决过程中“足够好”表征的(不)适用性。