Page 61 - Foundations of Cognitive Psychology : Core Readings

60 Jay L. McClelland, David E.Rumelhart, and Geoffrey E.Hinton

Theboy theman chased kissedthe girl.
But consider these examples (Rumelhart, 1977; Schank, 1973):

I saw the Grand Canyon flying to New York.
I saw the sheep grazing in the field.
Our knowledge of syntactic rules alone does not tell us what grammatical role
is played by the prepositional phrases in these two cases.In the first, ‘‘flying to
New York’’ is taken as describing the context in which the speaker saw the
Grand Canyon—while he was flying to New York.In the second, ‘‘grazing in
the field’’ could syntactically describe an analogous situation, in which the
speaker is grazing in the field, but this possibility does not typically become
available on first reading.Instead we assign ‘‘grazing in the field’’ as a modifier
of the sheep (roughly, ‘‘who were grazing in the field’’).The syntactic structure
of each of these sentences, then, is determined in part by the semantic relations
that the constituents of the sentence might plausibly bear to one another.Thus,
the influences appear to run both ways, from the syntax to the semantics and
from the semantics to the syntax.
In these examples, we see how syntactic considerations influence semantic
ones and how semantic ones influence syntactic ones.We cannot say that one
kind of constraint is primary.
Mutual constraints operate, not only between syntactic and semantic pro-
cessing, but also within each of these domains as well.Here we consider an
example from syntactic processing, namely, the assignment of words to syn-
tactic categories.Consider the sentences:

Ilikethe joke.
Ilikethe drive.
Iliketojoke.
Iliketodrive.
In this case it looks as though the words the and to serve to determine whether
the following word will be read as a noun or a verb.This, of course, is a very
strong constraint in English and can serve to force a verb interpretation of a
word that is not ordinarily used this way:
Iliketomud.
On the other hand, if the information specifying whether the function word
preceding the final word is to or the is ambiguous, then the typical reading of
the word that follows it will determine which way the function word is heard.
This was shown in an experiment by Isenberg, Walker, Ryder, and Schweikert
(1980).They presented sounds halfway between to (actually/tˆ/) and the
-
(actually/dˆ/) and found that words like joke, which we tend to think of first as
nouns, made subjects hear the marginal stimuli as the, while words like drive,
which we tend to think of first as verbs, made subjects hear the marginal stim-
uli as to.Generally, then, it would appear that each word can help constrain the
syntactic role, and even the identity, of every other word.
Simultaneous Mutual Constraints in Word Recognition Just as the syntactic role
of one word can influence the role assigned to another in analyzing sentences,