Meaning through syntax is insufficient to explain comprehension of sentences with reduced relative clauses: comment on McKoon and Ratcliff (2003).
Meaning through syntax is insufficient to explain comprehension of sentences with reduced relative clauses: comment on McKoon and Ratcliff (2003).
复制标题
通过语法来表达意义不足以解释对减少关系从句的句子的理解：对 McKoon 和 Ratcliff (2003) 的评论。
DOI：
10.1037/0033-295x.112.4.1022
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Tanenhaus,MichaelK
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
McRae,Ken;Hare,Mary;Tanenhaus,MichaelK
作者认为，G. McKoon 和 R. Ratcliff 提出的意义通过句法 (MTS) 模型（参见记录 2003-05781-006）未能解释对减少关系从句的句子的理解。首先，该理论关于基于动词的事件表示以及它们如何与结构联系的核心假设与词汇语义学文献中既定的分析不相容。其次，MTS 理论既没有提供原则性的解释，也没有提供一致的解释来解释为什么一些简化的亲属是困难的，而另一些是简单的。最后，McKoon 和 Ratcliff 对基于约束的模型的批评是有缺陷的，因为有时他们测试了不存在的理论，有时他们为他们所争论的基于约束的模型提供了证据。（PsycINFO 数据库记录 (c) 2016 APA，保留所有权利）
The authors argue that the meaning through syntax (MTS) model proposed by G. McKoon and R. Ratcliff (see record 2003-05781-006) fails to account for the comprehension of sentences with reduced relative clauses. First, the theory's core assumptions regarding verb-based event representations and how they link to constructions are incompatible with well-established analyses from the lexical semantics literature. Second, the MTS theory provides neither a principled nor a consistent account for why some reduced relatives are hard whereas others are easy. Finally, McKoon and Ratcliff's critique of constraint-based models is flawed in that sometimes they tested a nonexistent theory and sometimes they provided evidence for the constraint-based models against which they were arguing.(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)