Recency and Lexical Preferences in Spanish

One experiment provided evidence in support of Gibson, Pearlmutter, Canseco-Gonzalez, and Hickok’s (1996) claim that a recency preference applies to Spanish relative clause attachments, contrary to the claim made by Cuetos and Mitchell (1988). Spanish speakers read stimuli involving either two or th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Gibson, Edward, Pearlmutter, Neal J., Torrens, Vicenç
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Fecha de publicación:1999
País:España
Institución:Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
Repositorio:e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED
Idioma:español
OAI Identifier:oai:e-spacio.uned.es:20.500.14468/24613
Acceso en línea:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/24613
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:6104.04 Psicolingüística
id ES_2b7d8cbaacdfd43f075a23791f09729c
oai_identifier_str oai:e-spacio.uned.es:20.500.14468/24613
network_acronym_str ES
network_name_str España
repository_id_str
spelling Recency and Lexical Preferences in SpanishGibson, EdwardPearlmutter, Neal J.Torrens, Vicenç6104.04 PsicolingüísticaOne experiment provided evidence in support of Gibson, Pearlmutter, Canseco-Gonzalez, and Hickok’s (1996) claim that a recency preference applies to Spanish relative clause attachments, contrary to the claim made by Cuetos and Mitchell (1988). Spanish speakers read stimuli involving either two or three potential attachment sites in which the same lexical content of the two-site conditions appeared in a different structural configuration in the three-site conditions. High attachment was easier than low attachment when only two sites were present, but low attachment was preferred over high attachment, which was in turn preferred over middle attachment, when three sites were present. The experiment replicated earlier results and showed that (1) attachment preferences are determined in part by a preference to attach recently/low, and (2) lexical biases are insufficient to explain attachment preferences.Springere-Spacio UNED20242024-12-0219991999-07-0119991999-07-01journal articlehttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfhttps://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/24613reponame:e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNEDinstname:Universidad Nacional de Educación a DistanciaEspañolspaopen accesshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccesshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.esoai:e-spacio.uned.es:20.500.14468/246132026-06-06T12:38:31Z
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Recency and Lexical Preferences in Spanish
title Recency and Lexical Preferences in Spanish
spellingShingle Recency and Lexical Preferences in Spanish
Gibson, Edward
6104.04 Psicolingüística
title_short Recency and Lexical Preferences in Spanish
title_full Recency and Lexical Preferences in Spanish
title_fullStr Recency and Lexical Preferences in Spanish
title_full_unstemmed Recency and Lexical Preferences in Spanish
title_sort Recency and Lexical Preferences in Spanish
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv Gibson, Edward
Pearlmutter, Neal J.
Torrens, Vicenç
author Gibson, Edward
author_facet Gibson, Edward
Pearlmutter, Neal J.
Torrens, Vicenç
author_role author
author2 Pearlmutter, Neal J.
Torrens, Vicenç
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv e-Spacio UNED
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv 6104.04 Psicolingüística
topic 6104.04 Psicolingüística
description One experiment provided evidence in support of Gibson, Pearlmutter, Canseco-Gonzalez, and Hickok’s (1996) claim that a recency preference applies to Spanish relative clause attachments, contrary to the claim made by Cuetos and Mitchell (1988). Spanish speakers read stimuli involving either two or three potential attachment sites in which the same lexical content of the two-site conditions appeared in a different structural configuration in the three-site conditions. High attachment was easier than low attachment when only two sites were present, but low attachment was preferred over high attachment, which was in turn preferred over middle attachment, when three sites were present. The experiment replicated earlier results and showed that (1) attachment preferences are determined in part by a preference to attach recently/low, and (2) lexical biases are insufficient to explain attachment preferences.
publishDate 1999
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 1999
1999-07-01
1999
1999-07-01
2024
2024-12-02
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv journal article
http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501
dc.type.openaire.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/24613
url https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14468/24613
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv Español
spa
language_invalid_str_mv Español
language spa
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv open access
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es
rights_invalid_str_mv open access
http://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/deed.es
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Springer
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED
instname:Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
instname_str Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia
reponame_str e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED
collection e-spacio. Repositorio Institucional de la UNED
repository.name.fl_str_mv
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1869405147749154816
score 15,811543

Similares en LA Referencia