Banner Portal
Efeitos do status argumental e de segmentação no processamento de sintagmas preposicionais em português brasileiro



Como Citar

MAIA, Marcus. Efeitos do status argumental e de segmentação no processamento de sintagmas preposicionais em português brasileiro. Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos, Campinas, SP, v. 50, n. 1, p. 13–28, 2011. DOI: 10.20396/cel.v50i1.8637236. Disponível em: Acesso em: 24 maio. 2024.


A questionnaire study and a self paced reading experiment investigate the off-line and on-line comprehension of adjunct and argument prepositional phrases (PP) in Brazilian Portuguese. The first study compares NP-attached adjunct and argument PPs and VP-attached adjunct and argument PPs and show a general preference for argument PPs in both cases. The second study presents an experimental design crossing the argument status of PPs (argument or adjunct) and the segmentation type of the sentences that contain the PPs (short or long). Results do not indicate differences in reading times (RT) between adjunct and argument PPs in the first pass of the parser, in contrast with models of sentence processing that predict a rapid initial access to lexical information. Nonetheless, RT differences between adjunct and argument PPs are found in a garden-path configuration, something which is attributed to the reanalysis stage. Segmentation effects are also found and discussed with relation to the Implicit Prosody Hypothesis (Fodor, 1998; 2002).


BADER, M. (1998) Prosodic influences on reading syntactically ambiguous sentences. In FODOR, J. D. & FERREIRA, F. (eds.) Reanalyses in sentence processing, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic, 1-46.

BOLAND, J. & BLODGETT, A. (submetido). Argument Status and PP-Attachment. Michigan University.

CLIFTON, C., Jr., SPEER, S. R., & ABNEY, S. P. ( 1991). Parsing arguments: Phrase structure and argument structure as determinants of initial parsing decisions. Journal of Memory and Language, 30, 251-271.

FERNÁNDEZ, E.M. (2003). Bilingual sentence processing: Relative clause attachment in English and Spanish. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishers.

FODOR, J.D. (2002a). Psycholinguistics cannot escape prosody. In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Speech Prosody (pp. 83-88). Université de Provence.

FODOR, J.D. (2002b). Prosodic disambiguation in silent reading. Proceedings of NELS 32, M. Hirotani (ed.). Amherst, MA: GLSA, University of Massachusetts.

FODOR, J.D. (1998a). Learning to parse? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 2, 285-319.

FODOR, J.D. (1998b). Parsing to learn. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 27, 3, 339-374.

FODOR, J.D. & INOUE, A. (1994). The Diagnosis and Cure of Garden Paths. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 23, 5, 407-434.

FRAZIER, L. (1979) On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut. Distributed by Indiana Linguistics Club;

FRAZIER, L. & RAYNER, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, 14.

FRAZIER, L. & CLIFTON, C. (1995). Construal. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

GILBOY, E. & SOPENA, J.M. (1996) Segmentation effects in the processing of complex NPs with relative clauses. In CARREIRAS, M. GARCÍA-ALBEA, J. & SEBÁSTIAN-GALLÉS, N. (eds.) Language processing in Spanish. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, p. 191-206.

MACDONALD, M. C.; Pearlmutter, N.J. & Seidenberg, M.S. (1994). The Lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101, 676-703.

MAIA, M., ALCÂNTARA, S., BUARQUE, s. & Faria, F. (2003). O Processamento de concatenações sintáticas em três tipos de estruturas frasais ambíguas em português. Fórum Linguístico, vol 4, no. 1, p. 13-53.

MAIA, M. LOURENÇO-GOMES, M.C. & MORAES, J. (2004). Prosodic effects on the reading comprehension and the oral production of ambiguous relative clauses and prepositional phrases in Brazilian Portuguese. Poster apresentado na 17th Annual CUNY Human Sentence Processing Conference. College Park, Maryland, Março de 2004. Pynte, J. & Prieur, B. Prosodic Breaks and Attachment Decisions in Sentence Parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes, 1996, 11 (1/2), 165–191.

SCHUTZE, C. & GIBSON, E. (1999). Argumenthood and English prepositional phrase attachment. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 409-431.

SLOWIACZEK, M. L. & CLIFTON, C. (1980). Subvocalization and reading for meaning. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19: 573-582.

SPEER, S. R. & CLIFTON, C. Jr. (1998). Plausibility and argument structure in sentence comprehension. Memory and Cognition, 26(5), 965-978.

SPIVEY-KNOWLTON, M. & SEDIVY, J. (1995). Resolving attachment ambiguities with multiple constraints. Cognition, 55, 227-267.

O periódico Cadernos de Estudos Linguísticos utiliza a licença do Creative Commons (CC), preservando assim, a integridade dos artigos em ambiente de acesso aberto.


Não há dados estatísticos.