This article examines the nature and time course of the processing of discontinuous dependency relationships in language and draws suggestive parallels to similar issues in music perception. The on-line language comprehension data presented demonstrate that discontinuous structural dependencies cause reactivation of the misordered or "stranded" sentential material at its underlying canonical position in the sentence during ongoing comprehension. Further, this process is demonstrated to be driven by structural knowledge, independent of pragmatic information, aided by prosodic cues, and dependent on rate of input. Issues of methodology and of theory that are equally relevant to language and music are detailed.

[Footnotes]

[Footnotes]
1
(Chomsky, 1965);
Government and Binding Theory (Chomsky, 1981).
3
Frazier and Flores-d'Arcais (1989)
6
McKoon and Ratcliff (1994;
McKoon, Ratcliff, & Albritton, 1996)
Nicol et al. (1997),
Walenski (1997)

References

References
Bates, E., &: MacWhinney, B. (1987). Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157-193). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Besson, M., & Faïta, F. (1995). An event-related potential (ERP) study of musical expect- ancy: Comparison of musicians with nonmusicians. Journal of Experimental Psychol- ogy: Human Perception and Performance, 21 , 1278-1296.
Bever, T. G., & McElree, B. (1988). Empty categories access their antecedents during com- prehension. Linguistic Inquiry, 19, 35-44.
Bigand, E., & Pineau, M. (1997). Global context effects on musical expectancy. Perception & Psvchophvsics, 59(71 1098-1107.
Bigand, E., Madurell, E, Tiîlman, B., & Pineau, M. (in press). Effect of global structure and temporal organization on chord processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology.
Chiappe, P., & Schmuckler, M. (1997). Phrasing influences the recognition of melodies. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 4(2), 254-259.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of a theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
Chomsky, N. (1981). Lectures on government and binding: The Pisa lectures. Dordrecht: Foris.
Crain, S., & Fodor, J. (1985). How can grammars help parsers? In D. R. Dowry, L. Karttunen, & A. M. Zwicky (Eds.), Natural language parsing (pp. 94-128). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Frazier, L., & Flores d'Arcais, G. B. (1989). Filler-driven parsing: A study of gap-filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 331-344.
Friederici, A., Sc Mecklinger, A. (1996). Syntactic parsing as revealed by brain responses: First-pass and second-pass parsing processes. Journal of "Psycholinguistic Research, 25, 157-176.
Garnsey, S. M., Tanenhaus, M. K., & Chapman, R. M. (1989). Evoked potentials and the study of sentence comprehension. Journal of "Psycholinguistic Research, 18(1), 51-60.
Givon, T. (1998). Toward a neurology of grammar. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 21(1), 154-155.
Jackendoff, R. (1991). Musical parsing and musical affect. Music Perception, 9(2), 199-229.
Kroll, J. E, & Potter, M. C. (1984). Recognizing words, pictures and concepts: A compari- son of lexical, object, and reality decisions. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Be- havior, 23, 39-66.
Krumhansl, C. L. (1998). Topic in music: An empirical study of memorability, openness, and emotion in Mozart's String Quintet in C Major and Beethoven's String Quartet in A Minor. Music Perception, 16(1), 119-134.
Love, T., & Swinney, D. (1996). Coreference processing and levels of analysis in object- relative constructions: Demonstration of antecedent reactivation with the cross-modal priming paradigm. Journal of Psych olinguistic Research, 25(1), 5-24.
Love, T., & Swinney, D. (1997). Real-time processing of object-relative construction by pre-school children. Abstract published in Proceedings of the 10th Annual CUNY Con- ference on Human Sentence Processing.
MacDonald, M., Pearlmutter, N., de Seidenberg, M. (1994). The lexical nature of syntactic ambiguity resolution. Psychological Review, 101(4), 676-703.
McKee, C, Nicol, J., & McDaniel, D. (1993). Children's application of binding principles during sentence processing. Journal of Language and Cognitive Processes, 8(3), 265-290.
McKoon, G., & Ratcliff, R. (1994). Sentential context and on-line lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 20(5), 1239-1243.
McKoon, G., Ratcliff, R., & Albritton, D. (1996). Sentential context effects on lexical deci- sions with a cross-modal instead of an all-visual procedure. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 22(6), 1494-1497.
Meyer, D. E., Schvaneveldt, R. W., & Ruddy, M. G. (1975). Loci of contextual effects on visual word recognition. In P. M. A. Rabbit Se S. Dornic (Eds.), Attention and perfor- mance V. San Diego: Academic Press.
Meyer, R. K., Palmer, C, &C Mazo, M. (1998). Affective and coherence responses to Rus- sian laments. Music Perception, 16(1), 135-150.
Nagel, H. N., Shapiro, L. P., & Nawy, R. (1994). Prosody and the processing of filler-gap sentences. Journal of Psych olinguistic Research, 23, 473-485.
Neely, J. H. (1991). Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. In D. Besner, & G. W. Humphreys (Eds.), Basic pro- cesses in reading: Visual word recognition (pp. 264-336). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research: Special Issue on Sen- tence Processing, 18(1), 5-24.
Nicol, J., & Swinney, D. (1989). The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psych olinguistic Research, 18(1), 5-24.
Nicol, J., Swinney, D., Love, T., & Hald, L. (1997). Examination of sentence processing with continuous vs. interrupted presentation paradigms. La Jolla, CA: Center for Human Infor- mation Processing, University of California, San Diego, Technical report #97-3.
Patel, A., Gibson, E., Ratner, J., Besson, M., & Holcomb, P. (in press). Processing syntactic relations in language and music: An event-related potential study. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.
Pechmann, T. (1998). Memory for chords: The retention of pitch and mode. Music Percep- tion, 16(1), 43-54.
Raffman, D. (1993). Language, music and mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Shapiro, L., Swinney, D., & Borsky, S. (1998). Online examination of language perfor- mance in normal and neurologically impaired adults. American Journal of Speech -Lan- guage Pathology, 7, 49-60.
Stowe, L. A. (1986). Parsing WH-constructions: Evidence for on-line gap location. Lan- guage & Cognitive Processes, 1(3), 227-245.
Swinney, D. (1979). Lexical access during sentence comprehension: (Re) consideration or context effects. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 18, 645-659.
Swinney, D. (1990). The resolution of indeterminacy during language comprehension: Per- spectives on modularity in lexical, structural and pragmatic process. In G. B. Simpson (Ed.), Understanding word and sentence (pp. 367-385). Amsterdam: North Holland.
Swinney, D., & Prather, P. (1989). On the comprehension of lexical ambiguity by young children: Investigations into the development of mental modularity. In D. Gorfein (Ed.), Resolving semantic ambiguity (pp. 225-238). New York: Springer- Verlag.
Swinney, D., & Love, T. (1998, March). Language input rate as a parameter on structural processing. Presented at the 11th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Pro- cessing, New Brunswick, NJ.
Swinney, D., Nicol, J., Ford, M., Frauenfelder, U., & Bresnan, J. (1987, November). The time course of co-indexation during sentence comprehension. Presented at Psychonomic Society meeting, Seattle, WA.
Swinney, D., Nicol, J., Love, T., & Hald, L. (in press). Methodological issues in the on-line study of language processing. In R. Schwartz (Ed.), Childhood language disorders. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Swinney, D., Onifer, W., Prather, P., & Hirshkowitz, M. (1979). Semantic facilitation across sensory modalities in the processing of individual words and sentences. Memory & Cog- nition, 7(3), 159-165.
Tabossi, P. (1988). Accessing lexical ambiguities in different types of sentential contexts. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 324-341.
Tanenhaus, M. K., Leiman, J. M., & Seidenberg, M. b. (1979). Evidence tor multiple stages in the processing of ambiguous words in syntactic contexts. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 18(4), 427-440.
Walenski, M. (1997). Compounding cues (pp. 1278-1296). La Jolla, CA: Center for Hu- man Information Processing, University of California, San Diego, Technical report #97-5.
This content is only available via PDF.