Published Papers That Used SuperLab

Various researchers have posited preferences during processing for one or another subcategorization of a verb. This paper describes an experiment that examines systematically the subcategorization preferences of verbs with semantically differing types of transitivity alternations. Some transitive verbs, for example, allow unspecified object deletion, while many others alternate between causative and inchoative forms. The experiment records reading times of subjects presented with sentences in which an alternating verb appears in an environment where either a transitive or intransitive reading is possible (and plausible). Subsequently, the ambiguity is resolved by a second verb, unambiguous in its subcategorization, as in the following examples:

The crumbling forts were too old to protect and maintain/prevail against attacks.

The hot water was ready to boil and force/surge through the pipes.

If subjects assume a subcategorization for the ambiguous verb that does not correspond to that of the second verb, elevated reading times at the second verb and following preposition are expected. In preliminary results, verbs with semantically similar alternations appear to pattern alike in this task, with greater variation between those with different types. This suggests a role for information from lexical semantic structures during processing, as opposed to purely syntactic models that would suggest a uniform preference for one subcategorization or the other. A proposal drawing on the semantic structures of Jackendoff (1987) and Pinker (1989) is suggested to account for these results.