What is the nature of lexical meanings such that they can both compose with others and also appear boundless? We investigate this question by examining the compositional properties of for-time adverbial as in "Ana jumped for an hour." At issue is the source of the associated iterative reading which lacks overt morphophonological support, yet, the iteration is not disconnected from the lexical meanings in the sentence. This suggests an analysis whereby the iterative reading is the result of the interaction between lexical meanings under a specific compositional configuration.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFFront Artif Intell
June 2023
I explore the hypothesis that the experience of meaning discreteness when we think about the "meaning" of a word is a "communicative" illusion. The illusion is created by processing-contextual constraints that impose disambiguation on the semantic input making salient a specific interpretation within a conceptual space that is otherwise continuous. It is this salience that we experience as discreteness.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFIn the sentence "The captain who the sailor greeted is tall," the connection between the relative pronoun and the object position of represents a long-distance dependency (LDD), necessary for the interpretation of "the captain" as the individual being greeted. Whereas the lesion-based record shows preferential involvement of only the left inferior frontal (LIF) cortex, associated with Broca's aphasia, during real-time comprehension of LDDs, the neuroimaging record shows involvement of the left posterior superior temporal (LPST) and lower parietal cortices, which are associated with Wernicke's aphasia. We test the hypothesis that this localization incongruence emerges from an interaction of memory and linguistic constraints involved in the real-time implementation of these dependencies and which had not been previously isolated.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWe examine metonymy at psycho- and neurolinguistic levels, seeking to adjudicate between two possible processing implementations (one- vs. two-mechanism). We compare highly conventionalized systematic metonymy (producer-for-product: "All freshmen read O'Connell") to lesser-conventionalized circumstantial metonymy ("[a waitress says to another:] 'Table 2 asked for more coffee.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF