I studied Theoretical Linguistics at The Graduate Center, CUNY. I earned my PhD in September, 2019. My research interests include the syntax-prosody interface, human sentence processing, and experimental linguistics. I am currently writing my dissertation on prepositional phrase attachment garden path effects in interrogatives and declaratives.
For more details, please download my CV.
- Language in Context: The societal implications of language, dialect, grammar and the hierarchies built around these systems.
- Introduction to Language: The basics of language, linguistics, and grammar.
- The Structure of English Words: An introduction to morphology and etymology, with an emphasis on English.
- The Sound Structure of English: The basics of phonetics and phonology, with an emphasis on English.
Some samples of my academic writing.
Prepositional Phrase Attachment Ambiguities in Declarative and Interrogative Contexts: Oral Reading Data
September, 2019. Doctoral dissertation, The Graduate Center, CUNY.
Certain English sentences containing multiple prepositional phrases (e.g., She had planned to cram the paperwork in the drawer into her briefcase) have been reported to be prone to mis-parsing of a kind that is standardly called a “garden path.” The mis-parse stems from the temporary ambiguity of the first prepositional phrase (PP1: in the drawer), which tends to be interpreted initially as the goal argument of the verb cram. If the sentence ended there, that would be correct. But that analysis is overridden when the second prepositional phrase (PP2: into her briefcase) is encountered, since the into phrase can only be interpreted as the goal argument of the verb. Thus, PP2 necessarily supplants PP1’s initially assigned position as goal, and PP1 must be reanalyzed as a modifier of the object NP (the paperwork).
Interrogative versions of the same sentence structure (Had she planned to cram the paperwork in the drawer into her briefcase?) may have a different profile. They have been informally judged to be easier to process than their declarative counterparts, because they are less susceptible to the initial garden path analysis. The study presented here represents an attempt to find a behavioral correlate of this intuitive difference in processing difficulty.
The experiment employs the Double Reading Paradigm (Fodor, Macaulay, Ronkos, Callahan, and Peckenpaugh, 2019). Participants were asked to read aloud a visually presented sentence twice, first without taking any time at all to preview the sentence content (Reading 1), and then again after unlimited preview (Reading 2). The experimental items were created in a 2 x 2 design with one factor being Speech Act (declarative vs. interrogative) and the other being PP2 Status, i.e., PP2 could only be an argument of the verb iv (Arg), as above, or else PP2 could be interpreted as a modifier (Mod) of the NP within the preceding PP, as in She had / Had she planned to cram the paperwork in the drawer of her filing cabinet(?).
Participants’ recordings of Reading 1 and Reading 2 were subjected to prosodic coding by a linguist who was naive to the research question. Distributions of prosodic boundaries were statistically analyzed to extract any significant differences in prosodic boundary patterns as a function of Speech Act, Reading, or PP2 Status. Logistic mixed effect regression models indicated, as anticipated, a significant effect of PP2 Status across all analyses of prosodic phrasing, and a significant effect of Reading for both analyses of prosodic phrasing that included boundary strength. Speech Act was a significant predictor in one of prosodic phrasing, but the hypothesized interaction (between Speech Act and PP2 Status) was not significant in any model.
Another analysis concerned the amount of time a participant spent silently studying a sentence after Reading 1 to be confident they had understood it before reading it aloud again (Reading 2). The time between readings is referred to as the inter-reading time (IRT). It was assumed that a longer IRT signifies greater processing difficulty of the sentence. Thus, IRT was hypothesized to provide a behavioral correlate of the intuitive judgement that the interrogative garden paths are easier to process than the declarative ones. If a correlate had been found, it would have taken the form of an interaction between the two factors (Speech Act and PP2 Status) such that the IRT difference between Arg and Mod sentence versions was smaller for interrogatives than for declaratives. Ultimately, however, no statistically significant interaction between Speech Act and PP2 Status was found.
Further studies seeking behavioral evidence of the informal intuition motivating this research are proposed. Also offered are possible explanations for why the intuition is apparently so strong for some English speakers, and why, if so, it is not reflected in IRT. Significant ancillary findings are that interrogatives are in general more difficult to process than corresponding declaratives. Also, inter-reading time (IRT) in the Double Reading paradigm is confirmed as a useful measure of sentence processing difficulty given that within the declarative sentences, the garden-path (Arg) versions showed significantly longer IRTs than the non-garden-path (Mod) versions.
On Japanese Unpronounced Arguments
June, 2015. Term paper for Syntax Seminar on Parasitic Gaps taught by Jon Nissenbaum at The Graduate Center, CUNY.
Abe (2011) provides convincing evidence that parasitic gaps exist in Japanese,contra to Takahashi’s (2006) claim that apparent parasitic gaps should be analyzedas argument ellipses. This paper seeks to potentially support and simplifyAbe’s (2011) parasitic gap analysis. It reviews the nominal empty categoriesthat must be assumed to be part of the Japanese inventory by Abe’s(2011) as well as Takahashi’s (2006) analysis, and suggests that minor refinementsto Abe’s (2011) might allow for a simpler null nominal inventory forJapanese that more closely match the inventory of such null elements thatare predicted by Universal Grammar.
On labial sequences in Austronesian
May, 2012. First qualifying paper.
Advised by Juliette Blevins, PhD.
Many Austronesian languages bar Labial – V0 – Labial sequences, which occur as a result of infixation with a particular infix *-um-, reconstructed for Proto-Austronesian and inherited by the languages discussed. These languages appear to use diverse repair strategies for such sequences, e.g. fusion of the offending consonants, gaps in the morphological paradigms, or reanalysis of the infix as a prefix (Zuraw and Lu 2009). Because this phenomena bears on many divergent genetically related languages, and appears to be morphologically restricted to patterns with reflexes of *-um-, diachronic exploration is likely to be fruitful. I will explore a subset of the repair strategies, providing an overview of possible synchronic analyses (cf. Alderete 1997), and attempt to motivate a novel diachronic phonetically-motivated analysis, in line with the typology of sound change codified in Evolutionary Phonology (Blevins 2004).
Comments on “Dissimilation, Assimilation and Vowel Reduction”
April, 2011. Article review written for “Issues in Slavic Phonology and Phonetics” taught by Maria Gouskova and Lisa Davidson at NYU.
The That-Trace Effect in Minimalism
May, 2010. Term paper for Syntax II taught by Christina Tortora at The Graduate Center, CUNY.
I propose that the complementizer that is a lexical item which is distinct in its properties from its null counterpart. It is these differing properties (specifically, that bears and selects for φ-features while the null declarative does not) which result in the differing behavior observed between that and the null declarative complementizer.
Regarding “Minimalist Approaches to Locality of Movement” and the tucking in phenomenon
April, 2010. Article review for Syntax II taught by Christina Tortora at The Graduate Center, CUNY.