title: Processing (non)compositional expressions: mistakes and recovery.
abstract: Current models of idiom representation and processing differ with respect to the role of literal processing during the interpretation of idiomatic expressions. Word-like models (Bobrow & Bell, 1973; Swinney & Cutler, 1979) propose that idiomatic meaning can be accessed directly, whereas structural models (Cacciari & Tabossi, 1988; Cutting & Bock, 1997; Sprenger, Levelt, & Kempen, 2006) propose that literal processing is crucial in the access of idiomatic meaning. We used a self-paced reading task to examine how contextual expectations influence real-time processing of phrasal verbs that are ambiguous between a literal and idiomatic sense (e.g., look up, turn in) and how comprehenders recover from expectations that are revealed to be incorrect. Our results suggest that when comprehenders expect a literal interpretation in a situation where the sentence turns out to be idiomatic, real-time processing is disrupted more than if comprehenders are expecting an idiomatic interpretation and the sentence turns out to be literal. We interpret our results in favor of models of idiom processing that propose obligatory literal processing (e.g., Cacciari & Tabossi, 1988; Cutting & Bock, 1997; Sprenger et al., 2006). (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).
authors.affiliation: Department of Linguistics, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1693, USA. eschlon@mac.com
authors.forename: Edward
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Holsinger
authors.forename: Elsi
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Kaiser
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D015982:Bias; D032882:Comprehension / Q000502:physiology*; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D011930:Reaction Time / Q000502:physiology; D011932:Reading; D012660:Semantics; D013997:Time Factors; D014825:Vocabulary