{"id":{"repo_id":"cuny-grad","oai_identifier":"oai:academicworks.cuny.edu:gc_etds-1475"},"canonical_url":"https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cuny-grad/oai:academicworks.cuny.edu:gc_etds-1475","repository":{"repo_id":"cuny-grad","name":"City University of New York - Graduate Center","base_url":"https://academicworks.cuny.edu/do/oai/"},"display":{"title":"Understanding Doubly Center-Embedded Sentences Through Contrastive Focus","abstract":"<p>A production and comprehension-judgment experiment examined the relationship between prosody and comprehensibility in doubly center-embedded relative clause constructions in English. Lexically identical sentences with contrastive emphasis on NP1, NP2, or VP1, and a baseline version for comparison, were read aloud for recording and judged for comprehensibility. Contrast on NP2 and VP1 yielded higher comprehensibility judgments compared to baseline than contrast on NP1 compared to baseline. This was contrary to the prediction that contrast on NP1 would encourage the prosodic pattern NP1 || RC || VP3, which in previous work has been reported to be optimal for comprehension. Several explanations for this outcome are considered, including the possibility that contrastive focus does not reliably induce a following prosodic boundary if phrase lengths are not supportive of it. </p>","abstract_html":"&lt;p&gt;A production and comprehension-judgment experiment examined the relationship between prosody and comprehensibility in doubly center-embedded relative clause constructions in English. Lexically identical sentences with contrastive emphasis on NP1, NP2, or VP1, and a baseline version for comparison, were read aloud for recording and judged for comprehensibility. Contrast on NP2 and VP1 yielded higher comprehensibility judgments compared to baseline than contrast on NP1 compared to baseline. This was contrary to the prediction that contrast on NP1 would encourage the prosodic pattern NP1 || RC || VP3, which in previous work has been reported to be optimal for comprehension. Several explanations for this outcome are considered, including the possibility that contrastive focus does not reliably induce a following prosodic boundary if phrase lengths are not supportive of it. &lt;/p&gt;","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Thorne, Ashley Caroline"],"institution":"The Graduate School and University Center of The City University of New York","degree_name":"Master of Arts","degree_level":"Master","degree_discipline":"Linguistics","degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":[],"advisors":["Janet D. Fodor"],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2014,"date_issued":"2014-10-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2014-10-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:58:31Z","subjects":["Linguistics","center-embedded","comprehension","contrastive focus","phonological phrase","prosody"],"languages":[],"rights":[],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/476","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor.advisor","label":"Advisor","values":["Janet D. Fodor"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Thorne, Ashley Caroline"]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"dc:date.available","label":"Dc Date Available","values":["2001-01-01T08:00:00Z"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_discipline","label":"Discipline","values":["Linguistics"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Master"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Master of Arts"]},{"key":"thesis:institution_name","label":"Thesis Institution Name","values":["The Graduate School and University Center of The City University of New York"]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Linguistics","center-embedded","comprehension","contrastive focus","phonological phrase","prosody"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/476"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["<p>A production and comprehension-judgment experiment examined the relationship between prosody and comprehensibility in doubly center-embedded relative clause constructions in English. Lexically identical sentences with contrastive emphasis on NP1, NP2, or VP1, and a baseline version for comparison, were read aloud for recording and judged for comprehensibility. Contrast on NP2 and VP1 yielded higher comprehensibility judgments compared to baseline than contrast on NP1 compared to baseline. This was contrary to the prediction that contrast on NP1 would encourage the prosodic pattern NP1 || RC || VP3, which in previous work has been reported to be optimal for comprehension. Several explanations for this outcome are considered, including the possibility that contrastive focus does not reliably induce a following prosodic boundary if phrase lengths are not supportive of it. </p>"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Understanding Doubly Center-Embedded Sentences Through Contrastive Focus"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor.advisor":["Janet D. Fodor"],"dc:creator":["Thorne, Ashley Caroline"],"dc:date.available":["2001-01-01T08:00:00Z"],"dc:description.abstract":["<p>A production and comprehension-judgment experiment examined the relationship between prosody and comprehensibility in doubly center-embedded relative clause constructions in English. Lexically identical sentences with contrastive emphasis on NP1, NP2, or VP1, and a baseline version for comparison, were read aloud for recording and judged for comprehensibility. Contrast on NP2 and VP1 yielded higher comprehensibility judgments compared to baseline than contrast on NP1 compared to baseline. This was contrary to the prediction that contrast on NP1 would encourage the prosodic pattern NP1 || RC || VP3, which in previous work has been reported to be optimal for comprehension. Several explanations for this outcome are considered, including the possibility that contrastive focus does not reliably induce a following prosodic boundary if phrase lengths are not supportive of it. </p>"],"dc:identifier":["https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/476"],"dc:subject":["Linguistics","center-embedded","comprehension","contrastive focus","phonological phrase","prosody"],"dc:title":["Understanding Doubly Center-Embedded Sentences Through Contrastive Focus"],"thesis:degree_discipline":["Linguistics"],"thesis:degree_level":["Master"],"thesis:degree_name":["Master of Arts"],"thesis:institution_name":["The Graduate School and University Center of The City University of New York"]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T01:58:31Z"}