Documentation

Linglib.Phenomena.TenseAspect.Studies.AlstottAravind2026

@cite{alstott-aravind-2026}: On aspectual coercion in before- and after-clauses #

@cite{alstott-aravind-2026} @cite{rett-2020}

Self-paced reading data from 4 experiments testing @cite{rett-2020}'s prediction that aspectual coercion (INCHOAT, COMPLET) incurs measurable processing cost. Under-specification theories (e.g. @cite{anscombe-1964}) do not predict such costs.

Results Summary #

ExpCoercion typeRT effectNaturalnessSupports Rett?
1aINCHOAT (within-modifier)nullnullNo
1bCOMPLET (at-modifier)sig verb+1sig lowerYes
2COMPLET (before-clause)sig verb+2†sig lowerYes
3INCHOAT (subj-experiencer)nullnullNo
4INCHOAT (after-clause)sig verb+2†sig lowerYes

† = exploratory analysis (pre-registered verb/verb+1 regions were null)

Key findings:

Experiment identifiers. Exp 1 has two sub-experiments (a and b).

Instances For
    Equations
    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
    Instances For

      Types of aspectual coercion tested across experiments.

      Instances For
        Equations
        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
        Instances For

          Spillover region where an effect was measured.

          Instances For
            Equations
            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
            Instances For

              Result from a self-paced reading experiment.

              • experiment : Experiment
              • condition : String
              • coercionType : CoercionType
              • effectBeta :

                Mixed-effects regression coefficient (log RT)

              • se :

                Standard error of the coefficient

              • pValue :

                p-value

              • Spillover region where effect was measured

              • significant : Bool

                Whether the effect reached significance (Bonferroni-corrected α = 0.025)

              • exploratory : Bool

                Whether the analysis was exploratory (not pre-registered)

              Instances For
                Equations
                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                Instances For

                  Naturalness rating result (ordinal logistic regression).

                  • experiment : Experiment
                  • coercionType : CoercionType
                  • ratingBeta :

                    Regression coefficient for coercion vs control

                  • se :

                    Standard error of the coefficient

                  • pValue :

                    p-value

                  • significant : Bool

                    Significant difference?

                  Instances For
                    Equations
                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                    Instances For

                      Exp 1a: INCHOAT with within-modifier + be-stative verb. E.g. "Within fifteen minutes Jessica was mad in office hours." No significant RT slowdown; no naturalness difference.

                      Equations
                      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                      Instances For
                        Equations
                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                        Instances For

                          Exp 1b: COMPLET with at-modifier + accomplishment verb. E.g. "At 9pm sharp Hector built the humble tent." Significant slowdown at verb+1; lower naturalness. Supports Rett's COMPLET operator.

                          Equations
                          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                          Instances For
                            Equations
                            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                            Instances For

                              Exp 2: COMPLET in before-clause with accomplishment EE. E.g. "Emma was irritable before Hector built the tent in the woods." Pre-registered regions (verb, verb+1) showed null effects. Exploratory verb+2 analysis found significant slowdown; lower naturalness. Delayed effect consistent with pragmatic (vs semantic) coercion.

                              Equations
                              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                              Instances For
                                Equations
                                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                Instances For

                                  Exp 3: INCHOAT with subject-experiencer verbs in within-modifier context. E.g. "Within fifteen minutes Jessica tolerated the unhelpful professor." No significant RT effect; no naturalness difference.

                                  Equations
                                  • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                  Instances For
                                    Equations
                                    • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                    Instances For

                                      Exp 4: INCHOAT in after-clause with subject-experiencer EE. E.g. "Dave was regretful after Lara feared the large dog." Pre-registered regions (verb, verb+1) showed null effects. Exploratory verb+2 analysis found significant slowdown; lower naturalness. INCHOAT cost detected in after-clauses but not within-modifier contexts.

                                      Equations
                                      • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                      Instances For
                                        Equations
                                        • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                        Instances For

                                          Complement coercion (e.g., "continued his article") in Exp 1a at noun+1. This replicates across all experiments, confirming paradigm sensitivity.

                                          Equations
                                          • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                          Instances For

                                            Complement coercion in Exp 1b at noun+1.

                                            Equations
                                            • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                            Instances For

                                              Complement coercion in Exp 3 at noun+1.

                                              Equations
                                              • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                              Instances For

                                                Rett's theory correctly predicts completive coercion costs where they occur. Both Exps 1b (at-modifier) and 2 (before-clause) show significant slowdowns.

                                                Rett's theory correctly predicts inchoative coercion cost in after-clauses. Exp 4 shows significant slowdown for after-start readings.

                                                Within-modifier INCHOAT shows no cost: Exps 1a and 3 show null results. This dissociation (null in within-modifier, significant in after-clause) suggests INCHOAT cost is construction-specific, not universal. The paper's §8.2 proposes a non-coercive, Krifka-style scalar implicature analysis for atelic within-modifier sentences.

                                                Processing measure: all experiments use self-paced reading.

                                                Equations
                                                • One or more equations did not get rendered due to their size.
                                                Instances For

                                                  Delayed effect in connective contexts: cost at verb+2 (not verb+1). Both connective experiments (2, 4) show verb+2 spillover, while the modifier experiment (1b) shows verb+1. Consistent with pragmatic coercion in connectives being slower to detect than semantic coercion in modifier contexts. Both connective results are exploratory.

                                                  RT significance and naturalness significance converge in all 5 experiments: every experiment that shows an RT effect also shows a naturalness effect, and every null RT result has a null naturalness result.

                                                  The paper's central finding: Rett's ambiguity theory predicts processing asymmetries between readings, and this prediction is confirmed by the data. Under-specification theories (Anscombe, B&C, O&ST) do not predict such costs.

                                                  The data confirms the prediction: significant processing costs exist for coerced readings (Exps 1b, 2, 4). The only theory that predicts this is Rett's, which posits covert coercion operators.