UNIVERSIDADE DE LISBOAFACULDADE DE LETRAS

Shared Mechanisms In Situated Language Production:A Cross-Linguistic Comparison Between Portuguese

And English

Mário Alexandre Gomes Carvalho

Tese orientada pela Prof.ª Doutora Maria Armanda Costa e pelo Prof.Doutor Moreno Ignazio Coco, especialmente elaborada para a obtenção dograu de Mestre em Ciência Cognitiva

2018

Ao meu pai e à minha mãe.

Agradecimentos

Começo naturalmente por agradecer aos meus orientadores, a Prof. Armanda Costa e o Prof.Moreno Coco. À Professora Armanda agradeço por acreditar em mim, e por todo o apoio que medeu desde que fui seu aluno de licenciatura, na psicolinguística e em tudo o mais. Ao ProfessorMoreno agradeço a enorme disponibilidade que teve desde o início deste longo processo, arranjandosempre tempo para ajudar nas frequentes alturas em que foi necessário. Tenho por ambos umenorme respeito e admiração, e espero ter merecido, pelo menos em parte, a fé que depositaram emmim ao aceitarem ser os meus orientadores.

Agradeço às minhas colegas do Laboratório de Psicolinguística, em particular à Paula e à Eunice. ÀPaula por ter sido, quase desde que a conheci, como uma irmã mais velha dentro do laboratório,mantendo-me sempre debaixo de olho e criticando-me quando necessário, o que de certo lhe custoumais do que parece. À Eunice por toda a ajuda que me deu durante a tese, e pelos conselhos que mefoi dando ao longo destes anos. Aproveito também para agradecer à Isabel Falé, que sempre me en-corajou a trabalhar mais para a tese, mesmo quando havia trabalho por fazer.

Agradeço aos meus colegas do mestrado em Ciência Cognitiva, àqueles que ficaram até ao fim, eaos que ficaram a meio. Um especial abraço à Luana, ao Tiago, ao David, ao Marco e ao Santiago.

Agradeço a todos os que me ajudaram com a tese. Ao João Silva, pela ajuda com a anotação mor-fológica dos dados, e às Professoras Catarina Magro e Rita Marquilhas do Centro de Linguística,que foram muito prestáveis e disponívels quando procurava uma maneira de anotar os dados. AoRui, enquanto participante incansável das minhas experiências e amigo, e por me ter ajudado comburocracia, o que é sempre um feito e tanto. E agradeço, claro a todos os participantes da minha ex-periência, sem os quais não teria dados para anotar.

Agradeço à minha família pelo apoio incondicional, aos meus tios, ao meu avô, e em particular aosmeus irmãos, e à minha mãe.

Agradeço aos meus amigos, em particular à Mél e ao Tiago. À Mél por ser a minha parceira no cri -me e na aventura pela linguística que partilhamos desde o início. A paixão e dedicação tão típicasdela são uma fonte de inspiração para mim desde o início da nossa amizade. Ao Tiago, por ser meuamigo há tanto tempo, e por mostrar preocupação pela minha vida académica e profissional apesarde habitarmos esferas tão diferentes.

Finalmente agradeço à Joana, a minha parceira na vida. Não há maior motivação do que tentar ser apessoa que ela vê em mim, e dar-lhe de volta todo o carinho, apoio e confiança que ela me dá, navida académica e pessoal.

Resumo

Esta dissertação investiga a produção de linguagem em contexto visualmente situado, com um focona produção de expressões referenciais e uma abordagem multi linguística que compara dados doPortuguês Europeu com dados do Inglês.

Literatura prévia na área da produção de linguagem visualmente situada tem estudado a produçãode expressões referenciais com base na ideia de acessibilidade referencial (e.g. Ariel, 2014; Gundel,Hedberg, & Zacharski, 1993): formas referenciais mais reduzidas ou mais descritivas refletem refer-entes que são mais ou menos cognitivamente acessíveis. Com base neste ideia, houve uma procurados fatores que informam a acessibilidade dos referentes. Foco-me nesta tese em três fatores previa-mente investigados pela literatura: a animacidade do referente, o nível de visual clutter e a presençade competição referencial. Foram encontrados efeitos para todos estes três fatores na produção deexpressões referenciais (Arnold & Griffin, 2007; Clarke, Elsner, & Rohde, 2013; Fukumura &Gompel, 2011; Koolen, Krahmer, & Swerts, 2015), mas de uma forma isolada e testando diferentesaspetos das expressões referenciais.

Através de uma experiência de produção de linguagem guiada, testo a animacidade referencial, onível de 'visual clutter' (ambas como variáveis independentes) e a presença de competição referen-cial (esta última como constante nas imagens) na descrição de imagens, e nas expressões referenci-ais produzidas como parte das descrições. Comparo os dados obtidos para o Português Europeucom os dados para o Inglês obtidas na experiência de Coco e Keller (2015).

A animacidade do referente teve o maior impacto nos resultados, levando a descrições iniciadasmais rapidamente, estruturalmente mais verbais, e, para o Português, com um maior número de ex-pressões referenciais reduzidas. O Português e o Inglês diferiram também na estrutura das de-scrições, com o Português recorrendo a um maior nível de informação estrutural (com maior uso deConjunções e Proposições) e o Inglês a mais informação referencial (com maior uso de Nomes ePronomes). Não foram encontrados efeitos para o nível de visual clutter, talvez devido à naturezaguiada da tarefa, e às variáveis testadas (que diferem de literatura prévia que estudou o nível de vis-ual clutter na produção de expressões referenciais).

De uma forma geral, os resultados reforçam o impacto da animacidade referencial na produção deexpressões referenciais e das estruturas línguísticas envolventes, e mostram que este impacto é par-cialmente influenciado pelas estruturas específicas da língua em uso.

Palavras-chave: produção de linguagem visualmente situada, animacidade, referência, acessibili-dade referencial , comparação multi-linguística, psicolinguística

Abstract

This thesis researches visually situated language production, with a focus on the production of re-ferring expressions and a cross-linguistic approach that compares data for European Portuguesewith data for English.

Previous literature in visually situated language has studied the production of referring expressionswith a basis on the idea of referential accessibility (e.g. Ariel, 2014; Gundel, Hedberg, & Zacharski,1993): reduced or more informative referring expressions reflect referents that are more or less cog-nitively accessible. Based on this idea, there has been a search for the factors that influence referen-tial accessibility. In this thesis, I focus on three factors that have been previously studied in visuallysituated language: referent animacy, the level of information of the visual context, and the presenceof referential competition. Effects have been found in the production of referring expressions for allthree of these factors (Arnold & Griffin, 2007; Clarke, Elsner, & Rohde, 2013; Fukumura & Gom-pel, 2011; Koolen, Krahmer, & Swerts, 2015), but they have been studied in isolation, and with dif-ferent aspects of the referring expressions under analysis.

Through a cued language production experiment, I test the impact of referent animacy, the level ofinformation of the visual context (both as independent variables), and the presence of referringcompetition (as a a constant and integral property of the stimuli) on the description of images, andon the referring expressions produced as part of the descriptions. I compare the data for EuropeanPortuguese obtained in this experiment with the data for English obtained in the experiment of Cocoand Keller (2015).

Referent animacy had the largest impact in the results, with animate referents leading to morequickly initiated descriptions that are more verbal in their structure, and, for Portuguese, in a greaternumber of reduced referring expressions. Portuguese and English also differed in description struc-ture, with Portuguese participants using a higher degree of structural information (through the useof Prepositions and Conjunctions), while the English participants make more use of referential in-formation (with an increased proportion of Nouns and Pronouns). No effects of visual informationwere found, maybe due to the guided nature of the task, and the specific tested variables (that differfrom previous literature which looked at the impact of visual context information on referring ex-pression production).

Overall, the results support the high impact of referent animacy on both referring expression pro-duction and on the surrounding linguistic structures that has been previously found in literature,while showing that this impact is partially influenced by specific properties of the used language.

Palavras-chave: visually situated language production, animacy, reference, referential accessibility,cross-linguistic comparison, psycholinguistics

Resumo Extenso

Esta dissertação investiga a produção de linguagem em contexto visualmente situado, com um focona produção de expressões referenciais e uma abordagem multi-linguística que compara dados doPortuguês Europeu com dados do Inglês.

Trabalhos como Griffin e Bock (2000) demonstraram que existe uma relação forte entre visão e pro-dução de linguagem, e em particular a produção de expressões referenciais: a ordem em que as enti-dades representadas numa imagem são vistas prediz a ordem em que são referidas, e existe um in-tervalo previsível de tempo entre visualização e referência – o chamado eye-voice span. Desde en-tão que o campo de produção de linguagem visualmente situada (visually situated language produc-tion) tem usado esta abordagem multi-modal que cruza conhecimento e ferramentas de cogniçãovisual e psicolinguística para a investigação de vários tópicos de produção de linguagem.

Como um desses tópicos, a investigação sobre a produção de expressões referenciais continua ativa.Muita dessa investigação tem tido como base a ideia de acessibilidade na escolha de produções ref-erenciais, com base em modelos de produção de expressões referenciais como os de Ariel (2014), ede Gundel, Hedberg e Zacharski (1993). Segundo esta ideia, a escolha de formas de referência maisdescritivas ("a senhora") ou mais reduzidas ("ela") está ligada à acessibilidade cognitiva do refer-ente. Um referente mais cognitivamente acessível é referido com formas mais reduzidas, enquantoque os referentes de mais difícil acesso são referidos com expressões mais longas e informativas. Aquestão que se coloca é quais são os fatores que fazem um referente mais ou menos acessível.

Com uma experiência de produção de linguagem guiada, em que os participantes descrevem ima-gens precedidas de uma palavra referente a entidades nelas representadas, estudo o impacto de trêspotenciais fatores de influência de acessibilidade referencial: a animacidade do referente, o nível deinformação do contexto visual e a presença de referentes em competição (este último não enquantovariável dependente, mas como uma constante nos estímulos apresentados). Literatura na área daprodução de linguagem visualmente situada encontrou efeitos diversos destes fatores na produçãode expressões referenciais (e.g. Arnold & Griffin, 2007; Clarke et al., 2013; Fukumura & Gompel,2011), mas estudou estes fatores em isolação e testando diferentes aspetos das expressões referenci-ais. Neste estudo, coloco os três fatores em interação e testo o seu efeito em três aspetos diferentesda produção de referências: a constituição lexical das descrições produzidas pelos participantes(medida a nível referencial (através da proporção de Nomes e Pronomes), estrutural (através da pro-porção de Conjunções e Preposições) e verbal (que incorpora tanto informação referencial como es-trutural, através da proporção de verbos); a forma das expressões referenciais usadas em referênciaà segunda entidade-alvo referida em cada descrição (que categoriza ou como formas mais longas,nomimais, ou como formas mais reduzidas, pronominais); e o tempo de planeamento de discursodos participantes (o intervalo de tempo entre as imagens serem apresentadas e começarem a ser de-scritas).

Faço também uma comparação dos dados obtidos para o Português Europeu com esta experiência,com aqueles obtidos na experiência de Coco e Keller (2015) para o Inglês. Deste modo, testo o im-pacto de propriedades específicas destas duas línguas na produção das descrições em geral e de ex-pressões referenciais em específico.

Os resultados encontrados mostram que, tal como acontece na literatura, a animacidade do referentetem um grande impacto, com referentes animados resultando em descrições mais verbais, em fasesde planeamento da descrição mais curtas, e, para o Português, num maior número de expressões ref-erenciais reduzidas. As diferenças entre o Português e o Inglês são por sua vez mais pronunciadasna constituição lexical das descrições: os falantes do Português produzem descrições estrutural-mente mais ricas, enquanto os falantes do Inglês produzem descrições com uma maior proporção deinformação referencial. Ao contrário do que acontece em literatura prévia (e.g. Clarke et al., 2013;Koolen et al., 2015), o nível de informação visual da imagem não tem nenhum efeito significativoem nenhuma das análises, possivelmente devido a diferenças relativas às variáveis testadas, e àtarefa experimental utilizada.

De uma forma geral, os resultados mostram que a animacidade do referente tem impacto a váriosníveis na produção de linguagem visualmente situada, e que esse impacto é parcialmente influenci-ado pelas propriedades estruturais da língua em uso.

1

Table of Contents1 - Introduction....................................................................................................................................3

1.1 - The case for a situated view of language................................................................................51.2 - Vision and Visual Guidance....................................................................................................7

1.2.1 - The early pillars of research on visual guidance.............................................................71.2.2 - Animacy in Visual Attention...........................................................................................91.2.3 - Saliency and Clutter........................................................................................................9

1.3 - Spoken Language Production...............................................................................................121.3.1 - Levelt’s (1999) model of spoken language production................................................13

1.3.1.1 - Conceptual Preparation.........................................................................................141.3.1.2 - Grammatical encoding..........................................................................................15

1.4 - Producing Referring Expressions.........................................................................................161.4.1 - Theoretical Framework.................................................................................................171.4.2 - What makes a referent more or less accessible?...........................................................181.4.3 - Reference in Visually Situated Language Production..................................................19

1.5 - Conclusions..........................................................................................................................252 - Experimental Work.......................................................................................................................27

2.1 - General Concept and Design................................................................................................272.2 - Methodology.........................................................................................................................27

2.2.1 - Participants....................................................................................................................282.2.2 - Materials.......................................................................................................................282.2.3 - Procedure......................................................................................................................292.2.4 - Analysed Measures.......................................................................................................30

2.3 - Hypotheses...........................................................................................................................312.3.1 - Animacy........................................................................................................................312.3.2 - Clutter...........................................................................................................................322.3.3 - Language.......................................................................................................................33

2.4 - Data Pre-Processing..............................................................................................................342.5 - Statistical Analysis................................................................................................................392.6 - Results..................................................................................................................................41

2.6.1 - Proportion of Nouns + Pronouns, Verbs and Conjunctions + Prepositions..................412.6.1.1 - Nouns + Pronouns (NPRO)...................................................................................412.6.1.2 - Verbs......................................................................................................................422.6.1.3 - Conjunctions + Prepositions (CJPREP)................................................................442.6.1.4 - Discussion.............................................................................................................45

2.6.2 - Form of Referring Expressions.....................................................................................482.6.3 - Looking Times..............................................................................................................502.6.4 - General Discussion.......................................................................................................51

3 - Conclusions..................................................................................................................................53References..........................................................................................................................................55Appendix A Penn-Treebank Tagset....................................................................................................59Appendix B LX-Tagger Tagset...........................................................................................................60Appendix C Portuguese Data.............................................................................................................62Appendix D English Data.................................................................................................................104Appendix E Distractor Image Stimuli..............................................................................................136Appendix F Experimental Image Stimuli.........................................................................................138Appendix G Experiment Instructions...............................................................................................140Appendix H Cue-Words...................................................................................................................142

2

1 - IntroductionThe last few decades have seen the rise of visually situated language processing, a field which com-bines tools and insights from language processing and visual cognition to provide a cross-modal ap-proach to topics from both areas. Language comprehension has benefited from this cross-modal per-spective for a long time, thanks in great part to the development of a paradigm that synchronizesspoken language comprehension with eye-tracking (Cooper, 1974) now known as the visual worldparadigm, which has resulted in many new developments of our understanding of language compre-hension (for a review, see Spivey & Huette, 2016).

Language production, however, has also benefited from the integration of visual context and in-sights from visual cognition. Griffin & Bock (2000), through an experiment where participants hadto describe images depicting simple events, showed that there was a strong and systematic connec-tion between our eye-movement and speech patterns. Their participants looked at the entities in theimages in a way that paralleled their order of reference in the descriptions, regardless of how thethematic and grammatical roles of the entities were manipulated, and there was a predictable time-span between when an entity was looked at and named. These findings show that there is a strongconnection between language production and vision, reinforcing the idea that looking at the twoprocesses in interaction is a valuable approach.

A specific research question that has benefited from visually situated language has been that of thechoice of referring expressions. When choosing to refer to a given referent, speakers have a numberof expressions at their disposal, from fuller, more informative expressions like ‘the blonde lady withthe white dress’ to shorter, easier to process pronominal forms like ‘she’. One explanation lies in theidea of accessibility (Ariel, 1988), that referents and their underlying concepts have different levelsof cognitive accessibility, with referring expressions being chosen accordingly: more informativeexpressions are produced to refer to less accessible referents, while pronominal forms are chosenwhen their referents are more immediately accessible and do not require defined descriptions.

What factors make a given referent more or less accessible? Linguistic and discourse-level factorslike the referent’s thematic and grammatical roles are known to play a role, but research on visuallysituated language has shown the importance of some other factors: the conceptual animacy of thereferred entities (whether they are animate, like animals and especially people, or inanimate ob-jects), the level of visual information in the image (e.g. the number of objects, under the measure ofscene clutter) and the presence of a referential competitor in the visual context have all shown tohave some impact on how referring expressions are produced.

There are, however, some gaps in the literature. The first is that these factors have been looked atseparately, so it is unclear if and how they interact in the production of referring expressions. Thesecond is that they've tested different aspects of the referring expressions, like their word length(Clarke et al., 2013) and whether or not they are overspecified (i.e. whether they use informationthat isn’t necessary for a clear reference, Koolen et al., 2015).

In order to address these gaps, this thesis features a cued language production experiment that stud-ies the impact of referent animacy, scene clutter and referential competition in visually situatedspeech production. 30 European Portuguese speakers were asked to describe naturalistic scenes

3

(which were manipulated as for their level of visual clutter) while always using a cue-word whichpreceded each scene. This cue-word was manipulated as for its animacy (referring to either a personor an object), and always referred to an entity which was represented twice in the scene (e.g. if thecue-word was ‘woman’, two women were depicted). I look at how scene clutter and referent ani-macy impact the overall constitution of the produced descriptions (measured through relative pro-portions of nouns plus pronouns as markers of referential information, verbs as markers of verbalinformation and prepositions plus conjunctions as markers of structural information), the time theparticipants take to start describing the scene, and the forms of referring expressions produced whenboth possible referents are mentioned. With this experimental design, I can test how scene clutterand referent animacy impact the choice of referring expressions

Additionally, I take a cross-linguistic perspective by comparing the European Portuguese data ob-tained in the experiment to the English data obtained by Coco & Keller (2015), who used the samedesign and stimuli to study mechanisms of visual guidance. Cross-linguistic approaches havehelped the research of many topics in psycholinguistics, including conceptual accessibility (Jaeger& Norcliffe, 2009). Here I compare English and European Portuguese, two languages that havesome structural differences that may be relevant in the study of reference production: characteristicsof European Portuguese that aren't shared by English, especially its status as a null-subject, pro-droplanguage may impact the way speakers structure their speech and establish reference, by allowing awider variety of referring expressions with omitted nouns.

This thesis has two main objectives:

(i) Study the impact of referent animacy and scene clutter on the production of scene de-

scriptions by European Portuguese and English speakers, with an emphasis on how reference is es-

tablished;

(ii) Compare how European Portuguese and English speakers produce scene descriptions

and referring expressions, and see if the differences between the languages result in meaningfully

different produced sentential and referential structures.

The thesis is structured in three sections:

In Section 1 I go over the relevant background for this thesis. I start by talking about the field vis-ually situated language production, before discussing some of the fundamentals of visual attentionand language production. I finish by talking about the problem of reference production.

Section 2 is centred around the experiment that is at the core of this thesis. The experiment’s design,objectives, hypotheses and results are discussed.

Section 3 serves as the conclusion to the thesis with a short reflection on the results and on possiblefuture work possibilities.

4

1.1 - The case for a situated view of language“A picture is worth a thousand words, but that’s the problem.”

(Gleitman & Gleitman, 1992)

When we use language in our day-to-day lives, we don’t do it in isolation, but inserted into certaincontexts of various natures – social, pragmatic and, as is the focus of discussion here, visual con-texts. Be it with a specialized task like reading a map aloud, telling the time from an analog clock ordescribing a picture, or with general communicative tasks like a regular conversation, it seems thatwe use visual cues to some extent when planning our speech: we look at the roads and buildings inthe map to find a path, at the hands of a clock to find the hours and minutes, and at the expression ofan addressee to see if they’re paying attention and understanding what we’re saying.

Insights from the field of visual cognition that tie visual gaze to attention and tools like eye-trackingthat allow for a very quick and precise capture of eye-movements are also of great interest to thestudy of language processing. For example, visual attention as measured by gaze position can bevery attractive for the study of reference: we can study how and when people look at different enti-ties in a scene when hearing or producing speech to research how reference is established in real-time. When describing an image, do visual properties affect what entities are or not mentioned?When hearing such a description, do we pre-emptively look at specific entities, predicting they willbe mentioned? When given such a direct look into how our cognitive processes like that providedby the measurement of eye-movements, we get a world of possibilities when researching languageprocessing.

Thus, there are two large gains to be made when incorporating the study of vision and language: itallows us to approximate the study of these processes to the complex context in which they actuallyoccur, and provide us with new ways to look at old questions that have inspired research in visualcognition and psycholinguistics.

Indeed, while the study of language and vision in interaction (which I’ll call visually situated lan-guage comprehension or production) has been mostly localized to the last two decades, it’s alreadyborne valuable insights for our understanding of language processing. This has been especially trueof language comprehension: boosted by the development of a paradigm that puts in simultaneousinteraction eye-tracked image visualization and speech stimuli (Tanenhaus, Spivey-Knowlton, Eber-hard, & Sedivy, 1995), now known as the ‘visual world paradigm’, the field has made remarkableprogress in topics like the resolution of syntactic ambiguities or reference processing (for a reviewof these and other topics in situated language comprehension, see Spivey & Huette (2016)).

This is not to say that visually situated language production hasn’t been productive. The seminalwork in the field is likely Griffin & Bock (2000), appropriately named ‘What the eyes say aboutspeaking’. Griffin and Bock asked participants to look at simple images depicting simple eventswith two characters (see Figure 1).

5

The participants were divided into 4 groups, meant to tease apart the different stages of languageproduction: one group described the scenes as they saw them, the second group described the scenesafter they saw them, a third group was asked to find which character was the patient in each scene,and a final group was asked only to observe the scenes without any particular task. By looking atthe produced utterances and eye-movements and their respective timings, Griffin and Bock had anumber of interesting findings:

• The participants appeared to first extract an event structure from the images before startingto formulate a spoken description;

• The allocation of visual attention to the image strongly predicted the order of mention of theentities, regardless of their thematic roles or of sentence structure;

• There was a predictable temporal link (of 902 and 932 ms, for subject and object nouns re-spectively) between when an entity was last gazed upon and when it was first referred, the‘eye-voice span’.

Taken as a whole, these observations made by Griffin and Bock make a strong case for a view oflanguage in which a general conceptual message is first generated and then produced incrementally,sentence-to-sentence (which is compatible, for example, with Levelt’s (1999) model, discussed pre-viously). They also make clear that there’s a strong connection between eye-movements and speech,setting the stage for further research that integrates the two. In the words of the authors:

“The observations not only show a systematic temporal linkage between eye movements and the contents of spoken utterances, but also offer new evidence for a tight coupling between the eye and the mind, and lay the ground-work for powerful tools to explore how thought becomes speech.” (Griffin & Bock, 2000, p. 279)

6

Figure 1: Example of the stimuli used in (Griffin & Bock, 2000), taken from the original paper. This figure actually represents 8 of the images used in the experiment: each character pair (turtle-mouse, man-dog and others not depicted here) represents a scene, and each scene had 4 variations,corresponding to the characters' position in the image and their thematic role in the depicted event(agent or patient). 5 of the scenes depicted active events, which should elicit predominantly active sentences, and 3 depicted passive events, which could also elicit passive sentences depending on the thematic role of a human character.

To work within with the field of visually situated language production, it pays to have an under-standing of how vision and language production work in isolation. If we are to believe that visualcontext plays a role in language production, then we need to understand what kind of informationguides visual attention, so as to know how visual attention informs speech. Accordingly, only by un-derstanding how speech production is structured, can we know at what levels visual attention can beof influence. For this reason, the next two subsections will focus on visual attention and speechproduction.

1.2 - Vision and Visual Guidance

1.2.1 - The early pillars of research on visual guidance

When we look at a complex scene, like a photograph or a painting depicting a landscape, we don’tdo so in a erratic fashion, randomly focusing on regions regardless of their visual aspects. Instead,our eyes are attracted to certain distinctive aspects and patterns of the scene, like a lone red flowerin a field of green or the curve of the wave in Hokusai’s Great Wave of Kanagawa (as explored inBuswell, 1935). Our own goals as viewers also play a role: if we’re playing a game of Where’sWally, for instance, our visual attention is likely to be particularly sensible to that red-and-white pat-tern that’s so characteristic of the titular character.

The mechanisms that guide visual attention have typically been divided into two main categories.Included within Low-level factors are stimuli-side visual properties, like colour and shape. High-level factors, by contrast, refer to mechanisms that are more viewer-related, like knowledge and in-tention.

The study of these factors of visual guidance owes much to two particular works, those of Buswell(1935) and Yarbus (1967). Buswell (1935) looked at how 200 participants looked at pictures ofpaintings of various kinds. Buswell found that certain regions generated more visual attention, nam-ing these regions “Centres of Interest”. Buswell interestingly had mixed results, finding these “Cen-tres of Interest” in images where he expected a random distribution of attention, while, in other im-ages, some regions which he expected to generate particular patterns of visual attention weren’t asproductive. Buswell also found that the level of art education of the subjects had an influence ontheir eye movements, as did the directions they were given before looking at the image.

Yarbus (1967) contribution to the field was two-fold. The book details, on one hand, an eye-trackingmethod based on suction cups developed by Yarbus and, on another, a number of studies with vari-ous methods and stimuli that the author conducted to study eye-movements. The key section ofYarbus (1967) for this study (and his most influential contribution in general) is, however, the veryfinal chapter, in which Yarbus describes his work with the viewing of “complex objects”, includingpictures. Yarbus describes a number of interesting phenomena he observes in his studies, most no-tably the effect of a given task when viewing images. Yarbus has a participant look at the same pic-ture 7 different times, each time with a different task and finds that the participant’s eye-movementpatterns varies, with the attention given to each region differing with how relevant they are to eachtask (see 2): “Depending on the task in which a person is engaged, i.e., depending on the characterof the information which he must obtain, the distribution of the points of fixation on an object will

7

vary correspondingly because different items of information are usually localized in different partsof an object.” (Yarbus, 1967, p. 192). By clearly showing how different tasks give rise to differentkinds of image-viewing behaviour, Yarbus gave credence to Buswell’s (1935) earlier observation ontask effect, and instigated research on how the viewer’s goals and other cognitive factors influenceeye-movement behaviour.

Put together, Buswell’s and Yarbus’s works showed that both a stimulus’ visual properties and theviewer’s own goals and intentions play a role in guiding visual attention. Since their studies, a vastbody of research has been done on what constitutes low and high-level factors of visual attention(for a review, see Tatler, 2016), and how these factors interact. For this thesis, there are two factorsof particular importance: depicted entity animacy, a high-level factor that is connected to the pres-ence of animate entities (particularly people) in the visual scene, and clutter, a low-level factor re-lated to object-level visual information.

8

Figure 2: An adaption taken from Greene, Liu, & Wolfe (2012) of Yarbus' (1967) Figure 109. A participant saw the same picture seven times, each time with a different task (described below each scan-path). The resulting scan-paths show clear differences between each session, suggesting a strong effect of task on the allocation of visual attention.

1.2.2 - Animacy in Visual Attention

When it comes to high-level factors, we know that visual attention seems to be greatly influencedby task, as described early on by Buswell (1935) and Yarbus (1967). We also know that semanticcontextual information is taken into account when searching for objects (Biederman, Mezzanotte, &Rabinowitz, 1982) and that objects that are present in semantically incongruent contexts (e.g. a gaspump in a children's playground) attract considerable visual attention when compared to objects thatare more typical in their placement (De Graef, Christiaens, & d’Ydewalle, 1990).

Most relevant to this thesis, however, are those factors that related to the concept of animacy, partic-ularly the presence of human, animate figures in an image. Yarbus (1967) observed that humanfaces appeared to attract more attention than their figures, which in turn attracted more attentionthan other objects. In particular, the eyes, mouth and nose seemed to attract a lot of interest. Furtherresearch has highlighted the attention paid to the eyes, which doesn’t appear to be driven by low-level factors (Birmingham, Bischof, & Kingstone, 2009) and is reinforced when participants areasked to memorize a given scene, suggesting they are particularly informative regions when encod-ing an image into memory (Birmingham, Bischof, & Kingstone, 2007).

Additionally, there’s a tendency to follow a depicted person’s gaze and look where they looking(Driver IV et al., 1999), which can put objects they’re gazing upon or manipulating in particular fo-cus (Fletcher-Watson, Findlay, Leekam, & Benson, 2008).

All this adds up to an idea that, when present in an image, people are a major factor in visual guid -ance, both attracting visual attention to themselves and directing it to what they interact with. Thisis interesting in how it ties into research on psycholinguistics that suggests that animate referents,especially people, have prominent roles in linguistic structures, and appear to be cognitively moreaccessible when establishing reference (research which I'll discuss in section 1.4.2).

1.2.3 - Saliency and Clutter

As our understanding of the low-level visual features that guide visual attention has grown, therehave been attempts at creating computational models that mimic human visual attention. An earlyand influential application of such a model, based solely in low-level features, is described by Itti &Koch (2000). Itti and Koch base their model on the idea of a ‘saliency map’ (as described by Koch& Ullman, 1987), itself based on the concept of ‘saliency’ - effectively, how much a given object orregion of an image stands out from its surroundings in terms of its low-level visual features. Asaliency map is then a map of any given image representing how much its different regions standout visually – or, as described in Itti & Koch (2000, p. 1490), “an explicit two-dimensional map thatencodes the saliency of objects in the visual environment”.

In the model by Itti & Koch (2000), low-level information is extracted from the image to create in-dividual maps accounting for luminance, colour and orientation contrasts. These maps, which addup to a total of 42, compete and are then combined to create the saliency map, to try and account forthose low-level features as a whole. Visual attention is then modelled by the way of a Winner TakesAll algorithm, which allocates attention towards the most salient location, aided by an inhibition-of-return mechanism which suppresses that location in the saliency map so attention is then directed

9

towards the next most salient region. Thus, visual attention as modelled by Itti and Koch sequen-tially jumps from region to region in decreasing order of saliency.

The specific model by Itti & Koch (2000) and the general idea of saliency as a measure of low-levelfactor impact in the guidance of visual attention have proven influential, giving rise to a number ofmodels that incorporate saliency (see Borji & Itti (2013) for a review). It has proven at least some-what effective in predicting human visual attention: for example, Parkhurst, Law and Niebur(2002) had participants look at a series of images, depicting scenes ranging from simple fractals torealistic pictures of rooms, and found that salient regions correlated with fixation locations to agreater degree than chance could predict.

However, models that are solely based on saliency and other visual features have at least two majorshortcomings that prevent them from serving as general models of visual attention (see Henderson,(2003) and Tatler (2016) for a more in-depth discussion). The first is that they don't integrate high-level factors, and so don't account for very impactful viewer-related effects like that of task shownin the work of Yarbus (1967); the second is that a correlation between saliency and human visual at-tention doesn’t necessarily imply a causal relation between the two. High-level factors might guideattention to regions that are visually salient, but have interfering high-level information (Tatler,2016), For example Einhäuser, Spain and Perona (2008) find that maps derived from the location ofobjects in the scene outperform saliency maps at predicting human visual attention.

10

Figure 3: A schematic of the model of saliency-based visual attention implemented in (Itti & Koch, 2000), retrieved from the original paper.

In the context of this thesis, saliency is a useful concept to help measure and manipulate image clut-ter (Rosenholtz, Li, Mansfield, & Jin, 2005). In this context, clutter refers to how densely packedwith objects a given image is – the more objects a scene has, the more cluttered it is (see 4 below).By integrating saliency and edge information, as described in Rosenholtz et al. (2005), we can getan effective quantitative measure of scene clutter.

The idea of scene clutter is useful as it allows us to work with varying levels of visual informationusing a same base image. This is interesting not only for studying visual perception in itself, butalso for language production, as it allows us to manipulate the number of objects – and as such thenumber of entities available to be referred – in any given image. Thus, an image that possesses ahigher degree of scene clutter should also be referentially richer, allowing for some interesting pos-sibilities when studying reference production in a situated language environment, as will be dis-cussed in section 1.4.3.

11

Figure 4: An example of different levels of clutter with the same scene. The left image is considered to be less cluttered than the image in the right, which has a much higher number of objects. These are stimuli used for the experimental work of this thesis and were originally used in Coco & Keller (2015).

1.3 - Spoken Language Production

Speech production is a complex process, in which multiple steps need to be taken before an initialabstract message to be communicated turns into fully realized speech. The speaker needs to jugglemultiple sources of information, from general knowledge to their understanding of the surroundingcontext and their addressee’s own state of mind. It’s a process that needs to happen at a very highspeed for its high degree of complexity, and, consequentially, it often results in errors.

These speech errors have provided us with valuable information in how semantic, phonological andsyntactic information work and combine to shape produced utterances (for a review, see Griffin &Ferreira, 2011). The insights provided from speech errors have given rise to a number of attempts atconstructing models of spoken language production, aiming at understanding the various stages oflanguage production and how they interact. In order to better understand the inner working of lan-guage production, and how visual information may play a part, I'll briefly review one such model,that of Levelt (1999).

12

1.3.1 - Levelt’s (1999) model of spoken language production

Levelt’s (1999) model, a ‘blueprint of the speaker’, functions roughly as follows:

1) Conceptual Preparation: the speaker first prepares a conceptual, pre-verbal message for whatthey want to communicate, based on their mental states, knowledge of the world, their insight intotheir addressee's mind and a number of other knowledge sources.

2) Grammatical Encoding: this pre-verbal message gains an abstract surface structure based onits concepts’ corresponding lemmas, and their semantic and syntactic attributes. This structure re-flects the message’s referents, their relations, and their predicates.

3) Morpho-phonological Encoding: The surface structure is then given a phonological score,where the phonological words are constructed and syllabified in relation to their syntactic context.

4) Phonetic encoding: turns the phonological score into an articulatory score, where the motorgestures required to produce the needed syllables are mentally accessed.

5) Articulation: the articulatory gestures are physically executed, and overt speech is produced.The speaker monitors his own speech, to correct for any potential mistakes that might result in com-munication problems.

13

Figure 5: An illustration of Levelt's (1999) model of spoken language production, taken from the original source.

The conceptual preparation and grammatical encoding stages constitute the first core unit of themodel, which Levelt associates with rhetorical, semantic and syntactic systems. The morpho-phono-logical encoding, phonetic encoding and articulatory stages constitute the second unit, which in-volves phonological and phonetic systems.

Levelt’s model takes an incremental view of spoken language production, meaning that while itsdifferent stages are sequentially ordered (from top to bottom as seen in Figure 5), they are in inter-action and work partially in parallel. For example, the pre-verbal message need not be entirely final-ized in the conceptual preparation stage for grammatical encoding to start working – instead, gram-matical encoding processes the pre-verbal message while it is received.

In this thesis I'm looking at how language and reference production are influenced by visual con-text, and how this influence manifests itself in language-specific structures. For this reason, fromthe stages Levelt's model described above, there are two relevant to the analysis that will be per-formed: conceptual preparation, when the linguistic message is being planned, and the visual con-text will play its role; and grammatical encoding, when the syntactical linguistic structures taketheir form.

1.3.1.1 - Conceptual Preparation

In this stage, the speaker prepares a pre-verbal message, an abstract conceptual structure generatedfrom the concepts the speaker wishes to communicate about. This message is shaped from thespeaker’s various knowledge sources, like their knowledge of the external world and their insightinto their addressee's mental states (Theory of Mind). Levelt divides this process into two phases.

Conceptual preparation in Levelt's model is divided in two stages: macroplanning and microplan-ning. When macroplanning, a speaker decides on what to say next, trying to guide the discoursefocus, shared with their addressee, to whichever idea they want to focus on, in pursuit of a largercommunication goal. As part of a more complex message, the speaker shifts the discourse focus be-tween the various concepts to be communicated about. When microplanning, the speaker decideson how to shape his message, particularly what perspective to take (for example, when describing apicture depicting a tree and a house, whether to focus on the position of the tree in relation to thehouse or the opposite - “There’s a tree to the right of an house” versus “There’s an house to the rightof a tree” (Levelt, 1999)). These two stages add up to a complicated process of speech-planning, inwhich a speaker needs to understand and select information to communicate, and decide on best ap-proach to communicate it.

In visually situated language, how might the visual context play a role in this process? It might be,for example, that when the visual context is particularly dense with clutter, the speaker has a morecomplicated process of macroplanning, as they have more information to potentially address. Thepresence of animate entities might also play a role, as the speaker might focus on these entities andtake a particular perspective that focuses on their role within the scene.

Another question is whether these message-planning processes are sensible to language-specificproperties. Levelt (1999) argues that conceptual preparation should indeed have some differences

14

between languages, as they have different ranges of lexical concepts and must obligatorily addressdifferent information depending on that language's grammar ('thinking for speaking' - (Slobin,1996)). This point is, however, fairly controversial, as the degree to which language can have an im-pact on more general thought processes is a heated topic of discussion in the literature (Wolff &Holmes, 2011).

1.3.1.2 - Grammatical encoding

As seen in 5, grammatical encoding takes the pre-verbal message output from the conceptual prepa-ration stage and outputs a surface structure, with the aid of the speaker’s mental lexicon. This iswhere syntax gets involved: “Surface structures”, says Levelt, “are syntactic in nature” (Levelt,1999, p. 94). ‘Syntactic words’, or ‘lemmas’, are incrementally generated and ordered left-to-rightbased on the emerging pre-verbal message. According to the specific language’s syntactic proper-ties, the lemmas are mapped onto phrases with respect to their thematic role structure.

The generation of the surface structure is largely lexically driven. A lexical concept from the pre-verbal message activates a corresponding lemma in the mental lexicon, and that lemma’s syntacticproperties become then available for the syntactic construction of the verbal message. As differentlexical concepts from the pre-verbal message activate their corresponding lemmas, they start beingfit together into a sentence, according to their syntactic constraints, much like a jigsaw puzzle.

The most important question here is how exactly a lemma for any specific concept is selected. Lev-elt describes a model of lemma selection as follows:

“Lemma selection is modelled as follows. In the conceptual network, the target concept is in a state of activation. Its activation spreads to all semantically related concepts (for empirical evidence, see Levelt et al. 1991). Each active lexical concept also spreads partof its activation down to its' lemma, down in the lemma stratum. Lemma selection now becomes a probabilistic affair. During any smallest interval in time the probability of selecting the target lemma is its degree of activation divided by the total activation of allactive lemmas in the stratum. This is called 'Luce's rule'.” (Levelt, 1999, p. 96)

The final selection can only fall upon the correct lemma, one that “(…) entertains the correct senserelation to the conceptual level” (Levelt, 1999, p. 96). The larger a given concept’s Luce ratio, thequicker its lemma should be selected (see Levelt, Roelofs, & Meyer, 1999).

After lemmas are selected, how are they combined to form the larger verbal message? As mentionedbefore, when the lemmas are retrieved, so are their syntactic properties. The lemmas are then com-bined in a way that satisfies their respective syntactic constraints, a process named ‘unification’.

From the original sentence of ‘Poor Pete believes that the committee selected him’, take the syntac-tic fragment ‘the committee selected him’. There are three active lemmas: ‘select’, ‘committee’, and‘him’. We can consider ‘select’ to have a S(entence) node as its root, and two Noun Phrase (NP)nodes as its feet. ‘committee’ has NP as a root and several feet: a determiner phrase (DP) and threeoptional modifiers in an adjectival phrase (AP), a prepositional phrase (PP), and a S node, thatcould be filled by a relative clause. Finally, the pronoun ‘him’ has NP at its head, and no other feet.The pronoun ‘him’ is selected here, as opposed to a noun, due to the discourse context surroundingthis fragment: the referent referred to by ‘him’ is ‘Poor Peter’. According to Levelt (and based on

15

the work of Schmitt (1997)), one of the references to Peter is marked as ‘in focus’, which makes theencoder generate a pronominal lemma as opposed to the full, nominal form. The matter of selectionof pronouns as opposed to nominal forms is of particular importance to this thesis and will be devel-oped further in section 1.4, on referring expressions.

With all the pieces in place, the unification process connects roots to feet. The root node of ‘com-mittee’ unifies with the first NP foot of ‘select’, while ‘him’ unifies with the second. All the optionalnodes in ‘committee’ don’t receive unification and are trimmed. This process is illustrated in 6, be-low.

An important aspect of the incremental nature of this model is that since the conceptual informationgets processed by the grammatical encoder as it is output by the conceptual preparation stage, con-cepts that are more highly accessible will often be processed first and be placed at a higher syntacticposition. Notably, animate referents tend to be more cognitively accessible and to be placed in thesubject position and agent role. This is important to keep in mind when studying reference and ani-macy, as is the case in this thesis.

1.4 - Producing Referring ExpressionsAs briefly mentioned when discussing Levelt’s (1999) model, when selecting what to refer, there’s akey concept of accessibility. As a given concept is more cognitively accessible, it is more likely to

16

Figure 6: An illustration of the process of unification for the fragment "the committee selected him". The upper half depicts the syntactic and thematic structure of the three constituent lemmas and the bottom half their unified structure. Adapted from Levelt (1999).

be accessed earlier into the language process, and placed in more prominent structural positions, re-ceiving higher grammatical functions and central semantic roles (Levelt et al., 1999). Another mat-ter where accessibility plays a role is in the how of a given referent is referred, in guiding the choiceof referring expressions.

1.4.1 - Theoretical Framework

A central problem in the study of reference is that a given concept can be referred to in a multitudeof ways. This is reflected in language in the many different referring expressions one can use. Whenspeaking English, for example, we can use proper nouns (‘Roosevelt’), demonstrative expressions(‘that car’), definite and indefinite references (‘a car’, ‘the car’), or pronouns (‘it’). It is clear, how-ever, that certain expressions are preferred depending on their linguistic and non-linguistic context.One wouldn’t use an anaphoric pronoun in the absence of a linguistic or contextual clue as to its ref-erent, but rather a definite description like a proper name:

(1) In the absence of a contextual clue, as a first mention:

(a) ? She is on vacation in Madrid.

(b) Laura is on vacation in Madrid.

Conversely, when a referent has been established, subsequent mentions don’t need as much infor-mation, and reduced expressions seem to be preferred:

(2) Repeated mentions:

(a) ? Laura is on vacation in Madrid. Laura sent me a postcard just yesterday!

(b) Laura is on vacation in Madrid. She sent me a postcard just yesterday!

These phenomena have originated research on why and how referring expressions are chosen andproduced. A few theories of reference production have linked these processes to an idea of cognitiveaccessibility, with referring expressions being produced in relation to how cognitively accessiblethey are. To illustrate this, I’ll briefly discuss one such theory, the accessibility theory by Ariel(1988, 2014).

The core idea behind the accessibility theory is that the different referring expressions are markersfor different levels of cognitive accessibility of their referents. When a speaker produces a particularreferring expression, it signals to their addressee how accessible the mental representation to be re-trieved is. Thus, a speaker produces a fuller, more informative form to mark low-accessibility, and aless informative form to mark high-accessibility, providing a more informative form when it is nec-essary, and an easier to produce form when it is not (Ariel, 1988).

(3) Laura [Noun, Low-Accessibility, More informative] is on vacation in Madrid. She [Pronoun, High-Accessibility, Less informative] sent me a postcard just yesterday!

As another example, let’s go back to Levelt’s (1999) model and recall how, for the sentence “PoorPete believes that the committee selected him”, the pronoun ‘him’ is selected as an argument for theverb ‘select’. Levelt argues:

17

“Remember that it refers back to referent X, POOR PETER. In the message, one of the occurrences of argument X will be marked as 'in focus'. That will tell the grammatical encoder that it should select a reduced, pronominal lemma for that occurrence of the lexical concept.” (Levelt, 1999, p. 98)

This idea is compatible with the notion of accessibility as proposed by Ariel. When the speaker firstmakes reference to the concept of ‘(Poor) Peter’, the concept is in a state of low-accessibility, nothaving been mentioned before and requiring more information for a precise reference, and so thespeaker produces a modified noun, an informative form that serves as a marker of low accessibility.When the concept of ‘(Poor) Peter’ gets mentioned a second time, the concept is in a state of high-accessibility, and speaker produces a lower-information, high-accessibility marker in the pronoun‘him’.

It should also be noted that the Accessibility Theory is certainly not the only theory of reference thatlooks at cognitive aspects. As mentioned before, an alternative can be found in the form of the‘Givenness Hierarchy’ (Gundel et al., 1993), which sees referring expressions as signalling differentcognitive statuses of a concept, but in a hierarchical and non-mutually exclusive manner:

“It should also be noted that the GH is not a hierarchy of degrees of accessibility in the sense of Ariel (1988, 1990), for example, as the statuses are in a unidirectional entailment and are therefore not mutually exclusive” (Gundel, Bassene, Gordon, Humnick, & Khalfaoui, 2010, p. 1771)

For this thesis, more important than any particular model of reference is the core notion of accessi-bility and its relation to choice of referring expressions in language production, a relation which ismore generally assumed (Fukumura & Gompel, 2011).

1.4.2 - What makes a referent more or less accessible?

What kind of information makes a referent more or less accessible, and thus referred to with differ-ent forms?

Let’s remember example (2):

(2) Repeated mentions:

(a) ? Laura is on vacation in Madrid. Laura sent me a postcard just yesterday!

(b) Laura is on vacation in Madrid. She sent me a postcard just yesterday!

As previously discussed, a clear factor in referential accessibility is prior mention: a referent is morelikely to be referred to with a more informative form (‘Laura’ in example (2)) when it is first men-tioned.

It’s not surprising to find out that, as the distance between a referent’s first mention and eventualsubsequent mentions grow, there’s a decrease in that referent’s accessibility. Indeed, this is whatAriel (2014) finds: in an analysis of four texts, Ariel finds that pronouns are especially frequent inthe same sentence in which their referent is first mentioned with a definite description, and in the

18

sentence immediately following that. Conversely, in later sentences within the same paragraph, andin later paragraphs, mentions with definite descriptions become more frequent.

Grammatical functions and thematic roles have also been found to play a part. For instance, Arnold(2001) tested sentences containing verbs that selected source and goal arguments, like ‘teach’(“Melora[source, subject] taught a sonata to Mike[goal, object-of-PP] in an hour and a half.”) and‘learn’ (“Sonia[goal, subject] quickly learned the steps from Allen[source, object-of-PP].”), andfound that subject and source referents were more likely to be referred to with pronouns, denotinghigher accessibility.

These factors of accessibility, however, aren’t being explicitly investigated in this thesis. Instead,I’ll be looking at the role of conceptual animacy, referential competition and contextual visual infor-mation. These will be discussed next.

1.4.3 - Reference in Visually Situated Language Production

Conceptual animacy is a particularly strong candidate as a factor of accessibility. Animate entitiesare more likely than inanimate objects to serve as agents or actors of an action. Accordingly, studieslike Itagaki & Prideaux (1985) have shown that animate entities are more likely to be selected as thesubjects of a sentence. Given the large prominence of animate entities in linguistic structures, itseems like an entirely reasonable idea that they occupy an important place in cognitive domains aswell, and are more cognitively accessible to reflect this importance.

To test this possible link between animacy and accessibility, Fukumura & van Gompel (2011) con-ducted two sentence-completion experiments, in which participants had to complete sentence frag-ments preceded by a sentence containing both an animate and an inanimate referent, like in (4), be-low:

(4) Examples of stimuli from Fukumura & van Gompel (2011):

(a) The hikers[Subject, Animate] carried the canoes[Object, Inanimate] a long way downstream. Sometimes…

(b) The canoes[Subject, Inanimate] carried the hikers[Object, Animate] a long way downstream. Sometimes...

In both experiments, the participants were asked to complete the sentence fragment (in (4), ‘Some-times”); in the first experiment, participants could complete the fragment freely, while in the secondexperiment they had to refer to one of the targets, which was visually-cued. The authors found thatthe animate antecedents were not only more frequently selected as the subject of the continuationsentences, but also more likely to be referred to with pronouns, regardless of their syntactic func-tion. The authors suggest this is clear evidence that animacy affects the choice of referring expres-sions, and that animate concepts and referents are more accessible.

The second factor is that of referential competition, how reference is established when there’smore than one possible referent in the linguistic or visual context.

19

Arnold & Griffin (2007) studied this issue through two storytelling experiments, in which partici-pants had to complete a story that was contextualized with pictures (see Figure 7, below). The par-ticipants were presented with two-panel cartoons and oral descriptions of the first panel, e.g.“Mickey went for a walk with Daisy in the hills one day”, and were asked to continue the story bydescribing the second panel, as if they were telling a story to a five-year-old.

The researchers wanted to study how the presence of visual referential competitor influenced howthe participants chose to refer to the main character. In a pilot experiment, Arnold and Griffin foundthat when both the competing referents had the same gender, they would use less pronouns thanwhen they had different genders or that when only one (visual and linguistic) referent was available– a natural effect, given that English pronouns would be ambiguous in that case – but were sur-prised to find that, when the referents had different genders and ambiguity resolution wasn’t at play,the use of pronouns wasn’t as pronounced as the authors expected. Arnold and Griffin then devisedtwo experiments to explicitly compare conditions where there was no referential ambiguity (‘one-character’, mid part of 7) with those where there was a second referent of a different gender (‘two-character’ and, in experiment two, ‘one-two’, left and right sides of 7). The authors found that thepresence of a referential competitor in the linguistic context always resulted in a reduced productionof pronouns, even when this competitor was absent in the immediate visual context (condition ‘one-two’).

To further study how linguistic and visual information interact in the choice of referring expres-sions, Fukumura, van Gompel, & Pickering (2010) conducted two experiments that manipulatedvisual and linguistic saliency. Both experiments had a complex, two-stage procedure that involved aparticipant and a confederate (a non-genuine participant played by an actor). In the first stage, boththe participant and the confederate saw a picture, which the confederate had to replicate with the aidof toys. The participant then saw and read out loud a sentence describing the picture. In the secondphase, a new picture was shown to the participant, who had to describe it out loud for the confeder-ate to replicate with the toys. The authors manipulated the presence of a referential competitor in

20

Figure 7: Example of the visual stimuli used in Arnold & Griffin (2007). This figure depicts the three conditions used across the two experiments described in the paper – on the left is the two-character condition, in which both characters are displayed in both pictures; on the middle is the one-character condition, where a single character is shown in both pictures; on the right is the two-one condition, in which the first panel shows two characters, and the bottom panel shows only one.

both linguistic and visual contexts, so that the pictures could have one or no competitor (pictures aand b in 8), and the accompanying context sentence could have one or no prepositional phrase con-taining a second referent (example (5)).

(5) Example of the linguistic stimuli used in Fukumura et al. (2010), Experiment 1:

(a) The pirate’s carpet had been cleaned by a prince. (Competitor present)

(b) The pirate’s carpet had been cleaned. (Competitor absent)

The authors measured the frequency of use of pronouns versus that of nouns when the participantsdescribed the second picture using the referent character as the sentence subject. They found thatboth the visual and the linguistic contexts had an impact in the choice of expression: the presence ofa competitor, in either the sentence describing the first image or in the images themselves, led to areduced use of pronouns in reference to the main character.

In the previously discussed Fukumura & van Gompel (2011), the authors also looked at one aspectof referential competition, that of the role of animacy. In a third experiment, where participants alsohad to produce a sentence referring back to an entity in a previously read sentence, the animacycongruency between the two referents was manipulated; they could both be animate or inanimate,or instead one of each. The authors found that when both referents had the same level of animacy,the use of pronouns was inhibited, an effect they attribute to a reduction of the referent’s accessibil-ity due to the semantic similarity with its competitor.

21

Figure 8: An example of the stimuli used in Experiment 1 from Fukumura et al. (2010). Each vertical pair of pictures represents one of the two visual conditions of the experiment: pair a, on the left, has a referential competitor, pair b, on the right, has none.

Finally, I want to look at the role of visual information in referring expression generation. By vis-ual information I mean here more specifically the role of clutter, a notion previously discussed inthe chapter on vision. Thus, I intend to discuss how different degrees of visual information in im-ages – from simpler images depicting one or two objects to complex scenes with large numbers ofitems – can affect reference production.

As mentioned on the section on vision, the notion of clutter is closely connected to reference. Thisis because clutter is effectively connected to the number of objects present in a visual scene – and asthe number of objects grow, so does the number of entities that can be referred. As such, when wemanipulate the level of visual clutter of a scene, we also increase the possibilities of reference thatcan be established when said scene serves as visual context for linguistic communication. However,this doesn’t mean that any possible reference will be actually realized: for example, when one de-scribes a picture or a scene, one might not mention entities that they don’t find relevant to the gen-eral idea of the scene (the ‘gist’). Additionally, the level of clutter might have a role to play in howreference is established. The presence of too much visual information and of referable entities, evenwhen they’re irrelevant to the general idea of the scene or message to be communicated, might leadto more concepts being mentally activated and interfering with the accessibility of a referent that aspeaker does wish to mention.

Clutter has been used as a factor in the study of overspecification, when, in referring, more informa-tion is given than what is necessary (for example, mentioning ‘the red chair’ when there’s only asingle chair in the visual context). For example, (Koolen et al., 2015) ran an experiment where par-ticipants had to describe a target object pictured in naturalistic scene, which were manipulated as fortheir level of clutter. The authors found that the cluttered versions of the scenes resulted in more fre-quent production of overspecified forms of reference.

Clarke, Elsner & Rohde (2013) also looked at how clutter affects the generation of referring expres-sions, specifically expression length (in number of words). Participants were asked to produce refer-ring expressions to cued targets in ‘Where’s Wally’ scenes (classified as either less or more clut-tered, though they were generally of a high degree of visual complexity), so as if to help an hypo-

22

Figure 9: Example of the stimuli used in Koolen et al. (2015). The left and rightimages represent the less and more cluttered conditions, respectively. Note howthe overspecified expression "the red plate" doesn't help distinguish the plates apart.

thetical viewer to locate the target. The authors found that the participants generated lengthier refer-ring expressions in response to more highly-cluttered scenes. Duan, Elsner, & de Marneffe (2013)tested the corpus from Clarke et al. (2013) and found that in the images with a higher level of clut-ter, indefinite expressions were more likely to be produced.

These studies illustrate that clutter does have some impact in the production of referring expres-sions, but they don’t directly look at how forms are chosen to refer to previously mentioned refer -ents or concepts, so they’re harder to place in relation to literature I discussed that studies factorslike animacy and referential competition on this kind of reference.

The work of Coco (Coco, 2011; Coco & Keller, 2015) has focused in large part on studying refer-ence in the shared domain of vision and language. Coco (2011) did a series of studies on both lan-guage comprehension and production, studying various aspects of reference processing and the in-terplay of language and vision. Experiment 4, on the impact of referent animacy and scene clutteron scene description, is of particular interest. This experiment features a cued, web-based writtenlanguage production task, where the participants were asked to describe a scene that was precededby a single-word cue, which in turn referred to one of the entities in the scene. Coco manipulatedvisual and linguistic levels of animacy by changing the number of people (‘actors’) in the presentedscenes and the animacy of the cued word. The scenes had versions with a greater or smaller numberof objects, to manipulate clutter. Thus, each stimulus had 4 visual conditions and 2 linguistic condi-tions (see Figure 10).

23

Coco looked at three aspects of the produced descriptions: the associated reaction times (how longthe participants took to start and finish describing the scenes), the use of nouns and verbs, and theuse of certain syntactic structures. This last aspect isn’t too informative to the purposes of this the-sis, so I won’t describe it here.

The associated reaction times were looking times (how long the participants took from stimulus on-set to begin typing up a response) and description times (how long they took to finish typing the re-sponse). When the cued entity was animate, participants took less time to start describing the image.Coco also found some interesting interactions: Looking times were larger in animate-cue minimal-clutter conditions, and shorter in two-actor animate-cue conditions. This last result is particularlycurious, as it might suggest that when there are two people in the scene and one of them is a cuedtarget, the resulting descriptions end up being focused around the two, which in turn results in de-scriptions starting earlier than those involving more inanimate information due to their higher levelof accessibility.

These results, however, have some issues if we want to think of them in terms of reference process-ing in spoken language. The biggest issue is that these results are for written language. While theystill serve as relevant data points, there are likely enough differences between the systems involvedin written and spoken language production that the results can’t be assumed to extend to speech.The second issue, and one that Coco points out, is that the referential information available for cuedanimate and inanimate targets differed: the cued object always had a duplicate in the scene, while

24

Figure 10: Example of the stimuli used in Experiment 4 from (Coco, 2011). The number of actors (1 or 2) and the level of clutter (Minimal or Cluttered) was manipulated for each scene, while animacy was manipulated for each preceding cue (Animate vs. Non-Animate).

the cued animate entity was always unique and unambiguously referred to. Thus, any differencefound between the Animacy conditions might be due to an asymmetry in referential competitionsince, when the cued target is the object, the participants had to decide what instances of the objectto refer or not.

The second set of results is concerned with the frequency of use of nouns and verbs in the descrip-tions. Coco finds that when the cued target is animate, the participants produce fewer nouns, but thiseffect is reversed in two-actor conditions. Verbs are also more frequent in the two-actor condition,but, unlike nouns, they are more frequent when the cue is animate. Finally, there is an interactionbetween clutter and cue: animate cues with minimal-clutter scenes result in fewer verbs.

This all paints a rather complex picture of how cue-animacy, scene clutter and number of actors in-fluence the production of nouns and verbs, but when we take a closer look, the results seem sensi-ble: like Coco suggests, the reduced use of nouns in the animate-cue condition can be a product ofless elaborate descriptions, which in turn can be a result of the lack of referential ambiguity. Addi-tionally, it might be that when the cue is animate, the inanimate objects go unmentioned, resultingin simpler, shorter descriptions. The reversal of this effect in the two-actor condition is also easilyjustifiable: even if the reference is unambiguous, the high level of attention that people generate inan image makes them more likely to be described, thus resulting in longer sentences with morenouns. Meanwhile, the increased verb frequency with animate cues is predictable, as descriptionsfocused on animate entities are likely to focus on their actions, and in the two-actor condition, whenthere are two human entities available for reference, it’s natural that this effect grows stronger. Theinteraction between clutter and animacy, with minimal-clutter animate-cue conditions resulting infewer verbs is curious. Coco justifies it by stating the lower level of visual information makes itharder for speakers to select and encode the actions performed by the actor, but the visual informa-tion resulting from clutter manipulation shouldn’t be relevant to the actions performed by the actors.However, this extra visual information might interact with verbs by generating more descriptions ofthe contextual position of the entity (“The woman is next to the bookcase.”).

Taken as a whole, the results found by Coco suggest that animacy and clutter may well interact ininteresting ways to influence the production of referring expressions and of visually situated speechin general. However, as mentioned before, the asymmetry in referential ambiguity between the inan-imate and animate cue-targets complicates the interpretation of these results. They’re also for writ-ten language, which is likely to result in different linguistic structures and reaction times, and donethrough the internet, outside of a lab setting, so they’re harder to generalize.

1.5 - ConclusionsThanks to works like Griffin and Bock (2000), it is now known that there is a strong connection be-tween visual attention and language production. This connection is at the core of the field of vis-ually situated language production, the study of language production in interaction with the visualcontext. This field has helped with the research of a number of old topics in psycholinguistics, in-cluding that of reference production.

It is clear from observations of both spoken and written language that depending on the linguisticcontext, we choose and produce different kinds of referring expressions, from more complete de-

25

scriptions like "The pretty girl with the white dress", to reduced expressions such as "her". Theorieslike Ariel (2014) frame this choice as matter of accessibility: referring expressions serve as markersof how accessible their respective referents are, with more definitive descriptions being used to re-fer to less accessible referents, and reduced expressions being chosen when referring to more imme-diately available referents. The question, then, is what factors make a given referent more or less ac-cessible? A number of discourse-level factors, like the distance from the referring expression to thefirst mention of the referent, are known to play a factor, but for this thesis, the focus is on those thatare informed by the visual context.

A number of studies have shown that visual context can influence how reference is established, par-ticularly with features that can be encoded both visually and linguistically, like animacy (Fukumura& Gompel, 2011) and referential competition (Fukumura et al., 2010; Griffin & Bock, 2000), whilethe level of visual information measured in scene clutter has also shown to play a role (Clarke et al.,2013; Duan et al., 2013; Koolen et al., 2015).

There are, however, at least two gaps in this literature. The first is that scene clutter, visual informa-tion and referent animacy have been looked at in isolation, so it is unclear if and how they interactin the production of referring expressions. The second is that they looked at different aspects of ref-erence production, ranging from the individual chosen referring forms to their overall length. Theexperiment reported in the next section is an attempt at addressing these gaps.

26

2 - Experimental Work

2.1 - General Concept and DesignPrevious literature has shown that referent animacy (Fukumura & Gompel, 2011), visual clutter(Clarke et al., 2013; Duan et al., 2013) and referential competition (Arnold & Griffin, 2007) allhave an impact on how referring expressions are produced, but they looked at these factors in isola-tion and studied different aspects of referring expression production.

With this experiment, my aim was to address these gaps in the literature, by looking at how thosethree factors influence the production of reference, both at wider, sentence-structure levels but alsodown to the individual chosen referring expressions. I accomplish this through the use of a cuedlanguage production experiment, in which participants are asked to describe a series of naturalisticimages, that are manipulated as for their level of visual clutter, while guided by a preceding cueword, which refers ambiguously to one of two referential competitors in the scene, which can inturn be either animate or inanimate entities. I study how scene clutter and cue animacy interact inthe sentence structure of the produced descriptions, the referring expressions forms that are chosenby the participants, and the time they take planning their descriptions.

Additionally, I take here a cross-language approach by comparing data for European Portuguese(EP) and English speakers. The two-languages have some specific differences that can affect theproduction of reference, specifically the status of EP as a null-subject, pro-drop language, that canoptionally omit the production of referring expressions in certain contexts. By taking this approach,I can test how language-specific properties interact with the more language-neutral factors of ani-macy and clutter in the production of referring expressions.

I’m using the experimental design and stimuli from Coco and Keller (2015), who manipulated ref-erent animacy and scene clutter in a language production experiment, but with a different goal, thatof analysing mechanisms of visual guidance. Despite their different goals, the design of Coco andKeller's experiment is very suitable for the objective of studying reference production, with the ma-jor added benefit of allowing me to use their data from English speakers to perform the comparisonbetween English and EP. The stimuli and data from Coco and Keller (2015) were provided to me bythe authors.

2.2 - MethodologyThe experiment features a cued language production task, in which participants are asked to de-scribe a series of images that are each preceded by a cue-word, which the participants must alwaysuse when describing the image. This cue-word is always referentially ambiguous, as the images al-ways depict two entities that correspond to the preceding cue-word (e.g. the cue-word' 'woman' pre-cedes an image that depicts two women). Clutter and animacy are manipulated through the imagesand the cue-words, respectively: the images can have either a minimal or a high degree of visualclutter, and the cue-words refer to either animate or inanimate targets. The spoken descriptions pro-

27

duced by the participants were recorded, and their eye-movements were measured while they ob-served the images. In this thesis, only the speech data is reported.

The experiment took place in the Laboratory of Psycholinguistics of the Centre of Linguistics of theUniversity of Lisbon in 2017.

2.2.1 - Participants

Spoken language and eye-tracking data was recorded for 30 European Portuguese speakers (25 offemale), who were mostly students of the University of Lisbon. Participant ages ranged from 18 to34 (mean age = 20). Participants were either fully voluntary or participated for class credit. Out ofthese 30 participants, only the data for 24 was analysed (for reasons that will be discussed in the Re-sults section).

The participants for the English data collected in Coco and Keller (2015) were students of the Uni-versity of Edinburgh, and have a similar profile to the Portuguese participants.

2.2.2 - Materials

The images we used as stimuli (Appendix F) were the same as in Coco and Keller (2015). Coco andKeller obtained 24 basic pictures, depicting scenes from six general scenarios (Kitchen, Bedroom,Hotel Entrance, Bathroom, Office and Living Room) and used Photoshop to insert the cued objectsinto said pictures (e.g. the men and the briefcases in the stimuli from Figure 12). Distracting, con-text-appropriate objects were added to the image in the same way in order to create the Clutteredversions of the scenes. The visual clutter was measured in these images (as Feature Congestion,Rosenholtz et al., 2005) and compared against their Minimal clutter versions to ensure it was signif-icantly different. In addition to the 24 experimental items, 48 images were used as distractors (Ap-

28

Figure 11: An example of the stimuli used and the 2*2 design. The same base scene is represented in two images: the image on the left is in the Minimal Clutter condition, and thus has an inferior level of visual clutter and fewer objects, while the image on the right is in the Cluttered condition. The Cue-Words, 'Homem' and 'Mala', refer to entities which are represented twice in the image, regardless of whether they are being cued or not.

pendix E). In these images, the depicted cue-word referents varied from one to three. As a result,each participant saw a total of 72 images.

The cue-words (Appendix H) were translated from English to EP. Three cue-words had no good EPtranslations, and so had to be changed to a different word that could be interpreted as referring tothe same depicted object (‘soup’ to ‘empadão’ in item 9, ‘clipboard’ to ‘caderno’ in item 11, and‘waffles’ to ‘tostas’ in item 19). Due to a programming error, one image (item 12) had a differentcue-word between the Minimal Clutter and Cluttered conditions (‘caneta’ in the Minimal Cluttercondition, ‘juice’ in the Cluttered condition). This item was still analysed, as both cue-words hadthe two required referential competitors.

2.2.3 - Procedure

Participants were asked to describe a series of naturalistic images, while always using a cue-wordwhich was shown before each image. This cue-word always referred to an entity which was repre-sented twice in the scene. A 2*2 design crossed scene clutter, with the image stimuli being manipu-lated so as to have a less cluttered version (Minimal Clutter Condition) and a more cluttered version(Cluttered Condition), and cue animacy, with the preceding cue-words always referring to either aperson (Animate condition) or an inanimate object (Inanimate condition). Regardless of condition,the target entities were always shown in the image (see Figure 12).

The stimuli were distributed across 4 lists in a Latin square design, so every participant saw everyscene in only one condition. The order of display of the stimuli was randomized. The procedure wasas follows:

1. Before each trial, a fixation cross appeared at the centre of the screen. The participants wereasked to press the space-bar while looking at the cross;

2. A cue-word appeared in the screen for 750ms;

3. An image was shown in the screen for the participants to describe, without any time limita-tions. The participants were again asked to press the space-bar when they were done describ-ing the image.

29

Before the experiment itself, participants signed a form giving their consent to participate in the ex-periment, and read the instructions (Appendix G). Participants were additionally asked to keep theirdescriptions brief and to the point. The experiment started with a training block, with 4 images simi-lar in nature to the distractor items. Halfway through the experiment, participants were given thechance to take a small break. The entire process lasted around 45 minutes.

The experiment was conducted in the Laboratory of Psycholinguistics of the Centre of Linguisticsof the University of Lisbon. The participants’ eye-movements were captured with an SMI iView XHi-Speed 1250 eye-tracker, and their speech was recorded with a Logitech Web-cam Pro 9000. Theexperiment was built using OpenSesame (Mathôt, Schreij, & Theeuwes, 2012), with some customPython coding to integrate eye-tracking. The images were shown in a 1920*1080 resolution screen,which was located 60cm away from the participants.

2.2.4 - Analysed Measures

I’ll be looking at three types of variables to see how EP and English speakers structure their imagedescriptions and reference the depicted entities:

30

Figure 12: Schematic of the experimental procedure. A fixation point is displayed for 750ms, followed by the cue-word for another 750ms. The image is then displayed and the participant describes it without a time limit.

The first is the proportion of use of Nouns + Pronouns (NPRO), Verbs, and Conjunctions +Prepositions (CJPREP) in the scene descriptions. These categories were chosen as markers of dif-ferent types of information: Nouns and Pronouns are analysed together as markers of referential in-formation, as they are referring expressions, while Conjunctions and Prepositions are grouped asmarkers of structural information, since they are used to describe relations between depicted entitiesand their surrounding context. Verbs are analysed individually as markers of both referential andstructural information, as they are used to refer to actions in the scene, and establish relations be-tween the entities that are agents and those that are targets of these actions. This analysis allows usto see how scene clutter, cue animacy and participant language impact reference production on awider, sentence level, to complement our analysis of referring expressions as units. This also fol-lows up on the work of Coco (2011), which analysed the frequency of use of Nouns and Verbs in anexperiment similar to ours, and of Coco and Keller (2015), which looked at the proportional use ofNouns, Verbs and Adjectives, and their results are taken in consideration for the hypotheses.

In descriptions where participants refer both cued targets, I'll analyse the form of referring expres-sion chosen for the second target mentioned, and whether they’re more descriptive, nominalforms, or shorter, pronominal expressions. Referring expressions and how they are influenced byreferent animacy has been a topic of study in previous literature (e.g. Fukumura & Gompel, 2011).Here we test not only the impact of referent animacy on the choice of referring expressions, but alsothat of scene clutter and participant language. Additionally, there’s a twist in our approach to refer-ring expressions: here we’re not looking at how a previously mentioned referent gets subsequentlyreferred (1), but rather how, when two referents with the same underlying concept are referred, whatexpression participants choose for the second (2).

(1) “The hikers carried the canoes a long way downstream. Sometimes, they...”

(2) “A woman is cleaning the bathtub while the other is washing the glasses”

This allows for the effect of conceptual animacy found in works like Fukumura & Gompel (2011) tobe tested for references to new referents, rather than references to previously mentioned entities.

Finally, I'll analyse the participant’s looking times, specifically how long the participants take tostart describing the images. This was done for Experiment 4 in Coco (2011), but for written lan-guage, with a web experiment, and with an extra manipulation (the number of actors in the image).Here we hope to test looking times for spoken language, in a laboratory setting, and with a simpler2*2 experimental design, while introducing a comparison between English and EP. By analysinglooking times, I aim to see how scene clutter, cue animacy and participant language impact thespeech planning, pre-verbal phase (as envisioned by models like Levelt, (1999)) of the produced de-scriptions.

2.3 - Hypotheses

2.3.1 - Animacy

Referent animacy has been shown to have a large impact in various aspects of sentence production.Animate entities are mentioned first, are more often the sentence subject, and trigger shorter refer-

31

ring expressions. When depicted in an image, animate entities also attract a high level of visual at-tention, when compared to inanimate objects. As such, I expect the animacy manipulation to have ahigh impact on the produced descriptions, and for this impact to manifest itself in all of the analy-ses.

NPRO, Verbs and CJPREP: In terms of the proportion of the structural categories, I expect thereto be an effect for both Verbs, and CJPREP, with animate cues resulting in a higher proportion ofverbs, and inanimate cues to generate a higher proportion of CJPREP. I expect these effects as a re-sult of how the participants frame their descriptions around the cued entity: animate entities shouldbe described in terms of their actions in the scene, which should naturally result in an increasednumber of verbs. Inanimate entities should instead be referred to in regards to their position withinthe scene, and their surrounding context, which is accomplished with the use of prepositions. I alsoexpect an effect for NPRO, with the inanimate condition resulting in more referring expressions, fora similar reason as to the increase in CJPREP: as inanimate objects are referred to in context of theirsurroundings, more background objects are mentioned to describe this context. These results wouldbe in line with Experiment 4 from Coco (2011), that measured the frequency of use of Nouns andVerbs in a web-based written language production task, and found similar effects for animacy. How-ever, one of Coco’s explanations for the increased number of nouns in the inanimate condition isthat these conditions resulted in longer descriptions, with a higher number of nouns. Since I’m notmeasuring the absolute frequency of nouns, but rather their proportion in the produced sentences (inconjunction with pronouns), any found results can’t be caused by a direct effect of sentence length.

Form of Referring Expressions: I expect animacy to be the main driving force behind any effectsfound for the form of referring expressions for the second-mentioned cue target. Fukumura & Gom-pel (2011) found that animate referents were more likely to be referred to with shorter pronominalexpressions in repeated mentions. I expect a similar effect to show in the results, but for first men-tion to a referent whose concept was already previously activated in the description. There mightalso be an interaction with Language, with a more pronounced effect of animacy for European Por-tuguese, the language which I believe might provide more room for shorter referring expressions – apoint I’ll elaborate on in the language hypotheses.

Looking Times: Finally, I expect looking times to be shorter in the animate conditions, as a productof the more cognitively accessible animate entities resulting in a quicker conceptualization process,and an earlier onset of speech. It’s also possible that, since inanimate objects attract less visual at-tention, they aren’t considered as important to the general meaning of the image and are ignored inthe animate condition, while the animate entities are always considered. Thus, the extra informationprocessed in the inanimate condition might result in longer speech planning, and delayed descrip-tions.

2.3.2 - Clutter

I expect an overall reduced effect of clutter, as compared to animacy and language, mostly due tothe results from Coco (2011) Experiment 4, in which there were no significant effects of clutter forneither looking times or frequency of nouns and verbs. However, given the differences between that

32

experiment and the one that’s being reported here, namely that Coco’s is web-based and for writtenlanguage, there might be surprises.

NPRO, Verbs and CJPREP: I don’t expect effects of clutter in the proportions of any of these cat-egories. A higher level of visual clutter effectively translates to a higher number of background ob-jects, and thus more opportunities for reference, so if any category might be affected, it would beNPRO. That said, the presence of more objects doesn’t mean they will be referred, especially sincethis isn’t a free-description task: there’s a cue-word the participants must mention, and the partici-pants are asked to keep their descriptions short, and direct. Coco’s (2011) Experiment 4 didn’t findany effects of clutter for frequency of nouns or verbs, and while, as previously mentioned, there area number of large differences between our experiments, I don’t expect this is where they will mani-fest themselves.

Form of Referring Expressions: Previous literature (Clarke et al., 2013; Duan et al., 2013) hasshown that visual clutter can have an effect on the chosen form of referring expression, with higherlevels of visual clutter resulting in longer and overspecified expressions. I expect clutter to have aninhibitory effect on the production of reduced referring expressions, and for nominal expressions tohave a higher representation in descriptions of cluttered scenes, as a way to provide clearer refer-ences in more information-dense contexts.

Looking Times: I expect to find longer looking times in cluttered scenes, as more information-richimages might take longer to process, and the cued entities are harder to find. It should be noted,however, that Experiment 4 from Coco (2011) didn’t find a significant effect for clutter in lookingtimes. However, Coco’s experiment was web-based, which could result in less consistent times thanan experiment conducted in an laboratory setting.

2.3.3 - Language

Effects of language should more pronounced in the more the structure-sensible variables, the pro-portions of structural categories and the forms of referring expressions. Looking times should re-flect more language-universal conceptualization processes, and thus show no difference betweenEnglish and EP.

NPRO, Verbs and CJPREP: I expect the English and EP descriptions to differ structurally. In par-ticular, I expect a higher proportion of CJPREP in EP. This isn’t because of any conceptual-leveldifferences in the produced descriptions, but rather because of a structural difference between thegrammars of the two languages. When describing images, EP speakers tend to use a particular ver-bal structure that incorporates prepositional phrases (‘construção infinitiva preposicionada’, Bar-bosa & Raposo, 2013), like in example (3) below:

(3) “Está um menino a[preposition] brincar[verb] com um ursinho de peluche”.1

Here’s an example of a very similar description in English:

(4) “There is a boy playing[verb] with a teddy bear ”.

1 These and other example sentences are illustrative, and not actual data from the corpus.

33

The EP speaker uses a prepositional phrase containing an infinitive verb, while the English speakersimply produces a verb in the present continuous, but the two descriptions are effectively the samein terms of meaning. Given the prevalence of this kind of structures in EP whenever verbs are usedin image description (as can be seen in the data from Monteiro, 2017), it seems likely that they cancause an asymmetry in the proportion of CJPREP between the two languages, as the English verbalstructures lack these prepositions. This could also indirectly impact the proportion of NPRO andVerbs, with them being lower in EP as more prepositions are used in the descriptions. This effectcould disappear in the inanimate conditions, if fewer verbs are used, and consequentially, fewer ofthese prepositional structures.

Form of Referring Expressions: I don’t expect major differences between EP and English. EP is anull-subject, pro-drop language, meaning that, in certain structures, a previously mentioned referentisn’t explicitly realized:

(5) “Está uma menina sentada na cama e [a menina] está a abraçar o peluche”.

The equivalent sentence in English requires the use of a second mention:

(6) “There’s a girl sitting in the bed and she’s hugging the teddy.”

However, here I’m not analysing these repeated mentions, but rather the first reference to a secondcued-target. It is nonetheless possible that these properties of EP might make structures like the fol-lowing more frequent in the EP data:

(7) Está uma menina ao lado da cama e outra abraçada a um peluche.

In sentence structures like in (7), the second cued-target is referred to with a reduced pronominalexpression in “outra”, without a produced noun. These structures are also possible in English, as inexample (8), below:

(8) There’s a girl next to the bed and another hugging the teddy.

It is plausible that these structures aren’t as frequent in English, as the more rigid sentence struc-tures force the subjects to be fully realized. If so, we might find an effect of Language here, with EPspeakers producing more pronominal references.

Looking Times: I don’t expect an effect to be found for looking times between the two languages,as these should reflect more language-universal speech planning processes (Levelt, 1999) that aren’tas sensible to structural differences between the two languages.

2.4 - Data Pre-ProcessingThe first major step of the data pre-processing was to transcribe and annotate the spoken descrip-tions produced by the participants, which were recorded to individual .wav files trial by trial. Theproduced sentences were transcribed orthographically. Pauses and repetitions were transcribed,though they are excluded from the final, analysed form of the transcriptions. The only non-wordmarker in the transcriptions is ‘uk’, which marks an imperceptible and non-transcribed segment ofthe participant’s speech.

34

The annotation of the transcriptions involved multiple types of information. The first referencemade to each of the cued targets was annotated and time-stamped. The onset and the end of the pro-duced descriptions were also time-stamped. All of the time-stamping, as well as the transcriptionsthemselves, was performed with the aid of spectrogram analysis through the use of Praat (Boersma& Weenink, 2017), to ensure the time-stamps (which were annotated at the millisecond level) wereas accurate as possible. This temporal information is useful mostly for a synchronization betweenspeech and eye-tracking data; none of the reported results in this thesis make use of this informa-tion, with the exception of sentence onset times, but it’s available for future work.

"está um homem a levar um sermão do patrão"

First ReferenceFirst

ReferenceOnset

SecondReference

SecondReference

OnsetSentence Onset Sentence End

Strategy ofReference

homem 4430 patrão 7324 3979 7694 Both

Table 1: Example of the annotation performed for transcribed sentences. All times in milliseconds.

The transcriptions were also annotated as for their ‘strategy of reference’, denoting which cued tar-gets were referred to and in what order. The various strategies of reference were categorized as fol-lows:

‘First’ or ‘Second’ constitute the ‘Single-Reference’ strategy, when only one of the cued targetswas referred. The classification of either target as ‘First’ or ‘Second’ stems from an earlier experi-ment of Coco (2011, Experiment 6) with the same stimuli, and is based on the targets’ proximity totheir animate/inanimate counterparts (in Figure 13, the man and the briefcase on the left are ‘First’because they are closer to one another). This distinction isn’t relevant to the data analysis, but wasretained for our corpus for possible future work.

(9) "O senhor pousou a sua mala para assinar os papéis".

‘Both’ when both of the cued targets are referred to separately and unambiguously;

(10) "Um balcão com uma mala em cima e o senhor a assinar o papel com uma mala ao ladodele".

‘Ambiguous’ (shortened to 'Ambi' in the data) when none of the targets were referred to separately(“estão duas malas na receção do hotel”), or when a reference to a single target was established, butit isn’t possible to determine which one specifically (“está uma mala na receção do hotel”);

(11) "Há dois homens na imagem".

‘Null’ in the very few cases where no type of reference to either of the cued targets was made.

(12) "A imagem mostra a recepção de um hotel"

For the analysis, I included only the data which falls into either the ‘Single-Reference’ or ‘Both’strategies. These two strategies are those in which the cued targets are most clearly and unambigu-ously referred to, and by comparing them we can see how sentence structure and speech planningare affected by how the speakers focus their descriptions on one or both possible referents. Put to-gether, these two strategies also compose the majority (78%) of the corpus.

35

The second major step of the data treatment was to annotate the transcribed data with Part-of-Speech (POS) tags, to allow for the proportional analysis of Nouns + Pronouns, Verbs and Preposi-tions. This annotation was done through the LX-Tagger (António Branco & João Silva, 2004), anautomatic POS-tagger for European Portuguese with a reported 96,24% accuracy rate. After this an-notation, each word was suffixed with a POS tag, as can be seen in example (13):

(13) "o/DA senhor/CN pousou/V a/DA sua/POSS mala/CN para/PREP assinar/INF os/DA papéis/CN"

The full list of the POS tags for the EP data can be found in Appendix B. After the automatic anno-tation was complete, I performed a manual review to check for systematic classification errors inthe data. The one change made as part of this review was that every instance of the word outro (inall its number and gender cases) was given the custom tag ‘OTR’. This is because these words werecommonly misclassified, and there is a high frequency of cases like those illustrated in example(15), where it can arguably be considered to be realized as a pronoun. Depending on their surround-ing context, all 'outro' were counted as either 'PROTH' (pronominal 'outro') or 'DETOTH' (deter-miner 'outro'): those that appeared immediately before nouns were categorized as determiners, thosethat didn’t were categorized as pronouns. In the final data set, there were 132 determiner 'outro', and83 pronominal 'outro'.

(14) “o/DA outro/OTR homem/CN”

(15) “uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ outra/OTR a/PREP ol-har/INF”

The data for English from Coco and Keller (2015) had already been tagged with Penn Treebanktags, which differ from those used by LX-Tagger. To compare the English and EP data, the individ-ual tags were grouped under common categories. These ‘macro-categories’, and how the tags fromthe English and EP data were categorized within them, can be found in Table 2, below:

36

Figure 13: Item 14 from the experimental stimuli, to help illustrate the strategies of reference. Cue-words were mala/briefcase and homem/mala.

LX-Tagger Penn Treebank Tags Macro-Categories

CN NN, NNS, NNP, NNPS Nouns

GER, GERAUX, INF, INFAUX, PPA, PPT, VAUX, V

VB, VBD, VBG, VBN, VBP, VBZ, MD

Verbs

ADJ JJ, JJR, JJS Adjectives

ADV, PP, LADV1, LADV2 , LADV3

RB, RBR, RBSAdverbs

PREP, LPREP1, LPREP2, LPREP3

IN, TOPrepositions

DA, DEM, IA, QNT, UM, CARD, DETOTH*

DT, WDT, WP, WP$, CDDeterminers

CJ, LCJ1, LCJ2, LCJ3 CC Conjunctions

IND, INT, POSS, PRS, REL, LQD, LRED, CL, PROTH*

PRP, PRP$, PDT, EXPronouns

DFR, DGTR, DGT. DM, EADR, EOE, EXC, ITJ, LTR, MGT, MTH, NP, ORD, PADR, PNM, STT, SYB, TERMN, UNIT, WD, LDM, LITJ, LPRS,UK*

FW, LS, RP, SYM, UH, POS, :, WRB

Other

Table 2: Distribution of the LX-Tagger and Penn Treebank tags within Macro-Categories. Tags suffixed with * are not part of their original tag-sets, and were instead added as part of the tagging and tag-counting processes.

The tags were distributed not only in function of their nature, but also of their use within the corpus.For example, cardinal numbers (tag ‘CARD’ in LX-Tagger and CD in Penn Treebank) were placedin the Determiners category as they’re overwhelmingly used as determiners in both the EP and Eng-lish data. Following this, the POS tags for each description (for both EP and English data) werecounted and added up to their corresponding macro-categories.

Subsequently to the transcription and annotation processes, 6 EP participants were removed fromthe data. Three of these where removed due to bad eye-tracking results and another three were re -moved due to producing very lengthy descriptions. The participants with bad eye-tracking data wereremoved for more compatibility between our results and future work with this data set that incorpo-rates eye-tracking, for which those participants would have to be removed. The participants withvery lengthy descriptions were removed since, rather than briefly and directly describing the imageas was asked, they produced very detailed descriptions, often mentioning every object in the scene.As the end result of this process, a total of 576 trials remained per language (24 participants * 24 tri-als per participant). They’re distributed across the strategies of reference as shown in Table 3.

37

European Portuguese English

Single-Referent BothAmbiguous and

NullSingle-Referent Both Ambiguous

235 192 148 322 151 103

Table 3: Data points by strategy of reference and language. Only the data for the 'Single-Referent' and 'Both' are analysed. English has no 'Null' cases.

After this process of data treatment, we finally arrive at the final variables:

The first focus of analysis will be the proportions of Nouns + Pronouns (NPRO), Verbs and Con-junctions + Prepositions (CJPREP). To account for sentence length, I divided the sum of nouns andpronouns, the sum of conjunctions and prepositions, and verbs by the number of words of each de-scription. The result is a normalized version of these variables, effectively a percentage of howmuch each of the categories account for the total lexical constitution of each description. To illus-trate, see Table 4 with the value for absolute and normalized NPRO, Verbs and CJPREP for the sen-tence “O senhor pousou a sua mala para assinar os papéis.”:

o/DA senhor/CN pousou/V a/DA sua/POSS mala/CN para/PREP assinar/INF os/DApapéis/CN

NPRO Verbs CJPREP Total Words normNPRO normVerbs normCJPREP3 2 1 10 0.33 0.20 0.10

Table 4: Absolute (NPRO, Verbs and CJPREP) and Normalized (normNPRO, normVerbs and normCJPREP) values for the target macro-categories for the sentence "O senhor pousou a sua mala para assinar os papéis".

These normalized variables will be our final measure of analysis of NPRO, Verbs and CJPREP.

For the second focus of analysis, the form of the produced referring expressions, I annotated thefirst reference to the second mentioned target in each description where both targets were mentioned(the ‘Both’ strategy of reference mentioned at the start of this section). For EP, they were always inone of two forms: a defined description with a realized noun, such as “outra mulher” as in example(16):

(16) “está/V uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN outra/OTR mul-her/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM poltrona/CN”.

And descriptions where the noun is omitted, such as in example (17):

(17) “outra [mulher]” or “uma [mulher]” (as in “uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA e/CJ outra/OTR deitada/CN”).

The former were categorized as Nominal references, and the latter as Pronominal references. ForEnglish, there was a smaller number of reduced references, but they were somewhat more diverse:the data included cases where the noun isn’t produced like in the fragments “another [woman]” or“the other [woman]” but also cases where there doesn’t appear to be any produced referring expres-sions of any form like in example (18):

38

(18) “There is a suitcase on the reception and on the floor”.

Again, all these cases were categorized as Pronominal references, while any cases where a noun isfully produced, as in ‘the woman’, were categorized as Nominal references. The number of Nomi-nal and Pronominal references will be the variable used for the second part of the results.

For the third and final focus of analysis, Looking Time, sentence onset times will serve as the de-pendent variable. As previously described, sentence onset times for EP were annotated to the mil-lisecond level during the transcription of the data. The data for English provided by Coco and Kellerwas also pre-annotated with sentence onset times in milliseconds, so no extra treatment was neces-sary for the two data sets to be compatible. Unlike Coco (2011), I won’t be analysing sentence endtimes, as the effects Coco found for them mirrored those he found for sentence onset times, and theyaren't particular relevant to the research questions at hand.

To summarise:

• To measure structural changes within the descriptions produced by the participants, the ob-jects of analysis will be the proportion of produced Nouns and Pronouns (NPRO),Verbs, and Conjunctions and Prepositions (CJPREP). These are continuous, proportionalvariables with a range from 0 (no word in that category was produced) to 1 (every producedword fit into that category);

• To measure how participants choose between less or more descriptive forms of referring ex-pressions when referring to a second cued target, a categorical variable will be used, with thevalue of 'Nominal', when the a longer more descriptive expression is used, and 'Pronomi-nal', when a shorter form is produced instead;

• To measure how long participants take before starting to describe the images, while planningtheir speech, sentence onset times will serve as the variable of analysis, a continuous vari-able measured in milliseconds.

2.5 - Statistical AnalysisFor the morphological category (NNPRO, Verbs and CJPREP) and looking time analyses, linearmixed effect models were implemented, allowing for the control of both fixed and random effects.The full initial models had as their fixed predictors the factors of scene clutter (levels: cluttered andminimal), cue animacy (levels: animate and inanimate), participant language (levels: English andPortuguese) and strategy of reference (levels: single and both). Random effects were controlled forparticipants (24 per language) and image stimuli (48).

All of the predictor variables are centred. This means that each level of each predictor variable is as-signed a numerical value ranging from 1 to -1, with the values of each two levels always adding upto 0. The estimate effects reported in the results can be calculated by multiplying the estimate valueby the value of the corresponding predictor. Take for example the estimate value for the effect of an-imacy on looking times shown in Table 5.

39

Predictor Estimate Std. Error df t value p

Animacy 54.791 22.212 24.146 2.467 0.021

Table 5: Results for the effect of Animacy on Looking Times, shown to exemplify the use of centred variables. The centred values are - 0.45 for the Animate conditions, 0.55 for the Inanimate conditions.

The estimated value for each level of animacy is found by multiplying the Estimate value by thatlevel's centred value.

For the animate conditions:

52.791 * -0.45 = −25,78095

For the inanimate conditions:

52.791 * 0.55 = 31,51005

This shows that, on average, the animate conditions result in descriptions that start approximately26ms faster, while the inanimate conditions result in descriptions that are delayed by approximately32ms. The centred values are always reported in the result tables.

The implementation of these models was done in R (R Core Team, 2018), with the function ‘lmer’from the package ‘lme4’ (Bates, Mächler, Bolker, & Walker, 2015).

From the full models that includes all fixed and random effects, backwards model reductions wereperformed with the function ‘step’ from the package lmertest (Kuznetsova, Brockhoff, & Chris-tensen, 2017). The function finds the best-fitting model for the data by testing step-by-step reducedversions of the model with non-significant variables removed. In the data, I report for each analysisthe best-fitting model as found through this process.

For the referring expression analysis, the approach is slightly different. A generalized linear mixedeffects model is implemented through the use of the function ‘glmer’, again from the package‘lme4’. Unlike for the other analyses, no model reduction is performed. Additionally, the fixed ef-fect of strategy of reference is dropped here, as the analysis is run only for descriptions fitting intothe ‘Both’ strategy of reference (as they’re the only ones containing individual references to a sec-ond cued target).

For all of the analyses, the fixed predictors are centred (with their values detailed in the model resulttables). This means that each level of each factor is assigned a numerical value ranging from -1.0 to1.0.

To further test some of the interactions found in the data, post-hoc analyses were performed throughlinear mixed effect models ran on the subset of the data for each individual language. These wereimplemented in the same way as the main analyses, with the use of the ‘lmer’ function and back-wards model reduction through ‘step’.

40

2.6 - Results

2.6.1 - Proportion of Nouns + Pronouns, Verbs and Conjunctions + Prepositions

The results for all three tested categories are first reported separately, and then discussed together.

2.6.1.1 - Nouns + Pronouns (NPRO)

Predictors Estimate Std. Error df t value p

(Intercept) 0.339 0.005 52.068 62.454 <0.001Animacy 0.015 0.006 32.006 2.704 0.011Clutter 0.002 0.007 44.873 0.306 0.761Language -0.042 0.011 50.073 -3.913 <0.001Animacy:Clutter 0.006 0.010 46.024 0.621 0.538Animacy:Language 0.028 0.010 32.727 2.769 0.009Clutter:Language -0.003 0.013 41.812 -0.261 0.795Animacy:Clutter:Language -0.036 0.017 717.434 -2.069 0.039

Table 6: Mixed linear effects model results for the proportion of produced NPRO. Significant effectsin bold. Strategy of reference was dropped as a fixed predictor. The centred factors are Animacy (Animate - 0.45, Inanimate 0.55) Clutter (Cluttered -0.50, Minimal 0.50) and Language (English -0.47, Portuguese 0.53).

41

Significant main effects are found for animacy and language. Significant interactions are found be-tween animacy and language, and animacy, clutter and language.

2.6.1.2 - Verbs

Predictors Estimate Std. Error df t value Pr(>|t|)

(Intercept) 0.194 0.007 57.636 27.342 <0.001Animacy -0.071 0.008 51.379 -8.425 <0.001Language -0.023 0.013 43.054 -1.836 0.073Reference 0.041 0.009 59.301 4.590 <0.001Animacy:Language 0.003 0.014 51.530 0.244 0.809Animacy:Reference -0.010 0.013 347.722 -0.791 0.429Language:Reference -0.022 0.017 55.741 -1.344 0.184Animacy:Language:Reference -0.069 0.025 351.375 -2.766 0.006

Table 7: Mixed linear effects model results for the proportion of produced Verbs (normalized). Significant effects in bold. The centred factors are Animacy (Animate - 0.45, Inanimate 0.55) Reference (Single 0.38, Both -0.62) and Language (English -0.47, Portuguese 0.53).

42

Figure 14: Bar plots illustrating the mean produced NPRO, factoring in Cue Animacy, Scene Clutter and Participant Language. The error bars indicate the standard error margins.

Main effects are found for animacy (higher proportion of verbs in the animate conditions) and refer-ence (higher proportion of verbs in the ‘Single’ condition). A significant three-way interaction isfound between language, animacy and reference.

43

Figure 15: Bar plots illustrating the mean produced Verbs, factoring in Cue Animacy, Strategy of Reference and Participant Language. The error bars indicate the standard error margins.

2.6.1.3 - Conjunctions + Prepositions (CJPREP)

Predictor Estimate Std. Error df t value p

(Intercept) 0.177 0.005 68.388 38.121 <0.005Animacy 0.043 0.005 46.383 8.021 <0.001Language 0.088 0.008 57.861 10.514 <0.001Reference -0.047 0.005 190.599 -9.013 <0.001

Table 8: Mixed linear effects model results for the proportion of produced CJPREP (normalized). Significant effects in bold. The centred factors are Animacy (Animate - 0.45, Inanimate 0.55) Reference (Single 0.38, Both -0.62) and Language (English -0.47, Portuguese 0.53)

Main effects are found for animacy, language and strategy of reference.

44

Figure 16: Bar plots illustrating the mean produced CJPREP (normalized), factoring in Cue Animacy, Strategy of Reference and Participant Language. The error bars indicate the standard error margins.

2.6.1.4 - Discussion

In this section of the results, I analysed the sentence structures produced by the EP speakers fromthis experiment, and by the English speakers from Coco and Keller (2015). More specifically, Ilooked at how the proportion of nouns + pronouns, verbs, and conjunctions + prepositions were im-pacted by scene clutter, cue animacy, language, and whether the participants chose to refer one orboth possible cue targets. A summary of the results can be found in Table 9.

Language Animacy Reference Interactions

NPRO English > EP

Inanimate > Animate

No effect.Stronger effect of animacy for EP; Cluttered scenes result in a reversed and reduced animacy effect for English.

Verbs No effect.Animate > Inanimate

Single > Both

Decreased effect of animacy for ‘Both’ in EP.

CJPREPEP > English

Inanimate > Animate

Both > Single

None.

Table 9: Summary of the results for the proportion of produced NPRO, Verbs and CJPREP, factoring in Language, Animacy, Clutter and Strategy of Reference. Clutter is omitted due to lacking a main effect. “English > EP” denotes that that particular category has a significantly higher proportion in English as compared to EP.

Nouns and Pronouns, along with Conjunctions and Prepositions, show differences between Englishand EP. The major question regarding these effects is whether they reflect categorically differentstrategies of description by the two participant groups, with English speakers producing shorter,more noun-rich sentences while EP speakers produce longer more structurally-complex and rela-tion-rich descriptions with an increased use of prepositions and conjunctions; or whether these dif-ferences are instead related to specific structural aspects of the languages. For example, the reducednumber of nouns and pronouns in EP could be related to its status as a null-subject language, i.e. alanguage in which, in certain contexts, the sentence subject can be omitted. Since the subject is usu-ally realized with nominal or pronominal expressions, there might be an imbalance between EP andEnglish, in which the subject must obligatorily be expressed. The increased proportion of CJPREPfor EP might also be justified due to specific verbal structures in EP that incorporate prepositions(19), while in English the equivalent structures lack prepositions (20).

(19) “Está uma mulher a lavar a casa-de-banho” [1 Preposition / 7 Words = 0,14 CJPREP]

(20) “There is a woman washing the bathroom” [0 Preposition / 7 Words = 0,0 CJPREP]

Given that these structures seem very common in our data, and indeed in the data from other vis-ually-situated production experiments in EP (Monteiro, 2017), it seems plausible that they causethis asymmetry in CJPREP between the languages.

The surface-level analysis of the produced sentence structures that I performed doesn’t allow for adefinitive answer on whether the found differences between the two groups are due to meaningfullydifferent speech structure or to language-specific properties. It’s possible that a different approach tothis data could help solve this question. One option would be to take a more in-depth look into thesentence structures, perhaps through analysis of the sentence’s syntactic trees. Another option would

45

be to simply improve upon my analysis by, for example, distinguishing between language-specificpropositions, like the ones described here for EP that mark infinitive forms, and more universalprepositions used to establish relation between a referent and its context, or to annotate and analyseomitted subjects in the EP data.

The effects found for animacy are expected, with inanimate targets likely being described in func-tion of their location in relation to other objects, while animate targets result in descriptions morefocused around their action in the general context of the scene, resulting in a higher proportion ofNPRO and CJPREP for the former, and of Verbs for the latter. There are, however, some interestinginteractions. In the ‘Single-Referent’ strategy of reference, the effect found for animacy is more pro-nounced for EP. This suggests that the productions are more similar between the two conditions inEnglish, perhaps as a result of overall simpler descriptions. This is somewhat supported by the factthat the two languages have a significant difference in the length of the descriptions, as testedthrough a t-test comparing the mean produced words per description between each language , withEP speakers producing more words per description. The reverse effect happens for CJPREP in the‘Both’ strategy of reference, for which the effect of animacy is stronger in English than in EP. Ingeneral, from looking at Figures 15 and 16, the 'Both' strategy of reference appears to result in re-duced effects of animacy for EP. It might be that, when both cued targets are referred, the EP speak-ers end up producing overall more complete descriptions of the images that are more similar be-tween animate conditions.

These interactions also show that the different reference strategies result in somewhat differentstructures, especially when also taking into account the main effects found in Verbs and CJPREP.The main effect for CJPREP is expected, since the more complex and longer sentences resultingfrom both cued targets being described naturally lead into more prepositions and conjunctions beingproduced. The main effect found for Verbs might at first seem less intuitive. Shouldn't descriptionswith more referred entities, and thus with more potential actors, result in more verbs? However,there are two simple explanations for this result. The first is that what is measured here is not theabsolute number of verbs, but their proportion in the produced sentences. Sentences with two re-ferred entities like (21) and (22) can still have a decreased number of verbs in comparison to single-referent sentences like (23) and (24):

(21) "There is a man cleaning the bathtub while another man looks at him." [3 Verbs / 13 Words= 0,23 Verb proportion].

(22) "Está um homem a lavar a banheira enquanto outro homem olha para ele." [3 Verbs / 13Words = 0,23 Verb proportion].

(23) "There is a man cleaning the bathtub." [2 Verbs / 7 Words = 0,29 Verb proportion].

(24) "Está um homem a lavar a banheira." [2 Verbs / 7 Words = 0,29 Verb proportion].

For sentences (21) and (22), the proportion of verbs is lower than for sentences (23) and (24): asthey represent an overall lower proportion of the sentence, simply as a result of the use of conjunc-tions.

46

A second explanation is that the two referred entities can be used as different arguments for thesame verb, resulting in ‘Both’ strategy sentences like (25) and (26), where the proportion of verbs isalso reduced.

(25) "There is a girl talking to another girl." [2 Verbs / 8 Words = 0,20 Verb proportion]

(26) "Está uma rapariga a falar com outra rapariga" [2 Verbs / 8 Words = 0,20 Verb proportion]

Finally, no main effects are found for Clutter. I hypothesised that the Cluttered conditions could re-sult in an increase in the production of NPRO, perhaps to the detriment of the other structures. Thiscould be a result of there being more objects available to serve as potential referents, and would gowell with results such as those in Clarke, Elsner & Rohde (2013), that find that the presence ofhigher degrees of visual clutter results in longer referring expressions. The lack of results heremight be due to an effect of task: since we ask for a general description of the scene, the participantsmight not feel a need to specify the location of the cued targets and distinguish them from back-ground objects, to the degree that they would in a task such as Clarke et al’s (2013). It could be in-teresting to look at the proportion of adjectives here, as a way of seeing if cluttered scenes wouldtrigger overspecification phenomena as described in Koolen, Krahmer, & Swerts (2015). Unfortu-nately, adjectives have a low occurrence in our data, making a direct analysis difficult.

47

2.6.2 - Form of Referring Expressions

Predictors Estimate Std. Error z value p

(Intercept) -2.064 0.556 -3.715 >0.001Animacy -0.566 0.886 -0.638 0.523Language 1.187 0.934 1.271 0.204Clutter 0.717 0.499 1.438 0.151Animacy:Language -4.553 1.397 -3.259 0.001Animacy:Clutter 1.056 0.966 1.094 0.274Language:Clutter -0.203 0.825 -0.246 0.806Animacy:Language:Clutter 0.879 1.841 0.478 0.633

Table 10: Generalized Linear Mixed Effects model result for the proportion of use of Nominal vs Pronominal forms. Significant effects in bold. The centred factors are Animacy (Animate - 0.30, Inanimate 0.70) Clutter (Cluttered -0.53, Cluttered 0.47) and Language (English -0.56, Portuguese 0.44).

48

Figure 17: Bar plots representing the proportion of use of Nominal and Pronominal forms, crossing language, clutter and animacy.

European Portuguese English

Animate Inanimate Animate Inanimate

Nominal Pronominal Nominal Pronominal Nominal Pronominal Nominal Pronominal

65 60 53 6 86 16 27 1

Table 11: Number of Nominal and Pronominal form occurrences per Language and Animacy.

The only significant effect found is an interaction between Language and Animacy. This effect rep-resents a significant difference found between Animate conditions in EP, which isn’t found in Eng-lish: in EP, the form of the referring expression referring to the second entity is more likely to beNominal in the inanimate condition, while in the animate condition there’s an almost even split be-tween the use of nominal and pronominal forms. In fact, for English, the results, as seen in 17, ap-pear to be reversed, with inanimate objects generating more pronominal references. However the ef-fects for English don’t reach significance. Clutter is lacking any significant effects.

The clearest take-away from the data, then, is that, in the animate conditions, EP speakers producemore pronominal, less-defined referring expressions when referring to a second, conceptually-iden-tical referent. This is consistent with my hypotheses and literature that considers animate referentsto be more cognitively accessible, and more easily referable with less definite referring expressionslike pronouns. This provides, in my opinion, an interesting new data to the literature, by extendingpreviously found effects of conceptual accessibility on reference production to European Por-tuguese, but also by showing that these effects can manifest themselves in first references, when theconcept underlying the reference has been previously invoked.

One issue with this data, however, is that the referring expressions haven’t been controlled for theirgrammatical role. Since animate and inanimate entities are generally assigned different grammaticalroles in the sentences (subject and object, respectively), it’s possible that the found effects aren’tdue to animacy per se, but due to grammar. constraints put in place by these roles.

No effects of clutter are found. I did hypothesize that the presence of clutter would inhibit the pro-duction of less definite, pronominal referring expressions, but, in this data, it doesn't seem to be thecase. Looking at 17, it does seem like there might be an effect of Clutter in interaction with theInanimate condition for EP, but it’s not a significant effect, and there is a low number of occurrences(as can be seen in 11).

Finally, Language didn’t have a main effect. Main effects found for Language here would implythat one participant group produced significantly more descriptions where both cued targets are re-ferred. Since the choice of strategies of reference should reflect speech-planning processes that aremore language-neutral, the lack of an effect of language here is expected.

49

2.6.3 - Looking Times

Predictor Estimate Std. Error df t value p

(Intercept) 500.373 28.617 51.678 17.485 <0.001Animacy 54.791 22.212 24.146 2.467 0.021Language -32.623 56.846 51.949 -0.574 0.569Reference -26.283 20.758 769.354 -1.266 0.206Animacy:Language -0.216 43.859 26.105 -0.005 0.996Animacy:Reference -77.359 35.194 266.738 -2.198 0.029Language:Reference -42.820 41.685 769.497 -1.027 0.305Animacy:Language:Reference 201.707 70.267 260.375 2.871 0.004

Table 12: Linear mixed effects model results for sentence onset times. Significant effects in bold. The centred factors are Animacy (Animate - 0.45, Inanimate 0.55) Reference (Single 0.38, Both -0.62) and Language (English -0.47, Portuguese 0.53)

A significant effect is found for animacy, with an interaction between animacy and strategy of refer-ence, and a three-way interaction between animacy, strategy of reference and language.

The main effect for animacy is in line with the hypotheses, where I predicted that animate cuedwould result in quicker speech planning phases, and is in line with previous literature like Coco

50

Figure 18: Bar plots illustrating the mean sentence onset times, factoring in Cue Animacy, Participant Language and Strategy of Reference. The error bars indicate the standard error margins.

(2011) that found a similar effect of animacy in a web-based, written language production experi-ment. This can be seen as an effect of conceptual animacy, with descriptions centred around themore easily cognitively accessible animate referents being faster to begin production.

Finally, there’s an interaction between animacy and reference, and a three-way interaction betweenthese two factors and language. These are better discussed together, as they reflect the inhibited ef-fect of animacy in the English data in the ‘Single’ strategy of reference. This in turn appears to becaused by high sentence onset time for the animate condition. It might be that, when referring a sin-gle animate cued target, the English participants take a long time deciding which one to refer, takinginto account which is most relevant to a general description of the image, while this doesn’t happenfor the inanimate targets because they aren’t as important to the general description.

This naturally poses the question as to why it wouldn’t happen for the Portuguese data as well. Itshould be noted that there are some methodological limitations that can compromise the comparisonbetween the two languages for this particular variable. Sentence onset time annotation is particu-larly sensible to how the two data sets result from different experiments that were worked on by dif-ferent people, that might consider slightly different points as the onset of the sentence, not to men-tion that experimental software used might have an effect as well. However, one would expect anydifferences arising from these methodological issues to manifest themselves globally across theEnglish and EP data instead of in particular interactions between the factors. In general, this is apuzzling result that is hard to interpret.

2.6.4 - General Discussion

The results showed that the cue animacy, scene clutter, and participant language had varying levelsof impact in the tested measures of language production.

Animacy had the overall highest impact, with effects in all of the tested measures. Descriptions pro-duced in response to animate cue targets skewed towards an increased proportion in verbs, with de-scriptions focused within the actions of the animate entities in the scene, while inanimate produc-tions instead had a higher proportion of prepositions and nouns, likely as a function of a more con-textual description of the inanimate objects. In the European Portuguese data, animate cues also fa-cilitated the production of reduced referring expressions, and resulted in more quickly plannedspeech. These results are in line with previous psycholinguistics and visual cognition literature thatshows that animate entities appear to play important roles in both image visualization and languageproduction mechanisms: Animate entities attract a high degree of visual attention (Birmingham etal., 2009), and animate concepts appear to be more cognitively accessible when producing referringexpressions (Fukumura & Gompel, 2011) and are more commonly placed in high syntactic and se-mantic roles.

It’s also notable how these results fit into models like Levelt (1999), specifically regarding the con-ceptual preparation phase, when participants are preparing a conceptual message. Depending onwhether a person or inanimate object is cued, the lexical constitution of the descriptions change,which might reflect conceptual differences in how the perspective the participants take when de-scribing the image, and how they focus these descriptions on a moment-to-moment basis.

51

Language had a comparatively smaller effect on the tested variables. The proportions of Nouns +Pronouns and of Conjunctions + Prepositions were the only variables for which language had amain effect: English speakers produced a higher proportion of Nouns + Pronouns, while the EPspeakers compensated for that with a higher use of prepositions and conjunctions. As previouslydiscussed, this is possibly an effect of language-specific structures of Portuguese, particularly theuse of prepositions in certain verbal structures, which are absent from English. The fact that there’san interaction between language and animacy in choice of referring expressions might suggest thatPortuguese facilitate these effects of animacy, but given the overall low number of occurrences andthe very specific nature of the referring expressions studied, it’s hard to say conclusively.

Finally, Clutter didn’t have any effect, save for a minor and rather inconclusive interaction with ani-macy and language in the proportions of Nouns + Pronouns. Some previous works found an impactof scene clutter on reference production, but they measured aspects related to overspecification(Koolen et al., 2015) and referring form length (Clarke et al., 2013) that weren’t tested here. Thelack of effects of clutter on looking times does replicate the results from Coco (2011, Experiment4), who similarly didn’t find a significant effect for his cued language production experiment.

There are two methodological issues that might help explain the absence of any effects found forscene clutter. The first is the nature of the task. Since the participants are asked to describe the im-ages while always using the preceding cue-words, it’s very possible that they centralize their de-scription on the referents of these cue-words and don’t take the meaningless clutter into account.Both Clarke et al. (2013) and Koolen et al. (2015) featured tasks in which their participants wereasked to unambiguously describe the location of an entity, so the surrounding context of said entitywas more important than in our experiment, which could help explain why clutter played a biggerrole in their results. The second is the manipulation of the scene clutter. It might be that the amountof clutter in the cluttered versions of the scenes wasn’t enough to have an impact. The stimuli usedin Clarke et al. (2013) were particularly cluttered, as they used images from the Where’s Wally se-ries of books that are intentionally designed to be difficult to locate a target in.

52

3 - ConclusionsWith this thesis, my aim was to study language, and, in particular, reference production in interac-tion with a visual context.

To that end, I conducted a cued language production experiment where participants had to describeimage scenes (in which there was referential competition) preceded by a cue-word. The imageswere manipulated as for their level of visual clutter, and the cue-words referred to either an animateor an inanimate object in the scene. I tested the impact of animacy and clutter on three different as-pects of the descriptions produced by the participants, the lexical constitution of the sentences, thechosen forms of referring expressions when the second of the two cued-targets were referred, andthe time participants took planning their speech before initiating the descriptions. With this design, Iaimed to address gaps in the previous literature on reference production in visually situated lan-guage production, that looked at these factors in isolation, and tested different aspects of referenceproduction.

In addition, I took a cross-linguistic approach by comparing the European Portuguese data obtainedin the experiment, with English data obtained in a previous experiment by Coco and Keller (2015),which used the same experimental design and stimuli. In doing so, my goal was to test to what ex-tent language-specific structures influenced reference production.

The results showed particularly strong effects of cue-word animacy, which had an impact in allthree tested measures, and had some interactions with language, which otherwise only showed inthe proportions of Nouns and Pronouns, and of Conjunctions and Prepositions, likely due to lan-guage-specific structures. Clutter on the other hand has no significant effects. This is contrary tosome literature that looked at the effect of clutter on referring expressions (Clarke et al., 2013;Koolen et al., 2015), but due to differences in the tested variables and in the experimental methodol-ogy, the results aren’t necessarily incompatible.

Overall, the results are in line with previous literature, especially previous findings for animacy thatshow animate entities to be more cognitively accessible (Fukumura & Gompel, 2011), while show-ing that language-specific properties might play a role in interaction with animacy in reference pro-duction.

The experiment and the collected data also leave some doors open for future work. The most obvi-ous is the analysis of the unused eye-tracking data. In particular, there are some interesting possibil-ities in looking at how referring expressions coordinate with the eye-movements of the participantsas they looked at and described the images. For example, like Coco and Keller (2015), we couldlook at how the order of mention of the different entities tracks the order they are looked at, andhow the complexity of these patterns is modulated by animacy and clutter.

The analysis of the European Portuguese data also has some room for improvement. As previouslymentioned in the results, it’d be useful to annotate Portuguese-specific prepositions and differentiatethem from more universal prepositions used to establish links between objects and their surround-ings and other entities. The produced referring expressions could also be annotated as for their

53

grammatical role within the sentence, in order to tease apart the effects found for referring expres-sions in animacy from those that might be caused by their grammatical roles.

54

ReferencesAntónio Branco, & João Silva. (2004). Evaluating Solutions for the Rapid Development of State-of-the-Art POS Taggers for Portuguese. In Maria Teresa Lino, Maria Francisca Xavier, Fátima Ferreira, Rute Costa, & Raquel Silva (Eds.), Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC2004) (pp. 507–510). Paris: ELRA.

Ariel, M. (1988). Referring and accessibility. Journal of Linguistics, 24(1), 65–87. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226700011567

Ariel, M. (2014). Accessing Noun-Phrase Antecedents (RLE Linguistics B: Grammar). Routledge.

Arnold, J. E. (2001). The Effect of Thematic Roles on Pronoun Use and Frequency of Reference Continuation. Discourse Processes, 31(2), 137–162. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326950DP3102_02

Arnold, J. E., & Griffin, Z. M. (2007). The effect of additional characters on choice of referring expression: Everyone counts . ☆ Journal of Memory and Language, 56(4), 521–536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.09.007

Barbosa, P., & Raposo, E. P. (2013). Subordinação Argumental Infinitiva. In E. P. Raposo, Bacelar do Nascimento, Maria Fernanda, Mota, Maria Antónia, Segura, Luísa, & Mendes, Amália (Eds.), Gramática do Português (Vol. II). Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.

Bates, D., Mächler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, S. (2015). Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01

Biederman, I., Mezzanotte, R. J., & Rabinowitz, J. C. (1982). Scene perception: Detecting and judging objects undergoing relational violations. Cognitive Psychology, 14(2), 143–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(82)90007-X

Birmingham, E., Bischof, W. F., & Kingstone, A. (2007). Why do we look at people’s eyes? Journalof Eye Movement Research, 1(1). https://doi.org/10.16910/jemr.1.1.1

Birmingham, E., Bischof, W. F., & Kingstone, A. (2009). Saliency does not account for fixations to eyes within social scenes. Vision Research, 49(24), 2992–3000. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2009.09.014

Boersma, P., & Weenink, D. (2017). Praat: doing phonetics by computer. (Version 6.0.33). Retrieved from http://www.praat.org/

Borji, A., & Itti, L. (2013). State-of-the-Art in Visual Attention Modeling. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 35(1), 185–207. https://doi.org/10.1109/TPAMI.2012.89

Buswell, G. T. (1935). How people look at pictures: a study of the psychology and perception in art.

Clarke, A. D. F., Elsner, M., & Rohde, H. (2013). Where’s Wally: the influence of visual salience onreferring expression generation. Frontiers in Psychology, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00329

Coco, M. I. (2011). Coordination of Vision and Language in Cross-Modal Referential Processing. University of Edinburgh.

Coco, M. I., & Keller, F. (2015). Integrating mechanisms of visual guidance in naturalistic languageproduction. Cognitive Processing, 16(2), 131–150.

Cooper, R. M. (1974). The control of eye fixation by the meaning of spoken language: A new methodology for the real-time investigation of speech perception, memory, and language processing. Cognitive Psychology.

55

De Graef, P., Christiaens, D., & d’Ydewalle, G. (1990). Perceptual effects of scene context on object identification. Psychological Research, 52(4), 317–329. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00868064

Driver IV, J., Davis, G., Ricciardelli, P., Kidd, P., Maxwell, E., & Baron-Cohen, S. (1999). Gaze Perception Triggers Reflexive Visuospatial Orienting. Visual Cognition, 6(5), 509–540. https://doi.org/10.1080/135062899394920

Duan, M., Elsner, M., & de Marneffe, M.-C. (2013). Visual and linguistic predictors for the definiteness of referring expressions. In Proceedings of the 17th Workshop on the Semantics and Pragmatics of Dialogue (SemDial) (p. 10). Amsterdam.

Einhäuser, W., Spain, M., & Perona, P. (2008). Objects predict fixations better than early saliency. Journal of Vision, 8(14), 18–18. https://doi.org/10.1167/8.14.18

Fletcher-Watson, S., Findlay, J. M., Leekam, S. R., & Benson, V. (2008). Rapid Detection of PersonInformation in a Naturalistic Scene. Perception, 37(4), 571–583. https://doi.org/10.1068/p5705

Fukumura, K., & Gompel, R. P. G. van. (2011). The effect of animacy on the choice of referring expression. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(10), 1472–1504. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.506444

Fukumura, K., van Gompel, R. P. G., & Pickering, M. J. (2010). The use of visual context during the production of referring expressions. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 63(9), 1700–1715. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210903490969

Gleitman, L. R., & Gleitman, H. (1992). A picture is worth a thousand words, but that’s the problem: The role of syntax in vocabulary acquisition. Current Directions in Psychological Science,1(1), 31–35.

Griffin, Z. M., & Bock, K. (2000). What the eyes say about speaking. Psychological Science, 11(4), 274–279.

Griffin, Z. M., & Ferreira, V. S. (2011). Properties of Spoken Language Production. In M. Traxler &M. A. Gernsbacher, Handbook of Psycholinguistics. Elsevier.

Gundel, J. K., Bassene, M., Gordon, B., Humnick, L., & Khalfaoui, A. (2010). Testing predictions of the Givenness Hierarchy framework: A crosslinguistic investigation. Journal of Pragmatics, 42(7), 1770–1785. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2009.09.010

Gundel, J. K., Hedberg, N., & Zacharski, R. (1993). Cognitive status and the form of referring expressions in discourse. Language, 274–307.

Henderson, J. (2003). Human gaze control during real-world scene perception. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(11), 498–504. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2003.09.006

Itagaki, N., & Prideaux, G. D. (1985). Nominal properties as determinants of subject selection. Lingua, 66(2–3), 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0024-3841(85)90292-X

Itti, L., & Koch, C. (2000). A saliency-based search mechanism for overt and covert shifts of visual attention. Vision Research, 40(10), 1489–1506.

Jaeger, T. F., & Norcliffe, E. J. (2009). The Cross-linguistic Study of Sentence Production. Language and Linguistics Compass, 3(4), 866–887. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-818X.2009.00147.x

Koch, C., & Ullman, S. (1987). Shifts in Selective Visual Attention: Towards the Underlying NeuralCircuitry. In Matters of Intelligence (pp. 115–141). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-3833-5_5

56

Koolen, R., Krahmer, E., & Swerts, M. (2015). How Distractor Objects Trigger Referential Overspecification: Testing the Effects of Visual Clutter and Distractor Distance. Cognitive Science, 40(7), 1617–1647. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12297

Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in LinearMixed Effects Models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13

Levelt, W. J. (1999). Producing spoken language: A blueprint of the speaker. In The neurocognition of language (pp. 83–122). Oxford University Press.

Levelt, W. J., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(1), 1–38.

Mathôt, S., Schreij, D., & Theeuwes, J. (2012). OpenSesame: An open-source, graphical experimentbuilder for the social sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 314–324. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0168-7

Monteiro, A. P. dos S. (2017). Propriedades das imagens e avaliação de comportamentos linguísticos. Retrieved from http://repositorio.ul.pt/handle/10451/29936

Parkhurst, D., Law, K., & Niebur, E. (2002). Modeling the role of salience in the allocation of overt visual attention. Vision Research, 42(1), 107–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0042-6989(01)00250-4

R Core Team. (2018). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Retrieved from https://www.R-project.org/

Rosenholtz, R., Li, Y., Mansfield, J., & Jin, Z. (2005). Feature congestion: a measure of display clutter. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems (pp. 761–770). ACM. Retrieved from http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1055078

Schmitt, B. M. (1997). Lexical access in the production of ellipsis and pronouns (PhD Thesis). Radboud University Nijmegen Nijmegen.

Slobin, D. I. (1996). From “thought and language” to “thinking for speaking”.

Spivey, M. J., & Huette, S. (2016). Toward a situated view of language. In P. Knoeferle, P. Pyykkönen-Klauck, & M. W. Crocker (Eds.), Visually Situated Language Comprehension. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Tanenhaus, M. K., Spivey-Knowlton, M. J., Eberhard, K. M., & Sedivy, J. C. (1995). Integration of visual and linguistic information in spoken language comprehension. Science, 1632–1634.

Tatler, B. W. (2016). Perception of the visual environment. In P. Knoeferle, P. Pyykkönen-Klauck, & M. W. Crocker (Eds.), Visually Situated Language Comprehension. John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Wolff, P., & Holmes, K. J. (2011). Linguistic relativity: Linguistic relativity. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 2(3), 253–265. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.104

Yarbus, A. L. (1967). Eye Movements and Vision. Retrieved from http://wexler.free.fr/library/files/yarbus%20(1967)%20eye%20movements%20and%20vision.pdf

57

Appendix A Penn-Treebank Tagset

Retrieved from https://www.ling.upenn.edu/courses/Fall_2003/ling001/penn_treebank_pos.html

Number Tag Description

1. CC Coordinating conjunction

2. CD Cardinal number

3. DT Determiner

4. EX Existential there

5. FW Foreign word

6. IN Preposition or subordinating conjunction

7. JJ Adjective

8. JJR Adjective, comparative

9. JJS Adjective, superlative

10. LS List item marker

11. MD Modal

12. NN Noun, singular or mass

13. NNS Noun, plural

14. NNP Proper noun, singular

15. NNPS Proper noun, plural

16. PDT Predeterminer

17. POS Possessive ending

18. PRP Personal pronoun

19. PRP$ Possessive pronoun

20. RB Adverb

21. RBR Adverb, comparative

22. RBS Adverb, superlative

23. RP Particle

24. SYM Symbol

25. TO to

26. UH Interjection

27. VB Verb, base form

28. VBD Verb, past tense

29. VBG Verb, gerund or present participle

30. VBN Verb, past participle

31. VBP Verb, non-3rd person singular present

32. VBZ Verb, 3rd person singular present

33. WDT Wh-determiner

34. WP Wh-pronoun

35. WP$ Possessive wh-pronoun

36. WRB Wh-adverb

58

Appendix B LX-Tagger Tagset

Retrieved from http://lxcenter.di.fc.ul.pt/tools/pt/conteudo/LXTagger.html#tags

Tag Categoria Exemplos

ADJ Adjectivo bom, brilhante, eficaz, …

ADV Advérbio hoje, já, sim, felizmente, …

CARD Cardinal zero, dez, cem, mil, …

CJ Conjunção e, ou, tal como, …

CL Cliticos o, lhe, se, …

CN Nome computador, cidade, ideia, …

DA Artigo Definido o, os, …

DEM Demonstrativo este, esses, aquele, …

DFR Fracções meio, terço, décimo, %, …

DGTR Números RomanosVI, LX, MMIII, MCMXCIX, …

DGT Dígitos 0, 1, 42, 12345, 67890, …

DM Marcadores de Discurso olá, …

EADR Endereço Electrónico http://www.di.fc.ul.pt, …

EOE Final de Enumeração etc

EXC Exclamativa ah, ei, etc.

GER Gerúndio sendo, afirmando, vivendo, …

GERAUX Gerúndio "ter"/"haver" em termos compostos tendo, havendo …

IA Artigo Indefinido uns, umas, …

IND Indefinidos tudo, alguém, ninguém, …

INF Infinitivo ser, afirmar, viver, …

INFAUX Infinitivo "ter"/"haver" em termos compostos ter, haver …

INT Interrogativos quem, como, quando, …

ITJ Interjeição bolas, caramba, …

LTR Letras a, b, c, …

MGT Classe de Magnitudeunidade, dezena, dúzia, resma, …

MTH Meses Janeiro, Dezembro, …

NP Sintagma Nominal idem, …

ORD Ordinalprimeiro, centésimo, penúltimo, …

PADR Parte de Endereço Rua, av., rot., …

PNM Parte de Nome Próprio Lisboa, António, João, …

PNT Pontuação ., ?, (, …

POSS Possessivos meu, teu, seu, …

PPAParticípio Passado que não ocorre em termos compostos

afirmados, vivida, …

59

PP Sintagma Preposicional algures, …

PPT Particípio Passado em termos compostos sido, afirmado, vivido, …

PREP Preposição de, para, em redor de, …

PRS Pronome Pessoal eu, tu, ele, …

QNT Quantificadores todos, muitos, nenhum, …

REL Pronome Relativo que, cujo, tal que, …

STT Títulos Sociais Presidente, drª., prof., …

SYB Símbolos @, #, &, …

TERMN Terminações opcionais (s), (as), …

UM "um" ou "uma" um, uma

UNIT Abreviatura de unidade de medida kg., km., …

VAUXVerbos finitos "ter" ou "haver" em forma verbalcomposta

temos, haveriam, …

V Verbos falou, falaria, …

WD Dias da Semana segunda, terça-feira, sábado, …

Expressões Multi-palavra

LADV1…LADVn

Advérbios multi-palavrade facto, em suma, um pouco, …

LCJ1…LCJn Conjunções multi-palavra assim como, já que, …

LDEM1…LDEMn

Demonstrativos multi-palavra o mesmo, …

LDFR1…LDFRn Fracções multi-palavra por cento

LDM1…LDMn Marcadores Discursivos multi-palavra pois não, até logo, …

LITJ1…LITJn Interjeições multi-palavra meu Deus

LPRS1…LPRSn Pronomes Pessoais multi-palavra a gente, si mesmo, V. Exa., …

LPREP1…LPREPn

Preposições multi-palavra através de, a partir de, …

LQD1…LQDn Quantificadores multi-palavra uns quantos, …

LREL1…LRELn Relativos multi-palavra tal como, …

60

Appendix C Portuguese Data

Item Partic-ipant

Animacy Clutter Cue Reference Sentence

1 1 Animate Minimal Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN em_/PREP uma/UM ban-heira/CN e/CJ outra/OTR mulher/CN a/PREPpesar/INF -se/CL

1 2 Animate Cluttered Mulher First uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP pesar/INF -se/CLem_/PREP a/DA casa-de-banho/CN

1 3 Inanimate Minimal Balança First está/V uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP pesar/INF-se/CL em_/PREP a/DA balança/CN

1 4 Inanimate Cluttered Balança First está/V uma/UM mulher/CN em_/PREP uma/UM balança/CN e/CJ outra/OTR a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN a/PREP segurar/INF em/PREPlivros/CN

1 8 Inanimate Cluttered Balança Both há/V uma/UM balança/CN e/CJ uma/UM mul-her/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP essa/DEM balança/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN há/V outra/OTR balança/CN para/PREP usar/INFem/PREP cima/CN de/PREP um/UM de/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN e/CJ é/V uma/UMcasa-de-banho/CN tem/V outra/OTR mulher/CN a/PREP mexer/INF em/PREP coisas/CNcom/PREP um/UM livro/CN a_/PREP o/DAlado/CN e/CJ há/V champôs/V e/CJ coisas/CN de/PREP tomar/INF banho/CN

1 10 Animate Cluttered Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP pesar/INF -se/CL

1 11 Inanimate Minimal Balança Both em_/PREP uma/UM casa-de-banho/CN en-contram/V -se/CL duas/CARD mulheres/CNuma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRS está/V -se/CL a/PREP pesar/INF em_/PREP uma/UM bal-ança/CN e/CJ de_/PREP o/DA lado/CN es-querdo/ADJ encontra/V -se/CL outra/OTR bal-ança/CN

1 12 Inanimate Cluttered Balança First em_/PREP uma/UM casa-de-banho/CN uma/UM mulher/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA pé/CNde_/PREP o/DA armário/CN com/PREP fru-tos/CN e/CJ uma/UM outra/OTR está/V em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM balança/CN que/REL está/V a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de/PREP um/UM lavatório/CN

1 13 Animate Minimal Mulher Both duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREP a/DAcasa-de-banho/CN uma/UM mulher/CN está/

61

V -se/CL a/PREP pesar/INF está/V em/PREPcima/CN de_/PREP a/DA balança/CN a/PREPoutra/OTR mulher/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DApé/CN de_/PREP a/DA banheira/CN a/PREPoutra/OTR mulher/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DApé/CN de_/PREP a/DA banheira/CN tem/V os/DA cabelos/CN castanhos/ADJ usa/V óculos/CN e/CJ é/V um/LADV1 pouco/LADV2 mais/ADV forte/ADJ que/CJ a/DA outra/OTR mul-her/CN que/REL está/V em_/PREP a/DA bal-ança/CN

1 14 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both em_/PREP uma/UM casa-de-banho/CN es-tão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/UM mul-her/CN está/V -se/CL está/V a/PREP pesar/INF -se/CL em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM balança/CN e/CJ outra/OTR está/V perto/ADV de/PREP uma/UM caixa/CN de/PREParrumação/CN

1 15 Inanimate Minimal Balança First a/DA mulher/CN está/V -se/CL a/PREP pesar/INF a_/PREP a/DA balança/CN

1 16 Inanimate Cluttered Balança First uma/UM pessoa/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM balança/CN

1 17 Animate Minimal Mulher Both estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREPa/DA casa-de-banho/CN uma/UM mulher/CNpesa/V -se/CL e/CJ outra/OTR está/V a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP a/DA banheira/CN

1 18 Animate Cluttered Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V em_/PREP a/DA bal-ança/CN

1 19 Inanimate Minimal Balança First uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP pesar/INF -se/CLem_/PREP a/DA balança/CN

1 20 Inanimate Cluttered Balança First uma/UM mulher/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA balança/CN

1 21 Animate Minimal Mulher First estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREPa/DA casa-de-banho/CN uma/UM de_/PREPas/DA mulheres/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP o/DA lavatório/CN

1 23 Inanimate Minimal Balança First está/V uma/UM mulher/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA balança/CN

1 25 Animate Minimal Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP pesar/INF -se/CL

1 26 Animate Cluttered Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V em/PREP cima/CN

62

de_/PREP a/DA balança/CN

1 28 Inanimate Cluttered Balança First a/DA balança/CN está/V a/PREP pesar/INFuma/UM senhora/CN

1 29 Animate Minimal Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN está/V -se/CL a/PREPpesar/INF em_/PREP a/DA casa-de-banho/CN e/CJ outra/OTR parece/V estar/INF a/PREP lavar/INF as/DA mãos/CN

1 30 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both é/V uma/UM casa-de-banho/CN com/PREPuma/UM mulher/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA balança/CN e/CJ uma/UM em/PREP frente/CN a/DA caixas/CN com/PREPcosméticos/ADJ

2 1 Inanimate Cluttered Esponja First duas/CARD senhoras/CN em_/PREP uma/UM casa-de-banho/CN uma/UM está/V a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA lavatório/CN com/PREP uma/UM esponja/CN

2 3 Animate Cluttered Mulher First está/V uma/UM mulher/CN com/PREP uma/UM camisola/CN branca/ADJ a/PREP rir/INF -se/CL e/CJ a/PREP lavar/INF a/DA bancada/CN

2 4 Inanimate Minimal Esponja Both estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREPuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN e/CJ uma/UMde_/PREP elas/PRS segura/PPA uma/UMesponja/CN e/CJ há/V outra/OTR esponja/CNem_/PREP a/DA banheira/CN

2 8 Inanimate Minimal Esponja Both Há/V uma/UM esponja/CN pousada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM banheira/CN duas/CARD mul-heres/CN e/CJ uma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRStem/V outra/OTR esponja/CN e/CJ parece/Vestar/INF a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA balcão/CN

2 10 Animate Minimal Mulher First é/V uma/UM mulher/CN que/REL está/V a/PREP limpar/INF a/DA casa-de-banho/CN

2 12 Inanimate Minimal Esponja First duas/CARD mulheres/CN estão/V em_/PREPuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN uma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRS está/V com/PREP uma/UMesponja/CN a/PREP limpar/INF uma/UM ban-cada/CN e/CJ atrás/ADV de_/PREP ela/PRSatrás/ADV de_/PREP elas/PRS há/V uma/UMbanheira/CN

2 13 Inanimate Cluttered Esponja Both está/V uma/UM senhora/CN com/PREP uma/UM esponja/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN a/PREP limpar/INF a/DA casa-de-banho/CN e/CJ a/DA outra/OTR esponja/CN está/V em/

63

PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA banheira/CN

2 14 Animate Minimal Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA lavatório/CN de_/PREP a/DA casa-de-banho/CN e/CJ está/V outra/OTR com/PREP um/UM papel/CN em_/PREP a/DAmão/CN

2 15 Animate Cluttered Mulher Second a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP limpar/INFos/DA vidros/CN

2 16 Inanimate Minimal Esponja Second uma/UM esponja/CN perto/ADV de_/PREP a/DA banheira/CN

2 17 Inanimate Cluttered Esponja First Duas/CARD mulheres/CN limpam/V a/DAcasa-de-banho/CN uma/UM utiliza/V uma/UMesponja/CN para/PREP limpar/INF o/DA bal-cão/CN

2 18 Animate Minimal Mulher Second a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP ler/INF uns/IApapéis/CN

2 21 Inanimate Cluttered Esponja First uma/UM mulher/CN está/V a/PREP lavar/INFuma/UM esponja/CN para/PREP lavar/INF a/DA bancada/CN

2 25 Inanimate Cluttered Esponja First a/DA mulher/CN limpa/PPA a/DA casa-de-banho/CN com/PREP a/DA esponja/CN

2 26 Animate Minimal Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA balcão/CN

2 27 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREP uma/UM casa-de-banho/CN uma/UM de_/PREPelas/PRS está/V a/PREP limpar/INF a/DAbancada/CN a/PREP outra/OTR não/ADV sei/V muito/ADV bem/ADV em_/PREP o/DA que/REL é/V que/CJ está/V a/PREP agarrar/INF

2 28 Inanimate Minimal Esponja Second a/DA esponja/CN está/V pousada/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA banheira/CN

2 29 Inanimate Cluttered Esponja First para/PREP limpar/INF estas/DEM duas/CARDsenhoras/CN aliás/ADV uma/UM de_/PREPas/DA senhoras/CN usa/V uma/UM esponja/CN

2 30 Animate Minimal Mulher Both são/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREPuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN uma/UM está/Va/PREP limpar/INF os/DA vidros/CN e/CJ a/DA outra/OTR está/V a/PREP limpar/INF as/DA bancadas/CN com/PREP uma/UMesponja/CN

64

3 1 Inanimate Minimal Rolo Second duas/CARD crianças/CN em_/PREP uma/UMcasa-de-banho/CN com/PREP um/UM rolo/CN de/PREP papel/CN em_/PREP o/DAchão/CN

3 3 Animate Minimal Bebé Both duas/CARD crianças/CN uma/UM de_/PREPelas/PRS é/V um/UM bebé/CN que/REL está/V a/PREP brincar/INF com/PREP papel/CNhigiénico/ADJ e/CJ a/DA outra/OTR está/Va_/PREP os/DA saltos/CN

3 4 Animate Cluttered Bebé Both está/V um/UM bebé/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM sanita/CN a/PREP brincar/INFcom/PREP papel/CN higiénico/ADJ e/CJoutro/OTR em/PREP pé/CN

3 8 Animate Cluttered Bebé Both há/V um/UM bebé/CN em_/PREP uma/UMsanita/CN com/PREP papel/CN higiénico/ADJnão/ADV parece/V estar/INF muito/ADV bem/ADV equilibrado/PPA e/CJ há/V outro/OTRbebé/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN em/PREPpé/CN mas/CJ em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN e/CJ um/UM cesto/CN de/PREP roupa/CN e/CJdetergentes/ADJ

3 11 Animate Minimal Bebé Both em_/PREP uma/UM casa-de-banho/CN en-contram/V -se/CL dois/CARD bebés/CN um/LADV1 em/LADV2 cima/LADV3 de/PREPuma/UM sanita/ADJ e/CJ outro/OTR de/PREPpé/CN

3 12 Animate Cluttered Bebé Both dois/CARD bebés/CN estão/V em_/PREPuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN há/V produtos/CN de/PREP limpeza/CN e/CJ há/V rolos/CNde/PREP papel/CN higiénico/ADJ e/CJ um/UM de_/PREP eles/PRS está/V em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN e/CJ um/UM de_/PREP os/DAbebés/CN está/V sentado/PPA em/PREPcima/CN de_/PREP a/DA sanita/ADJ e/CJoutro/OTR está/V de/PREP pé/CN em_/PREPo/DA chão/CN

3 13 Inanimate Minimal Rolo Both estão/V dois/CARD bebés/CN em_/PREP a/DA casa-de-banho/CN um/UM bebé/CN está/V a/PREP brincar/INF com/PREP um/UM rolo/CN de/PREP papel/CN está/V um/UM rolo/CNem_/PREP o/DA chão/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR rolo/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA lado/CNde_/PREP a/DA sanita/CN a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP o/DA outro/OTR bebé/CN

3 18 Inanimate Cluttered Rolo Second o/DA rolo/CN está/V em_/PREP o/DA chão/

65

CN

3 19 Animate Minimal Bebé First um/UM bebé/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA sanita/CN

3 20 Animate Cluttered Bebé First um/UM bebé/CN a/PREP brincar/INF com/PREP o/DA papel/CN higiénico/ADJ

3 21 Inanimate Minimal Rolo Second está/V a/DA criança/CN está/V a/PREP lavar/INF um/UM rolo/CN de/PREP papel/CNhigiénico/ADJ há/V mais/ADV um/UM rolo/CNem_/PREP o/DA chão/CN

3 27 Animate Minimal Bebé Both dois/CARD bebés/CN estão/V em_/PREPuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN um/UM de_/PREP eles/PRS sentado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA sanita/CN outro/OTR em/PREP pé/CN a/PREP brincar/INF

3 29 Inanimate Minimal Rolo Both há/V um/UM rolo/CN de/PREP papel/CNhigiénico/ADJ em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN e/CJoutro/OTR em_/PREP a/DA parede/CN en-quanto/CJ duas/CARD crianças/CN estão/Va/PREP brincar/INF

3 30 Inanimate Cluttered Rolo Second duas/CARD crianças/CN uma/UM em_/PREPuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN e/CJ uma/UMestá/V sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DA sanita/CN a/PREP brincar/INF com/PREP o/DA rolo/CN de/PREP papel/CN higiénico/ADJ está/Vum/UM rolo/CN perdido/PPA em_/PREP o/DAchão/CN

4 2 Inanimate Minimal Balde First são/V dois/CARD homens/CN em_/PREPuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN um/UM está/V a/PREP limpar/INF uk/UK

4 3 Inanimate Cluttered Balde Second está/V um/UM balde/CN azul/ADJ a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP o/DA bidé/CN

4 4 Animate Minimal Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP lavar/INFuma/UM banheira/CN e/CJ outro/OTR a/PREP observá#/INF -lo/CL

4 8 Animate Minimal Homem Both há/V um/UM homem/CN inclinado/PPA sobre/PREP uma/UM banheira/CN tem/V um/UMtecido/PPA em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN parece/V estar/INF a/PREP lavar/INF qualquer/QNTcoisa/CN tem/V um/UM balde/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN mais/ADV uns/IA baldes/CN a_/PREP o/DA fundo/CN um/UM cesto/CN e/CJestá/V outro/OTR homem/CN de/PREPcostas/CN para/PREP a/DA imagem/CN

66

parece/V estar/INF de/PREP braços/CNcruzados/PPA

4 11 Inanimate Cluttered Balde First em_/PREP uma/UM casa-de-banho/CN en-contram/V -se/CL dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM a/PREP fazer/INF limpezas/CN com/PREP vários/QNT produtos/CN de/PREPlimpeza/CN e/CJ um/UM balde/CN e/CJoutro/OTR de/PREP pé/CN

4 12 Animate Minimal Homem Both dois/CARD homens/CN estão/V em_/PREPuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN um/UM de_/PREP eles/PRS está/V dobrado/PPA para/PREP a/DA banheira/CN com/PREP um/UMpano/CN em_/PREP as/DA mãos/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR está/V de/PREP costas/CN e/CJ de/PREP pé/CN

4 13 Animate Cluttered Homem Both estão/V dois/CARD homens/CN em_/PREP a/DA casa-de-banho/CN um/UM homem/CNestá/V a/PREP lavar/INF alguma/QNT peça/CN de/PREP roupa/CN em_/PREP a/DA ban-heira/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR homem/CNestá/V de/PREP costas/CN em_/PREP a/DAimagem/CN a/PREP olhar/INF para/PREP o/DA segundo/ORD homem/CN

4 14 Inanimate Minimal Balde First está/V um/UM homem/CN com/PREP um/UMpano/CN e/CJ um/UM balde/CN de/PREPágua/CN perto/ADV de/PREP uma/UM ban-heira/CN

4 15 Inanimate Cluttered Balde Second o/DA balde/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA pé/CNde_/PREP o/DA bidé/CN

4 17 Animate Cluttered Homem Both em_/PREP esta/DEM casa-de-banho/CNestá/V um/UM homem/CN com/PREP um/UMpano/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN e/CJoutro/OTR homem/CN está/V virado/PPA de/PREP costas/CN

4 18 Inanimate Minimal Balde First o/DA balde/CN está/V em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN

4 20 Animate Minimal Homem First um/UM homem/CN a/PREP lavar/INF roupa/CN

4 21 Animate Cluttered Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP lavar/INFa/DA banheira/CN e/CJ um/UM homem/CNde/PREP costas/CN

4 25 Animate Cluttered Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP lavar/INF a/

67

DA roupa/CN

4 27 Inanimate Cluttered Balde Both um/UM balde/CN em_/PREP um/UM cesto/CN em_/PREP a/DA casa-de-banho/CN e/CJum/UM balde/CN a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de/PREP produtos/CN de/PREP limpeza/CN

4 28 Animate Minimal Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP lavar/INF a/DA banheira/CN

4 29 Animate Cluttered Homem Both o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP lavar/INFroupa/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR homem/CNestá/V a/PREP observá#/INF -lo/CL

4 30 Inanimate Minimal Balde First uma/UM casa-de-banho/CN com/PREP dois/CARD senhores/CN um/UM está/V de/PREPcostas/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR está/V a/PREP lavar/INF a/DA banheira/CN com/PREPum/UM balde/CN e/CJ com/PREP um/UMpano/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN ou/CJuma/UM esponja/CN

5 1 Animate Minimal Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREPa/DA cama/CN e/CJ outra/OTR mulher/CNem/PREP pé/CN

5 2 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both há/V uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ outra/OTR a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN

5 3 Inanimate Minimal Sapato Second o/DA sapato/CN está/V de_/PREP o/DA lado/CN esquerdo/ADJ de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

5 4 Inanimate Cluttered Sapato Both estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREPum/UM quarto/CN uma/UM sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN outra/OTR em/PREPpé/CN e/CJ há/V um/UM sapato/CN dentro/LPREP1 de_/LPREP2 a/DA caixa/CN que/REL está/V em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ outro/OTR sapato/CN em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN

5 8 Inanimate Cluttered Sapato First há/V um/UM sapato/CN em_/PREP uma/UMcaixa/CN e/CJ uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN parece/V que/CJestá/V em_/PREP um/UM quarto/CN e/CJ há/V objetos/CN de/PREP casa/CN a_/PREP a/DA volta/CN e/CJ ela/PRS uk/UK está/V a/PREP sorrir/INF

5 10 Animate Cluttered Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V pensativa/ADJ

5 11 Inanimate Minimal Sapato Both em_/PREP um/UM quarto/CN encontram/V -

68

se/CL duas/CARD mulheres/CN e/CJ um/UMuma/UM caixa/CN com/PREP um/UM sapato/CN lá/ADV dentro/ADV e/CJ outro/OTR sap-ato/CN encontra/V -se/CL em_/PREP o/DAchão/CN

5 12 Inanimate Cluttered Sapato Both duas/CARD mulheres/CN estão/V em_/PREPum/UM quarto/CN uma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRS está/V sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DAcama/CN e/CJ a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP ela/PRS há/V uma/UM caixa/CN com/PREP um/UM sapato/CN dentro/ADV o/DApar/CN de_/PREP esse/DEM sapato/CN está/V em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN atrás/ADV de_/PREP a/DA mulher/CN que/REL está/V de/PREP pé/CN

5 13 Animate Minimal Mulher Both estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREPum/UM quarto/CN uma/UM mulher/CN está/Vem/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CNsentada/PPA e/CJ a_/LADV1 o/LADV2 lado/LADV3 de_/PREP essa/DEM mulher/CN tem/V uma/UM caixa/CN com/PREP uns/IA ténis/CN só/ADV com/PREP um/UM ténis/CN lá/ADV dentro/ADV e/CJ a/DA outra/OTR mul-her/CN está/V de/PREP pé/CN e/CJ atrás/ADV de_/PREP essa/DEM mulher/CN tem/Vum/UM par/CN de/PREP ténis/CN tem/V um/UM outro/OTR ténis/CN

5 14 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREPo/DA quarto/CN uma/UM está/V sentada/PPAem_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ outra/OTRestá/V de/PREP pé/CN perto/ADV de/PREPuma/UM mesa/CN

5 15 Inanimate Minimal Sapato Second está/V um/UM sapato/CN em_/PREP o/DAchão/CN

5 16 Inanimate Cluttered Sapato First sapato/CN dentro/LPREP1 de_/LPREP2 a/DAcaixa/CN

5 17 Animate Minimal Mulher Both em_/PREP este/DEM quarto/CN estão/Vduas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/UM mulher/CNestá/V sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ a/DA outra/OTR está/V em/PREP pé/CN uma/UM mulher/CN tem/V cabelo/CNcomprido/ADJ e/CJ outra/OTR tem/V o/DA ca-belo/CN curto/ADJ

5 18 Animate Cluttered Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

69

5 19 Inanimate Minimal Sapato First um/UM sapato/CN dentro/LPREP1 de_/LPREP2 a/DA caixa/CN

5 21 Animate Minimal Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN outra/OTR mulher/CNestá/V em/PREP pé/CN

5 25 Animate Minimal Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

5 27 Inanimate Minimal Sapato Both duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREP um/UMquarto/CN um/UM sapato/CN em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN e/CJ outro/OTR em_/PREP a/DAcaixa/CN de/PREP sapatos/CN

5 29 Animate Minimal Mulher First estão/V duas/CARD raparigas/CN em_/PREPo/DA seu/POSS quarto/CN e/CJ uma/UM de_/PREP as/DA mulheres/CN tem/V um/UM té-nis/CN a_/PREP o/DA seu/POSS lado/CN

5 30 Animate Cluttered Mulher First são/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRS sentada/PPA em_/PREPuma/UM cama/CN tem/V uma/UM caminha/CN pequenina/ADJ com/PREP um/UMursinho/CN de/PREP peluche/CN e/CJ uma/UM sapatilha/CN perdida/PPA em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN

6 2 Animate Minimal Criança First uma/UM criança/CN a/PREP dormir/INF em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

6 3 Animate Cluttered Criança Both são/V duas/CARD crianças/CN uma/UM cri-ança/CN está/V a/PREP dormir/INF e/CJoutra/OTR está/V com/PREP dois/CARD brin-quedos/CN um/UM em/PREP cada/QNT mão/CN

6 4 Inanimate Minimal Toalha First estão/V duas/CARD crianças/CN em_/PREPum/UM quarto/CN uma/UM em/PREP pé/CNe/CJ outra/OTR em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ há/V uma/UM toalha/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN dobrada/PPA

6 8 Inanimate Minimal Toalha Both há/V uma/UM toalha/CN amarela/ADJ em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM cama/CNe/CJ outra/OTR toalha/CN amarela/ADJ em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP um/UM cesto/CN e/CJ dois/CARD bebés/CN um/UM de_/PREPeles/PRS está/V a/PREP dormir/INF e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR está/V a/PREP brincar/INFcom/PREP alguma/QNT coisa/CN

6 10 Animate Minimal Criança First está/V uma/UM criança/CN a/PREP dormir/

70

INF

6 11 Animate Cluttered Criança Both em_/PREP um/UM quarto/CN encontram/V -se/CL duas/CARD crianças/CN uma/UMdeitada/CN em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJuma/UM em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN

6 12 Inanimate Minimal Toalha Both duas/CARD crianças/CN estão/V em_/PREPum/UM quarto/CN uma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRS está/V deitada/PPA em_/PREP a/DAcama/CN de/PREP olhos/CN fechados/PPAa_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP ela/PRSestá/V uma/UM toalha/CN dobrada/PPA outra/OTR criança/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA pé/CNde_/PREP a/DA cama/CN de/PREP pé/CN e/CJ em_/PREP o/DA canto/CN de_/PREP a/DA divisão/CN há/V uma/UM outra/OTRtoalha/CN dobrada/PPA em/PREP cima/CNde/PREP um/UM de/PREP uma/UM peça/CNde/PREP mobiliário/CN

6 13 Inanimate Cluttered Toalha Both em_/PREP a/DA imagem/CN estão/V duas/CARD crianças/CN em_/PREP um/UMquarto/CN desarrumado/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN está/V uma/UMtoalha/CN amarela/ADJ e/CJ de_/PREP o/DAoutro/OTR lado/CN de_/PREP o/DA quarto/CN está/V outra/OTR toalha/CN por/PREPcima/CN de/PREP um/UM uk/UK de/PREPmadeira/CN

6 14 Animate Minimal Criança Both está/V uma/UM criança/CN deitada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cama/CN e/CJ outra/OTR de/PREP pé/CN a/PREP brincar/INF

6 15 Animate Cluttered Criança First a/DA criança/CN está/V a/PREP dormir/INF

6 16 Inanimate Minimal Toalha Second uma/UM toalha/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP um/UM cesto/CN

6 17 Inanimate Cluttered Toalha Both em_/PREP este/DEM quarto/CN estão/V dois/CARD bebés/CN um/UM está/V deitado/PPAem_/PREP uma/UM cama/CN e/CJ tem/Vuma/UM toalha/CN dobrada/PPA amarela/ADJ e/CJ outra/OTR toalha/CN dobrada/PPAque/REL está/V em/PREP cima/CN de/PREPuma/UM mesa/CN

6 18 Animate Minimal Criança First a/DA criança/CN está/V a/PREP dormir/INF

6 19 Animate Cluttered Criança First uma/UM criança/CN a/PREP dormir/INF em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

71

6 21 Inanimate Cluttered Toalha First está/V uma/UM toalha/CN em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

6 25 Inanimate Cluttered Toalha Both existe/V uma/UM toalha/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN uma/UM toalha/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP o/DA cesto/CN

6 26 Animate Minimal Criança First a/DA criança/CN está/V a/PREP dormir/INFem_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

6 27 Animate Cluttered Criança Both uma/UM criança/CN a/PREP dormir/INF em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN enquanto/CJ outra/OTRestá/V de/PREP pé/CN a/PREP mexer/INFem/PREP dois/CARD objetos/CN desfocados/PPA parece/V que/CJ uma/UM criança/CNtem/V um/UM rasgão/CN em_/PREP as/DAcalças/CN

6 28 Inanimate Minimal Toalha First a/DA toalha/CN está/V dobrada/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

6 29 Inanimate Cluttered Toalha First está/V a/DA toalha/CN amarela/ADJ em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CNonde/REL está/V a/PREP dormir/INF o/DAmenino/CN

6 30 Animate Minimal Criança Both é/V um/UM quarto/CN está/V uma/UM cri-ança/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DAcama/CN a/PREP dormir/INF e/CJ outra/OTRde/PREP pé/CN

7 1 Inanimate Minimal Telemóvel First um/UM senhor/CN a/PREP ler/INF o/DA jor-nal/CN e/CJ outro/OTR senhor/CN deitado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN perto/ADVde_/PREP o/DA telemóvel/CN

7 2 Inanimate Cluttered Telemóvel First dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM está/Vdeitado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP o/DA telemóvel/CN

7 3 Animate Minimal Homem First está/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP dormir/INFcom/PREP o/DA telemóvel/CN perto/ADVde_/PREP ele/PRS

7 4 Animate Cluttered Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN deitado/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cama/CN com/PREP um/UMtelemóvel/CN e/CJ com/PREP um/UM uma/UM mala/CN de/PREP roupa/CN e/CJ está/Voutro/OTR homem/CN levantado/PPA a/PREPler/INF qualquer/QNT coisa/CN

72

7 8 Animate Cluttered Homem Both há/V um/UM homem/CN deitado/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cama/CN há/V outro/OTRhomem/CN em/PREP pé/CN a/PREP ler/INFum/UM jornal/CN e/CJ parecem/V estar/INFem_/PREP um/UM quarto/CN há/V uma/UMtelevisão/CN ligada/PPA

7 10 Inanimate Cluttered Telemóvel First Os/DA senhores/CN a/PREP mexer/INF com/PREP o/DA telemóvel/CN em_/PREP a/DAmão/CN

7 11 Animate Minimal Homem Both em_/PREP um/UM quarto/CN encontram/V -se/CL dois/CARD homens/CN um/UMdeitado/PPA e/CJ outro/OTR em/PREP pé/CN

7 12 Animate Cluttered Homem Both um/UM homem/CN está/V em_/PREP um/UMquarto/CN está/V deitado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ há/V outro/OTR homem/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP ele/PRS a/DA olhar/INF para/PREP um/UM jor-nal/CN e/CJ tem/V uma/UM mala/CN com/PREP roupa/CN lá/ADV dentro/ADV e/CJuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN por/PREP trás/ADV

7 13 Inanimate Minimal Telemóvel Both estas/DEM pessoas/CN estão/V dentro/ADVde/PREP um/UM quarto/CN está/V um/UMsenhor/CN deitado/PPA em_/PREP a/DAcama/CN a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP o/DA senhor/CN está/V um/UM telemóvel/CNpor/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP as/DA almo-fadas/CN uk/UK um/UM telemóvel/CN a/PREP carregar/INF

7 14 Inanimate Cluttered Telemóvel First está/V um/UM homem/CN deitado/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cama/CN e/CJ a_/PREP o/DAseu/POSS lado/CN está/V um/UM telemóvel/CN preto/ADJ e/CJ outro/OTR aparente-mente/ADV está/V a/PREP ler/INF o/DA jor-nal/CN

7 15 Animate Minimal Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V deitado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

7 16 Animate Cluttered Homem First um/UM homem/CN em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

7 17 Inanimate Minimal Telemóvel Both em_/PREP este/DEM quarto/CN um/UMhomem/CN está/V deitado/PPA em_/PREPuma/UM cama/CN a/PREP dormir/INF e/CJa_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP ele/PRStem/V um/UM telemóvel/CN também/ADVestá/V outro/OTR telemóvel/CN em_/PREP

73

um/UM suporte/CN colado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA parede/CN perto/ADV de_/PREP a/DAcama/CN

7 18 Inanimate Cluttered Telemóvel First o/DA telemóvel/CN está/V em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

7 19 Animate Minimal Homem First um/UM homem/CN deitado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

7 20 Animate Cluttered Homem First o/DA homem/CN a/PREP dormir/INF

7 21 Inanimate Minimal Telemóvel First está/V um/UM telemóvel/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

7 23 Animate Minimal Homem First há/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP dormir/INF

7 26 Inanimate Cluttered Telemóvel First o/DA telemóvel/CN está/V em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

7 27 Animate Minimal Homem Both um/UM homem/CN deitado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ outro/OTR em/PREP pé/CN a/PREP ler/INF o/DA jornal/CN

7 28 Animate Cluttered Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V deitado/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

7 29 Inanimate Minimal Telemóvel First o/DA homem/CN que/REL está/V deitado/PPAem_/PREP a/DA cama/CN está/V a/DA olhar/INF para/PREP o/DA seu/POSS telemóvel/CN

7 30 Inanimate Cluttered Telemóvel First um/UM senhor/CN está/V deitado/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cama/CN com/PREP os/DAsapatos/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA almofada/CN quase/ADV com/PREP um/UM telemóvel/CN aberto/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ está/V o/DA senhor/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP ele/PRS a/PREP ler/INF um/UMcaderno/CN uma/UM folha/CN e/CJ tem/Vuma/UM casa-de-banho/CN em_/PREP o/DAfundo/CN

8 1 Animate Cluttered Menina Both uma/UM menina/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREPa/DA cama/CN com/PREP um/UM peluche/CN e/CJ outra/OTR menina/CN em/PREP pé/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP a/DAcama/CN

8 2 Inanimate Minimal Peluche First é/V uma/UM menina/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cama/CN agarrada/PPA a_/PREPo/DA peluche/CN

8 3 Inanimate Cluttered Peluche First está/V uma/UM criança/CN em/PREP cima/

74

CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN a/PREP segu-rar/INF o/DA peluche/CN

8 4 Animate Minimal Menina Both está/V uma/UM menina/CN em_/PREP uma/UM cama/CN a/PREP segurar/INF em_/PREPo/DA urso/CN e/CJ está/V outra/OTR em/PREP pé/CN a/PREP olhar/INF para/PREP a/DA outra/OTR menina/CN

8 8 Animate Minimal Menina Both uk/UK uma/UM menina/CN a/PREP abraçar/INF um/UM peluche/CN está/V em/PREPcima/CN de/PREP uma/UM cama/CN ela/PRS está/V a/PREP sorrir/INF e/CJ há/Voutro/OTR peluche/CN em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN encostado/PPA a_/PREP a/DA cama/CNe/CJ em_/PREP esse/DEM uk/UK há/V outra/OTR menina/CN a/PREP fazer/INF algum/QNT gesto/CN para/PREP a/DA outra/OTRmenina/CN

8 10 Inanimate Minimal Peluche First a/DA menina/CN está/V feliz/ADJ com/PREPo/DA peluche/CN

8 11 Inanimate Cluttered Peluche Both em_/PREP um/UM quarto/CN encontram/V -se/CL duas/CARD crianças/CN a/PREP brin-car/INF uma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRS tem/Vum/UM peluche/CN a_/PREP a/DA ponta/CNde_/PREP a/DA cama/CN encontra/V -se/CLoutro/OTR peluche/CN e/CJ a_/PREP a/DAfrente/CN de_/PREP a/DA outra/OTR criança/CN vários/QNT brinquedos/CN

8 12 Animate Minimal Menina Both uma/UM menina/CN está/V sentada/PPAem_/PREP uma/UM cama/CN e/CJ está/V a/PREP abraçar/INF um/UM peluche/CN e/CJhá/V uma/UM outra/OTR menina/CN de/PREP pé/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

8 13 Animate Cluttered Menina Both estão/V duas/CARD meninas/CN em_/PREPum/UM quarto/CN está/V uma/UM menina/CNem/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CNcom/PREP um/UM urso/CN e/CJ está/V outra/OTR menina/CN de/PREP pé/CN de/PREPfrente/CN para/PREP a/DA cama/CN com/PREP um/UM vestido/CN de/PREP dormir/INF branco/ADJ com/PREP pintinhas/CN

8 14 Inanimate Minimal Peluche Both em_/PREP um/UM quarto/CN estão/V duas/CARD crianças/CN uma/UM de_/PREP ela/PRS está/V sentada/PPA de_/PREP elas/PRSestá/V sentada/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de/

75

PREP uma/UM cama/CN agarrada/PPA a/PREP um/UM peluche/CN e/CJ tem/V e/CJtem/V outro/OTR peluche/CN em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN perto/ADV de_/PREP a/DAcama/CN

8 15 Inanimate Cluttered Peluche First a/DA criança/CN tem/V um/UM peluche/CN

8 16 Animate Minimal Menina Second uma/UM menina/CN com/PREP um/UMpeluche/CN

8 17 Animate Cluttered Menina Both em_/PREP este/DEM quarto/CN está/V uma/UM menina/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cama/CN com/PREP um/UM peluche/CNe/CJ outra/OTR está/V em/PREP pé/CN fora/ADV de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN o/DA quarto/CN está/V desarrumado/PPA com/PREP brin-quedos/CN

8 18 Inanimate Minimal Peluche First o/DA peluche/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA colo/CN de_/PREP a/DA menina/CN

8 19 Inanimate Cluttered Peluche First uma/UM menina/CN a/PREP segurar/INF o/DA peluche/CN

8 20 Animate Minimal Menina Second uma/UM menina/CN agarrada/PPA a/PREPum/UM boneco/CN

8 21 Animate Cluttered Menina Both uma/UM menina/CN está/V sentada/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM cama/CNa/PREP outra/OTR menina/CN está/V a/PREP olhar/INF para/PREP ela/PRS

8 23 Inanimate Cluttered Peluche First a/DA criança/CN está/V a/PREP abraçar/INFum/UM peluche/CN

8 25 Animate Cluttered Menina Second a/DA menina/CN está/V a/PREP abraçar/INFo/DA seu/POSS peluche/CN

8 26 Inanimate Minimal Peluche Second o/DA peluche/CN está/V em_/PREP o/DAchão/CN

8 27 Inanimate Cluttered Peluche Both uma/UM rapariga/CN a/PREP segurar/INFem_/PREP um/UM peluche/CN e/CJ outro/OTR peluche/CN em_/PREP o/DA chão/CNa_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP a/DA cama/CN

8 28 Animate Minimal Menina Second a/DA menina/CN está/V em_/PREP a/DAcama/CN

8 29 Animate Cluttered Menina Both há/V uma/UM menina/CN muito/ADV sorri-dente/ADJ e/CJ outra/OTR que/REL está/Vpreocupada/PPA a/PREP olhar/INF para/

76

PREP ela/PRS

8 30 Inanimate Minimal Peluche Both é/V um/UM quarto/CN com/PREP duas/CARDmeninas/CN uma/CARD de/PREP pé/CNjunto/ADV a_/PREP a/DA cama/CN e/CJ a/DAoutra/OTR sentada/PPA em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA cama/CN com/PREP um/UMpeluche/CN abraçada/PPA a_/PREP o/DApeluche/CN e/CJ vê/V -se/CL também/ADVum/UM ursinho/CN em_/PREP o/DA chão/CNa_/PREP os/DA pés/CN de_/PREP a/DAcama/CN um/UM ursinho/CN de/PREPpeluche/CN

9 2 Animate Cluttered Homem First é/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP servir/INF o/DA jantar/CN

9 3 Inanimate Minimal Empadão First um/UM homem/CN está/V a/PREP servir/INFo/DA empadão/CN

9 4 Inanimate Cluttered Empadão First está/V uma/UM mesa/CN posta/PPA e/CJ um/UM homem/CN a/PREP retirar/INF um/UMempadão/CN está/V outro/OTR senhor/CNa_/PREP o/DA seu/POSS lado/CN a/PREPsegurar/INF um/UM copo/CN

9 8 Inanimate Cluttered Empadão Both há/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP tirar/INF um/UM empadão/CN de_/PREP uma/UM taça/CNparece/V estar/INF em_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN de/PREP jantar/CN e/CJ esse/DEMhomem/CN tem/V um/UM pano/CN pousado/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP o/DA om-bro/CN parece/V um/UM empregado/CN de/PREP mesa/CN e/CJ há/V outro/OTRhomem/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN com/PREP um/UM copo/CN de/PREP vinho/CNem_/PREP a/DA mão/CN há/V também/ADVum/UM empadão/CN atrás/ADV de_/PREP o/DA homem/CN que/REL tem/V um/UM pano/CN em_/PREP o/DA ombro/CN

9 11 Inanimate Minimal Empadão First em_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN encontram/V -se/CL dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM a/PREP beber/INF e/CJ outro/OTR a/PREPcomer/INF empadão/CN

9 12 Inanimate Cluttered Empadão First um/UM senhor/CN está/V a/PREP servir/INFcomida/CN em_/PREP uma/UM mesa/CNpossivelmente/ADV há/V um/UM homem/CNque/REL está/V a_/PREP a/DA direita/CN a/DA comida/CN parece/V -me/CL empadão/CNe/CJ a/DA mesa/CN está/V decorada/PPA

77

está/V posta/PPA de/PREP uma/UM maneira/CN muito/ADV uk/UK

9 13 Animate Minimal Homem Both a/DA imagem/CN mostra/V dois/CARDhomens/CN em_/PREP a/DA sala/CN um/UMhomem/CN está/V a/PREP servir/INF a/DAcomida/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR homem/CNestá/V de/PREP pé/CN com/PREP um/UMcopo/CN de/PREP vinho/CN em_/PREP a/DAmão/CN

9 14 Animate Cluttered Homem Both em_/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN de/PREP jan-tar/CN estão/V dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM homem/CN está/V segurando/GER em_/PREP um/UM copo/CN e/CJ outro/OTR está/V a/PREP servir/INF o/DA jantar/CN

9 15 Inanimate Minimal Empadão First o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP servir/INFempadão/CN

9 16 Inanimate Cluttered Empadão First um/UM homem/CN a/PREP servir/INF em-padão/CN

9 17 Animate Minimal Homem Both em_/PREP esta/DEM sala/CN estão/V dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM tem/V um/UMcopo/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN e/CJoutro/OTR serve/V em_/PREP a/DA uma/UMcomida/CN que/REL está/V em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN com/PREPuma/UM toalha/CN branca/ADJ

9 18 Animate Cluttered Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP servir/INF

9 19 Inanimate Minimal Empadão First uma/UM pessoa/CN a/PREP servir/INF o/DAempadão/CN

9 20 Inanimate Cluttered Empadão First um/UM homem/CN a/PREP servir/INF em-padão/CN

9 21 Animate Minimal Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN com/PREP um/UMcopo/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN e/CJ um/UM homem/CN com/PREP um/UM prato/CN

9 23 Inanimate Minimal Empadão First o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP mexer/INFem_/PREP o/DA empadão/CN

9 25 Animate Minimal Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP desenformar/INF a/DA comida/CN

9 26 Animate Cluttered Homem First o/DA homem/CN esteve/V a/PREP cozinhar/INF

9 27 Inanimate Minimal Empadão First um/UM homem/CN a/PREP comer/INF em-padão/CN enquanto/CJ o/DA outro/OTR

78

bebe/V água/CN talvez/ADV

9 29 Animate Minimal Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP servir/INFlasanha/CN a/DA outro/OTR homem/CN

9 30 Animate Cluttered Homem Both um/UM homem/CN a_/PREP a/DA mesa/CNa/PREP servir/INF -se/CL de/PREP lasanha/ADJ e/CJ outro/OTR a_/PREP o/DA seu/POSS lado/CN com/PREP um/UM copo/CNde/PREP vinho/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN

10 1 Inanimate Cluttered Sumo First duas/CARD mulheres/CN a_/PREP a/DAmesa/CN uma/UM a/PREP tomar/INF o/DApequeno-almoço/CN a/PREP beber/INF um/UM copo/CN de/PREP sumo/CN

10 2 Animate Minimal Mulher Both há/V uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA a_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN e/CJ outra/OTR uk/UKa_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP ela/PRS

10 3 Animate Cluttered Mulher First está/V uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP tomar/INFo/DA pequeno-almoço/CN

10 4 Inanimate Minimal Sumo Both está/V uma/UM senhora/CN sentada/PPAcom/PREP um/UM copo/CN de/PREP sumo/CN a_/PREP a/DA frente/CN há/V outro/OTRcopo/CN de/PREP sumo/CN em_/PREP a/DAbancada/CN e/CJ está/V outra/OTR senhora/CN idosa/ADJ levantada/PPA

10 8 Inanimate Minimal Sumo Both uma/UM mulher/CN tem/V um/UM sumo/CNpousado/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREPa/DA mesa/CN há/V outra/OTR mulher/CNque/REL olha/V para/PREP essa/DEM mul-her/CN e/CJ tem/V também/ADV um/UMcopo/CN de/PREP sumo/CN atrás/ADV

10 10 Animate Minimal Mulher First uma/UM mulher/CN está/V a/PREP tomar/INFo/DA pequeno-almoço/CN

10 11 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both em_/PREP um/UM quarto/CN encontra/V -se/CL duas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/CARD em/PREP pé/CN e/CJ outra/OTR sentada/PPA a/PREP tomar/INF o/DA pequeno-almoço/CN

10 12 Inanimate Minimal Sumo Both uma/UM mulher/CN está/V sentada/PPA a_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN com/PREP um/UMsumo/CN a_/PREP a/DA frente/CN e/CJ há/Vuma/UM outra/OTR senhora/CN que/RELestá/V de/PREP pé/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN e/CJ atrás/ADVhá/V uma/UM bancada/CN há/V outro/OTR

79

copo/CN de/PREP sumo/CN

10 13 Inanimate Cluttered Sumo Both estão/V duas/CARD senhoras/CN em_/PREPum/UM café/CN tem/V uma/UM senhora/CNque/REL está/V sentada/PPA em_/PREP a/DAcozinha/CN de_/PREP a/DA sua/POSS casa/CN a_/PREP a/DA frente/CN a/DA mulher/CNtem/V um/UM copo/CN de/PREP sumo/CNatrás/ADV de_/PREP a/DA senhora/CN que/REL está/V de/PREP pé/CN também/ADVtem/V outro/OTR copo/CN de/PREP sumo/CNatrás/ADV de_/PREP o/DA copo/CN de/PREPsumo/CN tem/V um/UM hamburger/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN tem/V uma/UM garrafa/CN de/PREP azeite/CN

10 14 Animate Minimal Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA a/PREP tomar/INF um/UM sumo/CN e/CJ outra/OTR de/PREP pé/CN com/PREP um/UMlivro/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN

10 15 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both a/DA mulher/CN está/V com/PREP a/DA sua/POSS mãe/CN

10 17 Inanimate Cluttered Sumo First uma/UM senhora/CN toma/V pequeno-al-moço/CN e/CJ bebe/V um/UM sumo/CNoutra/OTR senhora/CN está/V em/PREP pé/CN e/CJ olha/V para/PREP ali/ADV

10 18 Animate Minimal Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V sentada/PPA a_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

10 19 Animate Cluttered Mulher First uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP comer/INF

10 20 Inanimate Minimal Sumo First uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP beber/INF sumo/CN

10 21 Inanimate Cluttered Sumo First está/V um/UM sumo/CN em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

10 23 Animate Cluttered Mulher First está/V uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP comer/INF

10 26 Animate Minimal Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP almoçar/INF

10 27 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP comer/INF o/DApequeno-almoço/CN a/PREP sorrir/INF com/PREP dois/CARD sacos/CN de/PREP lixo/CNatrás/ADV de_/PREP ela/PRS e/CJ uma/UMsenhora/CN mais/ADV velha/ADJ em_/PREPa/DA sala/CN também/ADV

10 29 Inanimate Cluttered Sumo First esta/DEM senhora/CN está/V a/PREP beber/

80

INF um/UM belo/ADJ sumo/CN de/PREPlaranja/ADJ a_/PREP o/DA pequeno-almoço/CN

10 30 Animate Minimal Mulher Both são/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN a_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN uma/UM sentada/PPA e/CJoutra/OTR de/PREP pé/CN com/PREP sumo/CN de/PREP laranja/ADJ a/PREP beberem/INF sumo/CN de/PREP laranja/ADJ

11 3 Animate Minimal Homem First um/UM homem/CN de_/PREP o/DA exército/CN está/V a/PREP escrever/INF em_/PREPuma/UM folha/CN

11 4 Animate Cluttered Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREP um/UM sofá/CN a/PREP escrever/INFe/CJ outro/OTR a_/PREP o/DA seu/POSSlado/CN a/PREP beber/INF qualquer/QNTcoisa/CN ou/CJ a/PREP ler/INF

11 8 Animate Cluttered Homem Both um/UM homem/CN escreve/V sentado/PPAem_/PREP o/DA sofá/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN tem/V outro/OTR homem/CN com/PREPalguma/QNT coisa/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN a_/PREP a/DA volta/CN está/V livros/CNuma/UM cama/CN e/CJ uma/UM janela/CNuma/UM mesinha/CN de/PREP cabeceira/CNparece/V um/UM quarto/ORD sala/CN

11 12 Animate Cluttered Homem First dois/CARD homens/CN estão/V em_/PREPuma/UM divisão/CN sentados/PPA em_/PREPum/UM sofá/CN um/UM de_/PREP eles/PRSestá/V com/PREP um/UM uma/UM uk/UK e/CJ está/V a/PREP escrever/INF qualquer/QNT coisa/CN apoiando/GER -se/CL em_/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN e/CJ a_/PREP o/DAlado/CN de_/PREP eles/PRS há/V uma/UMestante/CN com/PREP muitos/QNT livros/CNhá/V inclusive/ADV um/UM livro/CN em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN

11 14 Inanimate Cluttered Caderno First em_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN estão/V dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM de_/PREP eles/PRS está/V a/PREP escrever/INF em_/PREPum/UM caderno/CN

11 16 Animate Cluttered Homem Both um/UM homem/CN com/PREP o/DA pai/CN

11 20 Animate Cluttered Homem First um/UM homem/CN a/PREP escrever/INF

11 25 Inanimate Minimal Caderno First o/DA militar/CN está/V a/PREP escrever/INFem_/PREP um/UM caderno/CN

81

11 29 Inanimate Minimal Caderno First um/UM senhor/CN está/V a/PREP escrever/INF apontamentos/CN em_/PREP o/DAcaderno/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

11 30 Inanimate Cluttered Caderno Both dois/CARD militares/CN mas/CJ um/UM já/ADV deve/V ser/INF reformado/PPA porque/CJ é/V muito/ADV velhote/ADJ e/CJ um/UMde_/PREP eles/PRS está/V a/PREP escrever/INF em_/PREP um/UM caderno/CN

12 1 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both um/UM senhor/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREPuma/UM cadeira/CN e/CJ uma/UM senhora/CN uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN

12 4 Animate Minimal Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA a/PREP falar/INF a_/PREP o/DA telemóvel/CNem_/PREP uma/UM poltrona/CN e/CJ outra/OTR mulher/CN em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN a/PREP olhar/INF para/PREP a/DAlareira/CN

12 8 Animate Minimal Mulher Both há/V uma/UM mulher/CN em_/PREP um/UMsofá/CN e/CJ há/V outra/OTR mulher/CNem_/PREP outro/OTR sofá/CN com/PREP o/DA telemóvel/CN parece/V estar/INF a/PREPfalar/INF a_/PREP o/DA telemóvel/CN e/CJhá/V uma/UM lareira/CN e/CJ parece/V ser/INF uma/UM sala/CN e/CJ uk/UK

12 12 Animate Minimal Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN está/V em_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN assim/LCJ1 como/LCJ2 uma/UM outra/OTR pessoa/CN com/PREP os/DApés/CN apoiados/PPA e/CJ a/DA divisão/CNnão/ADV tem/V quase/ADV uk/UK

12 13 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both são/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREP a/DA sala/CN de/PREP estar/INF tem/V uma/UM mulher/CN as/DA duas/CARD mulheres/CN estão/V sentadas/PPA tem/V uma/UMmulher/CN mais/ADV velha/ADJ que/RELestá/V colada/PPA a_/PREP o/DA telemóvel/CN está/V sentada/PPA a_/PREP o/DA sofá/CN e/CJ com/PREP os/DA pés/CN esticados/PPA a/DA segunda/ORD mulher/CN também/ADV está/V sentada/PPA mesmo/ADV em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN com/PREP as/DApernas/CN cruzadas/PPA e/CJ com/PREPum/UM vestido/CN preto/ADJ e/CJ rosa/ADJ

82

12 14 Inanimate Minimal Caneta First em_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRS está/V sentada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UMpoltrona/CN e/CJ a_/PREP a/DA sua/POSSesquerda/CN tem/V uma/UM caneta/CN e/CJoutra/OTR está/V sentada/PPA em_/PREPoutra/OTR poltrona/CN

12 15 Inanimate Cluttered Sumo Second o/DA sumo/CN está/V em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

12 16 Animate Minimal Mulher First uma/UM mulher/CN a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN

12 19 Inanimate Cluttered Sumo Second sumo/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DAmesa/CN

12 20 Animate Minimal Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA e/CJ outra/OTR deitada/CN

12 21 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN outra/OTR mulher/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UMpoltrona/CN

12 25 Animate Cluttered Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V sentada/PPA em_/PREP um/UM sofá/CN

12 26 Inanimate Minimal Caneta First a/DA caneta/CN está/V em_/PREP o/DA sofá/CN

12 29 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN está/V a/PREP falar/INFa_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN em_/PREP a/DAsala/CN enquanto/CJ outra/OTR está/V a/PREP pensar/INF

12 30 Inanimate Minimal Caneta Both é/V um/UM quarto/CN estão/V duas/CARDsenhoras/CN sentadas/PPA uma/UM com/PREP a/DA falar/INF a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN e/CJ com/PREP as/DA pernas/CN esti-cadas/PPA e/CJ tem/V uma/UM caneta/CNem_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN de_/PREP o/DAsofá/CN e/CJ mais/ADV a_/PREP a/DA frente/CN tem/V também/ADV um/UM banquinho/CN com/PREP outra/OTR caneta/CN em/PREP cima/CN

13 3 Inanimate Minimal Candeeiro First está/V um/UM candeeiro/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA cabeceira/CN a_/PREPo/DA pé/CN de_/PREP o/DA homem/CN

13 8 Inanimate Cluttered Candeeiro First uma/UM espécie/CN de/PREP uma/UM loja/CN de/PREP antiguidades/CN tem/V um/UM

83

candeeiro/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN

13 11 Inanimate Minimal Candeeiro Both em_/PREP o/DA hotel/CN encontra/V -se/CLduas/CARD pessoas/CN a_/PREP o/DA bal-cão/CN e/CJ de_/PREP o/DA lado/CN es-querdo/ADJ de_/PREP o/DA de_/PREP os/DAhomens/CN que/REL está/V a_/PREP a/DAfrente/CN encontra/V -se/CL um/UM can-deeiro/CN mais/ADV a_/PREP a/DA direita/CN encontra/V -se/CL um/UM candeeiro/CNem/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN com/PREP duas/CARD cadeiras/CN

13 12 Inanimate Cluttered Candeeiro First dois/CARD homens/CN estão/V dentro/ADVde/PREP uma/UM casa/CN e/CJ a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP eles/PRS há/V uma/UMcómoda/CN com/PREP um/UM candeeiro/CNe/CJ em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP eles/PRShá/V também/ADV candeeiros/CN

13 13 Animate Minimal Homem Both temos/V dois/CARD homens/CN um/UMhomem/CN com/PREP uma/UM camisa/CNuma/UM camisola/CN rosa/ADJ e/CJ outro/OTR homem/CN mais/ADV velho/ADJ a/PREP falar/INF com/PREP o/DA homem/CNmais/ADV novo/ADJ o/DA homem/CN mais/ADV novo/ADJ está/V atrás/ADV de_/PREPo/DA balcão/CN a_/PREP a/DA frente/CNde_/PREP o/DA outro/OTR homem/CN tem/Vuma/UM secretária/CN com/PREP um/UMcandeeiro/CN em/PREP cima/CN

13 14 Animate Cluttered Homem Second em_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN estão/V dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM de_/PREP esses/DEM um/CARD de_/PREP esses/DEMhomens/CN está/V a/PREP ler/INF um/UMpapel/CN

13 15 Inanimate Minimal Candeeiro First candeeiro/CN está/V em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN de/PREP cabeceira/CN

13 17 Animate Minimal Homem Both um/UM homem/CN está/V atrás/ADV de/PREP um/UM balcão/CN a/PREP receber/INFoutro/OTR homem/CN

13 18 Animate Cluttered Homem Second o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP pedir/INF in-dicações/CN

13 19 Inanimate Minimal Candeeiro Second um/UM candeeiro/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

13 25 Animate Minimal Homem Second o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP fazer/INF

84

check-in/CN em_/PREP o/DA hotel/CN

13 26 Animate Cluttered Homem Second o/DA homem/CN pediu/V informações/CNem_/PREP o/DA hotel/CN

13 29 Animate Minimal Homem Both este/DEM homem/CN está/V a/PREP mostrar/INF algo/IND a_/PREP o/DA senhor/CN de_/PREP a/DA receção/CN

13 30 Animate Cluttered Homem Both parece/V também/ADV ser/INF uma/UM re-ceção/CN de/PREP um/UM hotel/CN tem/Vduas/CARD dois/CARD homens/CN a_/PREPo/DA balcão/CN um/UM atrás/ADV de_/PREPo/DA balcão/CN e/CJ outro/OTR homem/CNcom/PREP um/UM papel/CN em_/PREP a/DAmão/CN a/PREP ler/INF

14 2 Animate Minimal Homem Second tem/V um/UM homem/CN rececionista/ADJ

14 3 Animate Cluttered Homem First está/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP escrever/INF em_/PREP a/DA papelada/CN

14 4 Inanimate Minimal Mala Both está/V um/UM senhor/CN com/PREP uma/UMmala/CN a/PREP assinar/INF qualquer/QNTcoisa/CN em_/PREP um/UM balcão/CN está/V outro/OTR senhor/CN atrás/ADV de_/PREPo/DA balcão/CN e/CJ há/V outra/OTR mala/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP esse/DEMbalcão/CN eles/PRS estão/V em_/PREP um/UM hotel/CN

14 8 Inanimate Minimal Mala Both há/V uma/UM mala/CN pousada/PPA em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP o/DA balcão/CNum/UM homem/CN de/PREP fato/CN a/PREPolhar/INF de/PREP frente/CN há/V outro/OTRa_/PREP o/DA lado/CN a/PREP escrever/INFe/CJ também/ADV tem/V uma/UM mala/CNpousada/PPA em_/PREP o/DA fundo/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP os/DA pés/CN

14 10 Animate Minimal Homem Second está/V um/UM homem/CN em_/PREP a/DAreceção/CN

14 12 Inanimate Minimal Mala Both um/UM homem/CN está/V de/PREP fato/CNatrás/ADV de/PREP um/UM balcão/CN a_/PREP a/DA esquerda/CN de_/PREP ele/PRShá/V uma/UM mala/CN em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN e/CJ a_/PREP a/DA direita/CN de_/PREP ele/PRS há/V um/UM homem/CN de/PREP pé/CN que/REL se/CL apoia/V em_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN e/CJescreve/V qualquer/QNT coisa/CN a_/PREPos/DA pés/CN de_/PREP este/DEM último/

85

ADJ homem/CN está/V uma/UM mala/CNtambém/ADV

14 13 Inanimate Cluttered Mala Both em_/PREP a/DA imagem/CN vê/V -se/CLduas/CARD malas/CN uma/UM mala/CNestá/V a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN aqui/ADV de_/PREP o/DA senhor/CN que/REL está/V a/PREP fazer/INF o/DA registo/CN de_/PREP o/DA hotel/CN e/CJ a/DA outra/OTR mala/CNestá/V lá/ADV a_/PREP a/DA frente/CN de_/PREP o/DA rececionista/CN

14 14 Animate Minimal Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA a_/PREP a/DA receção/CN e/CJ outro/OTR a/PREP assinar/INF um/UM papel/CN cada/LADV1 um/LADV2 de_/PREP eles/PRS tem/Vuma/UM mala/CN

14 15 Animate Cluttered Homem Second um/UM homem/CN está/V atrás/ADV de_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN

14 16 Inanimate Minimal Mala Second uma/UM mala/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP um/UM balcão/CN

14 17 Inanimate Cluttered Mala Both em_/PREP este/DEM hotel/CN está/V um/UMhomem/CN a/PREP escrever/INF em_/PREPum/UM papel/CN e/CJ tem/V uma/UM mala/CN a_/PREP o/DA seu/POSS lado/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP o/DA balcão/CNtem/V outras/OTR outra/OTR mala/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de/PREP um/UM can-deeiro/CN

14 18 Animate Minimal Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP assinar/INFum/UM papel/CN

14 19 Animate Cluttered Homem Second alguém/IND atrás/ADV de_/PREP o/DA bal-cão/CN

14 20 Inanimate Minimal Mala Second uma/UM mala/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

14 21 Inanimate Cluttered Mala Second está/V uma/UM mala/CN em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

14 25 Inanimate Cluttered Mala Second existe/V uma/UM mala/CN em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA receção/CN

14 26 Animate Minimal Homem First o/DA homem/CN assinou/V o/DA documento/CN

14 27 Animate Cluttered Homem Both um/UM homem/CN a/PREP trabalhar/INFcomo/CJ rececionista/CN de/PREP hotel/CN

86

em_/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN cheia/ADJ de/PREP papéis/CN e/CJ outro/OTR homem/CNa/PREP assinar/INF um/UM papel/CN

14 29 Inanimate Cluttered Mala First o/DA senhor/CN pousou/V a/DA sua/POSSmala/CN para/PREP assinar/INF os/DA pa-péis/CN

14 30 Animate Minimal Homem Both é/V um/UM balcão/CN parece/V de/PREP um/UM hotel/CN porque/CJ estão/V duas/CARDmalas/CN estão/V dois/CARD homens/CNem_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN um/CARD que/REL deve/V ser/INF o/DA rececionista/CNporque/CJ está/V de/PREP fato/CN e/CJ o/DAoutro/OTR a/PREP assinar/INF um/UM papel/CN

15 1 Inanimate Minimal Telefone First um/UM senhor/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREPuma/UM cadeira/CN e/CJ outro/OTR senhor/CN em_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN onde/RELestá/V um/UM telefone/CN

15 2 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First uma/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREPa/DA cadeira/CN e/CJ outro/OTR a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de/PREP um/UM telefone/CN

15 3 Animate Minimal Homem Second está/V um/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA

15 4 Animate Cluttered Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN a_/PREP o/DA bal-cão/CN e/CJ outro/OTR sentado/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN a_/PREP a/DA es-pera/CN

15 8 Animate Cluttered Homem Both há/V um/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN a/PREP olhar/INFde/PREP frente/CN parece/V que/CJ está/Vem_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN mas/CJ a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN há/V outro/OTR homem/CN atrás/ADV de/PREP um/UM balcão/CNque/REL parece/V estar/INF em_/PREP um/UM escritório/CN e/CJ há/V telefones/CNpousados/PPA

15 11 Animate Minimal Homem Both em_/PREP um/UM hotel/CN encontram/V -se/CL dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM sentado/PPA e/CJ outro/OTR de_/PREP o/DA outro/OTR lado/CN balcão/CN

15 12 Animate Cluttered Homem Both um/UM homem/CN está/V em_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN e/CJ está/V sentado/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN e/CJ a_/PREP a/DA esquerda/CN de_/PREP ele/PRS está/Vum/UM outro/OTR homem/CN a_/PREP o/DA

87

balcão/CN com/PREP uma/UM t-shirt/CNverde/ADJ

15 13 Inanimate Minimal Telefone Both vejo/V dois/CARD homens/CN em_/PREPuma/UM sala/CN de/PREP espera/CN um/UMtelefone/CN a_/PREP a/DA frente/CN de/PREP um/UM homem/CN em_/PREP o/DAbalcão/CN outro/OTR telefone/CN em_/PREPuma/UM espécie/CN de/PREP mesa/CN está/V a_/PREP a/DA frente/CN de_/PREP o/DAbalcão/CN

15 14 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First em_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN está/V um/UMhomem/CN sentado/PPA e/CJ a_/PREP o/DAseu/POSS lado/CN tem/V outro/OTR homem/CN a_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN perto/ADV de/PREP um/UM telefone/CN

15 15 Animate Minimal Homem Second o/DA homem/CN está/V sentado/PPA

15 16 Animate Cluttered Homem First um/UM homem/CN a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de/PREP um/UM telefone/CN

15 17 Inanimate Minimal Telefone Both esta/DEM sala/CN com/PREP dois/CARDhomens/CN tem/V um/UM telefone/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN e/CJ outro/OTR em/PREP cima/CN de/PREPuma/UM mesa/CN

15 18 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First o/DA telefone/CN está/V em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN

15 19 Animate Minimal Homem Second homem/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREP a/DAcadeira/CN

15 20 Animate Cluttered Homem Second um/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA

15 26 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First o/DA telefone/CN está/V em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN

15 27 Animate Minimal Homem Second um/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREPuma/UM cadeira/CN a_/PREP o/DA pé/CNde/PREP uma/UM receção/CN

15 28 Animate Cluttered Homem Second homem/CN está/V sentado/PPA

15 30 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone Both é/V um/UM uma/UM sala/CN com/PREP um/UM balcão/CN também/ADV parece/V uma/UM receção/CN de/PREP hotel/CN com/PREP um/UM senhor/CN sentado/PPA e/CJoutro/OTR senhor/CN a_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN em/PREP frente/CN a/PREP um/UM tele-fone/CN e/CJ há/V outro/OTR telefone/CN

88

em/PREP frente/CN a_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN em_/PREP uma/UM mesinha/CN mais/ADV pequena/ADJ

16 1 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN a_/PREP o/DA balcão/CNe/CJ outra/OTR mulher/CN a/PREP falar/INFcom/PREP ela/PRS

16 3 Inanimate Cluttered Flores First está/V um/UM jarro/CN de/PREP flores/CNjunto/ADV a_/PREP a/DA taça/CN de/PREPfruta/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DAsecretária/CN de/PREP madeira/CN

16 4 Animate Minimal Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN em_/PREP a/DAreceção/CN e/CJ há/V outra/OTR mulher/CNrececionista/ADJ a/PREP conversar/INF com/PREP essa/DEM senhora/CN

16 8 Animate Minimal Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN de/PREP verde/ADJ e/CJpreto/ADJ tem/V uma/UM mala/CN e/CJ está/V a/PREP comunicar/INF com/PREP outra/OTR mulher/CN atrás/ADV de/PREP um/UMbalcão/CN que/REL parece/V ser/INF rece-cionista/ADJ de/PREP algum/QNT sítio/CN e/CJ há/V umas/IA escadas/CN a_/PREP o/DAlado/CN um/UM uk/UK de/PREP flores/CN e/CJ uma/UM mesa/CN que/CJ uk/UK

16 11 Inanimate Cluttered Flores First em_/PREP um/UM hotel/CN encontra/V -se/CL duas/CARD mulheres/CN a_/PREP o/DAbalcão/CN com/PREP um/UM uma/UM taça/CN com/PREP flores/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN

16 12 Animate Minimal Mulher Both duas/CARD mulheres/CN estão/V em_/PREPuma/UM sala/CN e/CJ uma/UM está/V atrás/ADV de/PREP um/UM balcão/CN e/CJ a/DAoutra/OTR tem/V uma/UM mala/CN e/CJsorri/V para/PREP ela/PRS

16 13 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both vejo/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/UMmulher/CN é/V rececionista/ADJ a/DA outra/OTR mulher/CN está/V a/PREP fazer/INF a/DA reserva/CN a/DA mulher/CN está/V em_/PREP um/UM hotel/CN e/CJ traz/V uma/UMmala/CN uk/UK

16 14 Inanimate Minimal Flores Both tem/V um/UM vaso/CN de/PREP flores/CNem/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CNe/CJ tem/V um/UM vaso/CN de/PREP flores/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP um/UM bal-cão/CN

89

16 15 Inanimate Cluttered Flores First há/V flores/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREPa/DA bancada/CN

16 17 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN está/V atrás/ADV de/PREP um/UM balcão/CN e/CJ outra/OTRmulher/CN chega/V a_/PREP a/DA receção/CN de/PREP um/UM hotel/CN com/PREPquatro/CARD malas/CN

16 18 Inanimate Minimal Flores First as/DA flores/CN estão/V em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

16 19 Inanimate Cluttered Flores Second flores/CN dentro/LPREP1 de/LPREP2 um/UMvaso/CN

16 23 Inanimate Cluttered Flores First há/V um/UM ramo/CN de/PREP flores/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA secretária/CN

16 25 Animate Cluttered Mulher Second a/DA mulher/CN foi/V de/PREP férias/CN

16 26 Inanimate Minimal Flores First a/DA empregada/CN vende/V flores/CN a_/PREP a/DA cliente/CN

16 27 Inanimate Cluttered Flores First um/UM jarro/CN de/PREP flores/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CNem_/PREP uma/UM receção/CN

16 28 Animate Minimal Mulher Second a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP fazer/INF o/DA check-in/CN em_/PREP o/DA hotel/CN

17 2 Animate Cluttered Menino Both é/V um/UM menino/CN e/CJ um/UM bebé/CNem_/PREP a/DA cozinha/CN

17 3 Inanimate Minimal Maçã Second está/V uma/UM maçã/CN em_/PREP um/UMprato/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DAbancada/CN

17 4 Inanimate Cluttered Maçã Both estão/V duas/CARD crianças/CN a/PREPbrincar/INF em_/PREP a/DA cozinha/CN uma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRS tem/V uma/UMmaçã/CN e/CJ há/V outra/OTR maçã/CNem_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN

17 8 Inanimate Cluttered Maçã Both uma/UM cozinha/CN com/PREP crianças/CNe/CJ uma/UM maçã/CN em_/PREP um/UMprato/CN e/CJ em_/PREP um/UM tacho/CN

17 11 Inanimate Minimal Maçã Both em_/PREP uma/UM cozinha/CN encontram/V-se/CL dois/CARD rapazes/CN a/PREP brin-car/INF um/UM de_/PREP eles/PRS tem/Vuma/UM taça/CN com/PREP uma/UM maçã/CN lá/ADV dentro/ADV e/CJ mais/ADV atrás/ADV de_/PREP eles/PRS encontra/V -se/CLoutra/OTR maçã/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/

90

PREP o/DA balcão/CN

17 13 Animate Minimal Menino Both vejo/V um/UM menino/CN loiro/ADJ outro/OTR menino/CN moreno/ADJ está/V em_/PREP a/DA cozinha/CN o/DA menino/CN tem/V um/UM instrumento/CN a_/PREP a/DA sua/POSS frente/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTRmenino/CN tem/V uma/UM taça/CN com/PREP uma/UM maçã/CN entre/PREP as/DApernas/CN

17 14 Animate Cluttered Menino Both em_/PREP uma/UM cozinha/CN estão/V dois/CARD meninos/CN sentados/PPA em_/PREPo/DA chão/CN um/UM mais/ADV pequeno/ADJ e/CJ outro/OTR mais/ADV velho/ADJ a/PREP brincar/INF

17 15 Inanimate Minimal Maçã First o/DA menino/CN está/V a/PREP comer/INF a/DA maçã/CN

17 16 Inanimate Cluttered Maçã Second uma/UM maçã/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN

17 17 Animate Minimal Menino Both em_/PREP a/DA cozinha/CN está/V um/UMmenino/CN sentado/PPA a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP o/DA frigorífico/CN e/CJ tem/Vuma/UM taça/CN com/PREP uma/UM maçã/CN outro/OTR menino/CN toca/V em_/PREPo/DA tambor/CN

17 19 Inanimate Minimal Maçã Second uma/UM maçã/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP um/UM prato/CN

17 20 Inanimate Cluttered Maçã First um/UM menino/CN a/PREP brincar/INF com/PREP a/DA maçã/CN

17 21 Animate Minimal Menino Both um/UM menino/CN está/V a/PREP tocar/INFum/UM instrumento/CN com/PREP baquetas/CN o/DA outro/OTR menino/CN tem/V uma/UM tigela/CN com/PREP uma/UM maçã/CNlá/ADV dentro/ADV

17 23 Inanimate Minimal Maçã First há/V uma/UM maçã/CN em/PREP cima/CNde/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN

17 25 Animate Minimal Menino First o/DA menino/CN está/V a/PREP comer/INFuma/UM maçã/CN

17 27 Inanimate Minimal Maçã Both uma/UM criança/CN com/PREP uma/UMmaçã/CN em_/PREP a/DA tigela/CN e/CJoutra/OTR maçã/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM prata/CN em_/PREP uma/UMbancada/CN de/PREP cozinha/CN

91

17 28 Inanimate Cluttered Maçã Second a/DA maçã/CN está/V em_/PREP um/UMprato/CN

17 30 Animate Cluttered Menino Both é/V uma/UM cozinha/CN cheia/ADJ de/PREPcoisas/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP as/DA bancadas/CN e/CJ estão/V dois/CARDmeninos/CN em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN um/UM parece/V que/CJ tem/V umas/IA baque-tas/CN de/PREP bateria/CN em_/PREP a/DAmão/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR está/V a/PREPbrincar/INF com/PREP um/UM tachinho/CNcom/PREP uma/UM maçã/CN ou/CJ um/UMrecipiente/ADJ com/PREP uma/UM maçã/CNe/CJ brinquedos/CN em_/PREP o/DA chão/CN

18 3 Animate Cluttered Homem Both estão/V dois/CARD homens/CN um/UMhomem/CN está/V a/PREP tratar/INF de/PREP um/UM frango/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR homem/CN está/V a_/PREP a/DA es-pera/CN

18 8 Inanimate Minimal Faca Both há/V uma/UM faca/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP um/UM de/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN e/CJ há/V outra/OTR faca/CN a_/PREP o/DAlado/CN de/PREP um/UM pano/CN há/V um/UM homem/CN que/REL está/V a/PREP tirar/INF qualquer/QNT coisa/CN a_/PREP o/DAfrango/CN ou/CJ a/PREP pôr/INF e/CJ há/Voutro/OTR que/CJ está/V sentado/PPA a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN de_/PREP esse/DEMhomem/CN e/CJ parece/V que/CJ estão/Vem_/PREP uma/UM cozinha/CN

18 10 Animate Minimal Homem Both há/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP observar/INF outro/OTR senhor/CN a/PREP cortar/INFo/DA frango/CN

18 11 Animate Cluttered Homem Both em_/PREP uma/UM cozinha/CN encontram/V-se/CL dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM sen-tado/PPA e/CJ outro/OTR a/PREP preparar/INF a/DA comida/CN

18 12 Inanimate Minimal Faca First dois/CARD homens/CN estão/V em_/PREPuma/UM divisão/CN um/UM está/V a/PREPmexer/INF em/PREP carne/CN e/CJ há/Vduas/CARD facas/CN em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN uma/UM a_/PREPo/DA pé/CN de_/PREP esse/DEM homem/CNque/REL está/V de/PREP pé/CN e/CJ a/PREPmexer/INF em/PREP comida/CN e/CJ o/DAoutro/OTR está/V sentado/PPA

92

18 13 Inanimate Cluttered Faca Both dois/CARD homens/CN em_/PREP uma/UMcozinha/CN um/UM homem/CN está/V sen-tado/PPA a_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN o/DAoutro/OTR homem/CN está/V a/PREPpreparar/INF o/DA frango/CN tem/V duas/CARD facas/CN uma/UM faca/CN está/V a_/PREP a/DA frente/CN de_/PREP o/DAprimeiro/ORD homem/CN uk/UK e/CJ outra/OTR faca/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA lado/CNde_/PREP o/DA uk/UK

18 14 Animate Minimal Homem Both em_/PREP uma/UM sala/CN há/V um/UMhomem/CN com/PREP uma/UM faca/CN a/PREP arranjar/INF um/UM frango/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR de_/PREP outro/OTR lado/CNperto/ADV de/PREP uma/UM faca/CN

18 15 Animate Cluttered Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP cozinhar/INF

18 17 Inanimate Cluttered Faca Both em_/PREP uma/UM cozinha/CN um/UMhomem/CN prepara/V um/UM frango/CN e/CJutiliza/V uma/UM faca/CN tem/V outra/OTRfaca/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM tábua/CN

18 18 Animate Minimal Homem Second o/DA homem/CN está/V a_/PREP a/DA es-pera/CN de_/PREP a/DA comida/CN

18 19 Animate Cluttered Homem First um/UM homem/CN a/PREP preparar/INFfrango/PPA

18 21 Inanimate Cluttered Faca Both está/V uma/UM faca/CN em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN outra/OTR faca/Vtambém/ADV em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREPa/DA mesa/CN mas/CJ sobre/PREP um/UMobjeto/CN de/PREP madeira/CN

18 26 Animate Minimal Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP cortar/INFum/UM frango/CN

18 27 Animate Cluttered Homem Both um/UM homem/CN a/PREP cozinhar/INFuma/UM galinha/CN enquanto/CJ o/DA outro/OTR está/V a/PREP ver/INF

18 29 Inanimate Cluttered Faca Both está/V uma/UM faca/CN por/PREP usar/INFem/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CNe/CJ outra/OTR que/REL vai/V ser/INF usada/PPA para/PREP arranjar/INF o/DA frango/CN

18 30 Animate Minimal Homem Both um/UM homem/CN está/V sentado/PPA a_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN a/PREP tentar/INFchegar/INF a/PREP uma/UM faca/ADJ e/CJoutro/OTR homem/CN está/V a/PREP fechar/

93

INF um/UM frango/CN

19 2 Inanimate Cluttered Tosta First é/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP fazer/INFtostas/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR carne/CN

19 8 Animate Cluttered Homem Both uma/UM cozinha/CN um/UM homem/CN tem/V um/UM utensílio/CN que/REL eu/PRS não/ADV consigo/V perceber/INF o/DA que/REL é/V que/REL é/V em_/PREP as/DA mãos/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTR também/ADV e/CJ pare-cem/V estar/INF a/PREP cozinhar/INF

19 13 Inanimate Minimal Tosta Both estão/V em_/PREP a/DA cozinha/CN dois/CARD senhores/CN um/UM está/V a/PREPfazer/INF a/DA tosta/CN e/CJ o/DA outro/OTRestá/V a/PREP preparar/INF carne/CN está/Va/PREP cortar/INF a/DA outra/OTR tosta/CNestá/V em_/PREP o/DA micro-ondas/CN

19 14 Inanimate Cluttered Tosta Second estão/V dois/CARD homens/CN cozinheiros/CN aparentemente/ADV em_/PREP uma/UMcozinha/CN e/CJ dentro/LPREP1 de_/LPREP2 o/DA micro-ondas/CN têm/V uma/UM tosta/CN

19 17 Inanimate Minimal Tosta Both estão/V dois/CARD senhores/CN a/PREP co-zinhar/INF e/CJ um/UM está/V a/PREPpreparar/INF uma/UM torta/CN uma/UM está/V em_/PREP o/DA micro-ondas/CN e/CJ a/DAoutra/OTR está/V em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN

19 18 Inanimate Cluttered Tosta Second a/DA tosta/CN está/V dentro/ADV de_/PREPo/DA micro-ondas/CN

19 20 Animate Cluttered Homem Second um/UM homem/CN a/PREP cortar/INF carne/CN

19 21 Inanimate Minimal Tosta Both estão/V tostas/CN dentro/LPREP1 de_/LPREP2 o/DA micro-ondas/CN e/CJ uma/UMtosta/CN a/PREP ser/INF feita/PPA por_/PREP o/DA senhor/CN

19 23 Animate Minimal Homem Second há/V dois/CARD homens/CN em_/PREP a/DAimagem/CN um/UM de_/PREP os/DAhomens/CN está/V a/PREP mexer/INF em/PREP carne/CN

19 25 Inanimate Minimal Tosta First o/DA cozinheiro/CN está/V a/PREP fazer/INFuma/UM tosta/CN

19 26 Inanimate Cluttered Tosta First a/DA tosta/CN está/V em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN de_/PREP o/DA cozinheiro/CN

94

19 29 Inanimate Minimal Tosta Both este/DEM senhor/CN está/V a/PREPpreparar/INF uma/UM tosta/CN enquanto/CJoutra/OTR tosta/CN está/V a/PREP ser/INFfeita/PPA em_/PREP o/DA micro-ondas/CN

19 30 Inanimate Cluttered Tosta Second são/V dois/CARD senhores/CN a/PREP coz-inhar/INF qualquer/QNT coisa/CN e/CJ está/Vuma/UM tosta/CN realmente/ADV em_/PREPo/DA micro-ondas/CN mas/CJ o/DA que/RELeles/PRS estão/V a/PREP cozinhar/INF tem/Vtudo/IND a/PREP ver/INF com/PREP tudo/IND menos/ADV tostas/CN

20 3 Inanimate Cluttered Fruta First está/V um/UM prato/CN com/PREP fruta/CNem_/PREP o/DA canto/CN direito/ADJ em_/PREP o/DA canto/CN direito/CN inferior/ADJde_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

20 4 Animate Minimal Mulher Both estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREPa/DA cozinha/CN uma/UM de_/PREP elas/PRS segura/PPA uma/UM chávena/CN outra/OTR está/V a/PREP buscar/INF comida/CN

20 8 Animate Minimal Mulher Both a/DA mulher/CN tem/V uma/UM chávena/CNem_/PREP a/DA mão/CN está/V em_/PREPuma/UM cozinha/CN e/CJ olha/V para/PREPoutra/OTR mulher/CN que/REL parece/V es-tar/INF a/PREP tirar/INF comida/CN de_/PREP o/DA prato/CN

20 10 Inanimate Minimal Fruta First duas/CARD senhoras/CN estão/V a/PREPpreparar/INF um/UM prato/CN de/PREP fruta/CN

20 11 Inanimate Cluttered Fruta First em_/PREP uma/UM cozinha/CN encontram/V-se/CL duas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/UM a/PREP beber/INF e/CJ outra/OTR a/PREPpreparar/INF fruta/CN

20 12 Animate Minimal Mulher Both em_/PREP uma/UM casa/CN há/V uma/UMmulher/CN a/PREP mexer/INF em_/PREP a/DA comida/CN e/CJ há/V uma/UM outra/OTRmulher/CN com/PREP uma/UM chávena/CNem_/PREP a/DA mão/CN ambas/QNT estão/V a_/PREP a/DA volta/CN de/PREP uma/UMmesa/CN

20 13 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both vejo/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREPa/DA cozinha/CN a/DA primeira/ORD tem/Vuma/UM mulher/CN está/V a_/PREP a/DAfrente/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN essa/DEM mulher/CN está/V a/PREP preparar/INFuma/UM travessa/CN de/PREP frutas/CN a/

95

DA outra/OTR mulher/CN está/V a/PREP be-ber/INF uma/UM chávena/CN talvez/ADV de/PREP chá/CN as/DA duas/CARD mulheres/CN estão/V em_/PREP uma/UM cozinha/CN

20 14 Inanimate Minimal Fruta First em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN está/V um/UM prato/CN cheio/ADJ de/PREP fruta/CN e/CJ de/PREP roda/CN de_/PREP ela/PRS estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN

20 16 Animate Minimal Mulher Second uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP beber/INF chá/CN

20 17 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both em_/PREP a/DA cozinha/CN está/V uma/UMmulher/CN a/PREP beber/INF chá/CN pega/Vem_/PREP a/DA chávena/CN e/CJ outra/OTRestá/V a/PREP servir/INF -se/CL

20 20 Animate Minimal Mulher Second uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP beber/INF café/CN

20 21 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP fazer/INFuma/UM refeição/CN a/PREP outra/OTR mul-her/CN está/V a/PREP beber/INF um/UMcafé/CN

20 25 Animate Cluttered Mulher First uma/UM mulher/CN está/V a/PREP fazer/INFo/DA almoço/CN

20 28 Animate Minimal Mulher Both a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/DA olhar/INF para/PREP a/DA outra/OTR mulher/CN

20 29 Animate Cluttered Mulher Second esta/DEM figura/CN tem/V duas/CARD mul-heres/CN em/PREP que/CJ uma/UM de_/PREP as/DA uma/CARD mulher/CN está/V a/PREP beber/INF chá/CN

21 1 Animate Minimal Homem Both dois/CARD homens/CN uma/UM um/UM sen-tado/PPA a_/PREP a/DA secretária/CN e/CJoutro/OTR em/PREP pé/CN a/PREP mexer/INF em_/PREP os/DA papéis/CN

21 2 Animate Cluttered Homem First é/V um/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de/PREP uma/UM se-cretária/CN

21 3 Inanimate Minimal Caneca Second está/V uma/UM caneca/CN branca/ADJ em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP de_/PREP o/DAdossier/CN

21 13 Animate Minimal Homem Both em_/PREP a/DA imagem/CN vejo/V uma/UMsala/CN de/PREP reuniões/CN está/V um/UM

96

homem/CN de/PREP pé/CN a/PREP empaco-tar/INF umas/IA coisas/CN em_/PREP uma/UM caixa/CN e/CJ de_/PREP o/DA outro/OTRlado/CN de_/PREP a/DA imagem/CN está/Vum/UM homem/CN a/PREP mexer/INF em_/PREP o/DA teclado/CN

21 14 Animate Cluttered Homem Both uma/UM sala/CN de/PREP escritório/CN tem/V dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM homem/CNestá/V perto/ADV de/PREP uma/UM caixa/CNa/PREP pegar/INF em/PREP livros/CN e/CJoutro/OTR está/V perto/ADV de_/PREP o/DAcomputador/CN

21 15 Inanimate Minimal Caneca Second uma/UM caneca/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

21 17 Animate Minimal Homem Both em_/PREP esta/DEM sala/CN encontra/V -se/CL um/UM homem/CN em/PREP pé/CN com/PREP papéis/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN e/CJ outro/OTR homem/CN encontra/V -se/CLsentado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

21 18 Animate Cluttered Homem Second o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP carregar/INFuns/IA papéis/CN

21 19 Inanimate Minimal Caneca First uma/UM caneca/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

21 21 Animate Minimal Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP meter/INFcoisas/CN em_/PREP uma/UM caixa/CN e/CJoutro/OTR homem/CN a/PREP escrever/INFem_/PREP um/UM teclado/CN

21 25 Animate Minimal Homem Second o/DA homem/CN está/V a/PREP retirar/INFcartões/CN de_/PREP a/DA caixa/CN de/PREP papel/CN

21 26 Animate Cluttered Homem Second o/DA homem/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA pé/CNde_/PREP o/DA caixote/CN

21 29 Animate Minimal Homem Second em_/PREP este/DEM escritório/CN o/DAhomem/CN está/V a/PREP arrumar/INF as/DAsuas/POSS coisas/CN em_/PREP uma/UMcaixa/CN

21 30 Animate Cluttered Homem Both é/V um/UM escritório/CN está/V um/UMhomem/CN sentado/PPA a/PREP mexer/INFem_/PREP um/UM computador/CN e/CJ está/V outro/OTR de/PREP pé/CN a/PREP abrir/INF uma/UM caixa/CN uma/UM embalagem/CN

97

22 3 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both estão/V duas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/UMmulher/CN está/V a/PREP limpar/INF e/CJ a/DA outra/OTR está/V a/PREP comer/INF sen-tada/PPA em_/PREP um/UM sofá/CN preto/ADJ

22 8 Inanimate Minimal Livro Both há/V um/UM livro/CN pousado/PPA em/PREPcima/CN de/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN a_/PREP o/DA lado/CN há/V uma/UM mulher/CNsentada/PPA em_/PREP o/DA sofá/CN com/PREP um/UM prato/CN em_/PREP a/DAmão/CN e/CJ tem/V outro/OTR livro/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP outra/OTR mesa/CNe/CJ também/ADV há/V uma/UM senhora/CNque/REL parece/V estar/INF a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA chão/CN

22 10 Animate Minimal Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V sentada/PPA a/PREPcomer/INF

22 11 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both em_/PREP um/UM quarto/CN encontram/V -se/CL duas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/UM a/PREP fazer/INF limpeza/CN e/CJ outra/OTRsentada/PPA

22 13 Inanimate Cluttered Livro Both vejo/V um/UM livro/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN centro/CN vejo/Voutros/OTR livros/CN em_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN estante/CN há/V lá/ADV um/UM televisão/CN outro/OTR livro/CN há/V em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM estante/CN pequena/ADJ e/CJ

22 14 Animate Minimal Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA a/PREP comer/INF e/CJ outra/OTR tem/V um/UM pau/CN em_/PREP a/DA mão/CN

22 15 Animate Cluttered Mulher Second a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA chão/CN

22 17 Inanimate Cluttered Livro Both em_/PREP esta/DEM sala/CN está/V estão/Vduas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/UM sentada/PPA e/CJ a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREPela/PRS está/V uma/UM mesa/CN com/PREPum/UM livro/CN aberto/PPA atrás/ADV de_/PREP ela/PRS está/V outra/OTR mesa/CNcom/PREP outro/OTR livro/CN

22 18 Animate Minimal Mulher Second a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA chão/CN

22 19 Animate Cluttered Mulher First uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP

98

o/DA sofá/CN

22 23 Animate Cluttered Mulher Second está/V uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP limpar/INF a/DA sala/CN

22 26 Animate Minimal Mulher Second a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA chão/CN

22 27 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both uma/UM sala/CN com/PREP uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA chão/CN e/CJ a/DA outra/OTR a/PREP comer/INF em_/PREPo/DA sofá/CN

22 30 Animate Minimal Mulher Both é/V uma/UM sala/CN com/PREP uma/UMmulher/CN a/PREP limpar/INF o/DA chão/CNoutra/OTR sentada/PPA a/PREP comer/INFqualquer/QNT coisa/CN que/REL está/V em_/PREP um/UM prato/CN e/CJ com/PREPlivros/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UM mesa/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREPa/DA mesa/CN onde/REL ela/PRS está/V e/CJ em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN onde/REL está/V atrás/ADV de_/PREP a/DA senhora/CN que/REL está/V a/PREPlimpar/INF

23 3 Animate Minimal Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN a/PREP levar/INFum/UM sermão/CN de_/PREP o/DA patrão/CN

23 4 Animate Cluttered Homem Both está/V um/UM homem/CN sentada/PPA a/PREP uma/UM secretária/CN e/CJ o/DA seu/POSS patrão/CN está/V a/PREP falar/INFcom/PREP ele/PRS parece/V aborrecido/PPA

23 8 Animate Cluttered Homem First um/UM homem/CN está/V a/PREPespreguiçar/INF -se/CL em_/PREP a/DAcadeira/CN em_/PREP um/UM sítio/CN que/REL parece/V ser/INF um/UM escritório/CN

23 11 Animate Minimal Homem Both em_/PREP um/UM escritório/CN encontra/V -se/CL um/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA com/PREP o/DA computador/CN a_/PREP os/DApés/CN e/CJ outro/OTR homem/CN de/PREPpé/CN

23 12 Animate Cluttered Homem Both o/DA homem/CN está/V em_/PREP o/DA es-critório/CN com/PREP outro/OTR homem/CNeles/PRS têm/V muitos/QNT papéis/CN a_/PREP a/DA frente/CN assim/LCJ1 como/LCJ2computadores/CN

23 13 Inanimate Minimal Portátil Both estão/V dois/CARD senhores/CN em_/PREP

99

um/UM escritório/CN onde/REL têm/V dois/CARD computadores/CN um/UM computador/CN está/V em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA secretária/CN o/DA outro/OTR computa-dor/CN está/V por/PREP cima/CN de/PREPuma/UM caixa/CN em/PREP frente/CN a_/PREP a/DA secretária/CN

23 14 Inanimate Cluttered Portátil First está/V um/UM homem/CN sentado/PPA em_/PREP uma/UM cadeira/CN de/PREP es-critório/CN perto/ADV de/PREP um/UMportátil/CN e/CJ outro/OTR está/V em_/PREPa/DA uk/UK

23 15 Animate Minimal Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V sentado/PPA em_/PREP a/DA cadeira/CN

23 17 Inanimate Minimal Portátil Both em_/PREP a/DA secretária/CN grande/ADJvê/V -se/CL um/UM portátil/CN aberto/CN e/CJ em_/PREP outra/OTR mesa/CN a_/PREPo/DA lado/CN em/PREP cima/CN de/PREPuma/UM caixa/CN vê/V -se/CL outro/OTRportátil/CN e/CJ estão/V dois/CARD sen-hores/CN a/PREP falar/INF em_/PREP a/DAsala/CN

23 18 Inanimate Cluttered Portátil First o/DA portátil/CN está/V em/PREP cima/CNde_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

23 20 Animate Cluttered Homem First um/UM homem/CN a/PREP espreguiçar/INF -se/CL

23 25 Inanimate Minimal Portátil Both existe/V um/UM portátil/CN um/UM portátil/CNestá/V sobre/PREP a/DA mesa/CN e/CJ o/DAoutro/OTR portátil/CN está/V sobre/PREPestá/V em/PREP cima/CN de/PREP uma/UMcaixa/CN

23 27 Animate Minimal Homem Both um/UM homem/CN a/PREP trabalhar/INF e/CJ o/DA patrão/CN a/PREP chateá#/INF -lo/CL possivelmente/ADV

23 28 Animate Cluttered Homem First o/DA homem/CN está/V sentado/PPA

23 29 Inanimate Minimal Portátil Both este/DEM senhor/CN está/V a/PREP trabal-har/INF com/PREP o/DA seu/POSS portátil/CN em/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN mas/CJ há/V também/ADV outro/OTRportátil/CN em_/PREP outra/OTR secretária/CN

23 30 Inanimate Cluttered Portátil First estão/V dois/CARD homens/CN um/UM sen-hor/CN sentado/PPA a_/PREP a/DA se-

100

cretária/CN com/PREP vários/QNT papéis/CNum/UM portátil/CN dois/CARD portáteis/CN e/CJ está/V outro/OTR homem/CN em/PREPfrente/CN de_/PREP ele/PRS

24 1 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN sentada/PPA a_/PREP a/DA secretária/CN a/PREP falar/INF a_/PREPo/DA telefone/CN e/CJ outra/OTR mulher/CNperto/ADV de_/PREP a/DA secretária/CN

24 3 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First está/V uma/UM mulher/CN a_/PREP o/DAtelefone/CN

24 4 Animate Minimal Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN em_/PREP uma/UM secretária/CN a/PREP falar/INF a_/PREPo/DA telefone/CN e/CJ outra/OTR em/PREPpé/CN a/PREP olhar/INF para/PREP ela/PRS

24 8 Animate Minimal Mulher Both há/V uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP atender/INFum/UM telefone/CN e/CJ a/PREP sorrir/INFligeiramente/ADV há/V outra/OTR mulher/CNque/REL olha/V para/PREP ela/PRS e/CJparece/V estar/INF a_/PREP a/DA espera/CNparece/V que/CJ estão/V em_/PREP um/UMescritório/CN

24 10 Inanimate Minimal Telefone First uk/UK está/V a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN

24 11 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First em_/PREP um/UM escritório/CN encontram/V-se/CL duas/CARD mulheres/CN uma/CARDde/PREP pé/CN e/CJ outra/OTR sentada/PPAa_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN

24 12 Animate Minimal Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN está/V sentada/PPAatrás/ADV de/PREP um/UM balcão/CN está/Va_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN uma/UM outra/OTR está/V de/PREP pé/CN virada/PPA para/PREP ela/PRS com/PREP um/UM vestido/CNazul-escuro/ADJ

24 13 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both em_/PREP esta/DEM imagem/CN vê/V -se/CL duas/CARD mulheres/CN em_/PREP um/UM escritório/CN uma/UM mulher/CN está/Va/PREP falar/INF a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CNe/CJ a/DA outra/OTR mulher/CN está/V a_/PREP a/DA espera/CN que/REL a/DA outra/OTR mulher/CN acabe/V de/PREP falar/INFa_/PREP o/DA telemóvel/CN

24 14 Inanimate Minimal Telefone First está/V uma/UM mulher/CN a_/PREP o/DAtelefone/CN sentada/PPA em_/PREP uma/UMsecretária/CN enquanto/CJ outra/OTR está/V

101

a_/PREP a/DA

24 15 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First a/DA mulher/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA tele-fone/CN

24 16 Animate Minimal Mulher First uma/UM mulher/CN a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN

24 17 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both em_/PREP este/DEM escritório/CN está/Vuma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP falar/INF a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN e/CJ outra/OTR está/V de/PREP costas/CN a/PREP olhar/INFpara/PREP ela/PRS

24 19 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First uma/UM mulher/CN a/PREP falar/INF a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN

24 20 Animate Minimal Mulher Both uma/UM rececionista/CN a_/PREP o/DA tele-fone/CN e/CJ uma/UM mulher/CN a_/PREP o/DA pé/CN de_/PREP o/DA balcão/CN

24 21 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both está/V uma/UM mulher/CN a_/PREP o/DAtelefone/CN outra/OTR mulher/CN aguarda/Vpara/PREP ser/INF atendida/PPA

24 23 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP falar/INF a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN

24 25 Animate Cluttered Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DA tele-fone/CN

24 26 Inanimate Minimal Telefone First a/DA secretária/CN está/V a_/PREP o/DAtelefone/CN

24 27 Inanimate Cluttered Telefone First uma/UM secretária/CN a/PREP falar/INF a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN

24 28 Animate Minimal Mulher First a/DA mulher/CN está/V a/PREP fazer/INF um/UM telefonema/CN

24 29 Animate Cluttered Mulher Both uma/UM mulher/CN está/V a/PREP falar/INFa_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN enquanto/CJoutra/OTR mulher/CN está/V a_/PREP a/DAespera/CN de/PREP ser/INF atendida/PPA

24 30 Inanimate Minimal Telefone Both é/V uma/UM secretária/CN com/PREP uma/UM senhora/CN a/PREP falar/INF a_/PREP o/DA telefone/CN e/CJ tem/V outra/OTR sen-hora/CN a_/PREP a/DA sua/POSS frente/CNe/CJ outro/OTR telefone/CN também/ADVem/PREP cima/CN de_/PREP a/DA mesa/CN

102

Appendix D English Data

Item Partic-ipant

Animacy Clutter Cue Refer-ence

Sentence

1 1 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ weighing VBG her-self PRP

1 2 Inanimate Minimal Scale First The DT woman NN is VBZ using VBG the DTscale NN to RP weigh VB herself PRP

1 3 Animate Cluttered Woman Both The DT woman NN weight VBP herself PRPon IN the DT scale NN while IN her PRP$friend NN redid VBD her PRP$ face NN

1 4 Inanimate Cluttered Scale First A DT woman NN standing VBG on IN a DTscale NN

1 5 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN stands VBZ on IN the DTscale NN

1 6 Inanimate Minimal Scale First The DT woman NN is VBZ standing VBG onIN the DT scale NN in IN the DT bathroom NN

1 7 Animate Cluttered Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ on IN the DT scaleNN

1 8 Inanimate Cluttered Scale First A DT woman NN is VBZ standing VBG on INthe DT scale NN and CC another DT womanNN behind IN her PRP

1 9 Animate Minimal Woman First There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN weighingVBG herself PRP on IN the DT scales NNS

1 10 Inanimate Minimal Scale First The DT scale NN in IN the DT bathroom NNwas VBD stood VBN on RP by IN the DTwoman NN

1 11 Animate Cluttered Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ weighing VBG her-self PRP

1 12 Inanimate Cluttered Scale First There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN standingVBG on IN a DT scale NN in IN a DT bath-room NN facing VBG the DT sink NN and CCthe DT mirror NN

1 13 Animate Minimal Woman Both The DT woman NN is VBZ on IN the DTscales NNS and CC the DT woman NN is VBZstanding VBG

1 15 Animate Cluttered Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ weighing VBG her-self PRP

1 16 Inanimate Cluttered Scale Both A DT woman NN weights NNS herself PRP

103

upon IN a DT scale NN while IN a DT secondJJ scale NN lies VBZ to TO her PRP$ right NN

1 17 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ on IN the DTscales NNS

1 18 Inanimate Minimal Scale First There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN on IN topNN of IN the DT scales NNS

1 19 Animate Cluttered Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ on IN the DT scaleNN

1 20 Inanimate Cluttered Scale First The DT woman NN stood VBD on IN the DTscales NNS

1 21 Animate Minimal Woman Both The DT woman NN is VBZ in IN the DT bath-room NN one CD woman NN weights NNSherself PRP and CC another DT woman NN isVBZ moisturizing VBG

1 22 Inanimate Minimal Scale First A NN woman NN weights NNS herself PRP onIN the DT scales NNS

1 23 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN weighingVBG herself PRP at IN the DT sink NN withinIN bathroom NN while IN her PRP$ friend NNdoes VBZ some DT cleaning NN

2 1 Inanimate Minimal Sponge Second The DT sponge NN is VBZ next JJ to TO theDT bath NN

2 2 Animate Cluttered Woman Second The DT woman NN is VBZ reading VBG someDT letters NNS

2 3 Inanimate Cluttered Sponge First The DT woman NN used VBD the DT spongeNN to RP clean VB the DT counter JJ top NN

2 4 Animate Minimal Woman Second A DT woman NN washing VBG glass NN

2 5 Inanimate Minimal Sponge Second The DT sponge NN is VBZ next JJ to TO theDT bath NN

2 8 Animate Minimal Woman Both Two CD there EX are VBP two CD there EX isVBZ one CD woman NN cleaning NN bath-room NN taps NNS while IN another DTwoman NN is VBZ doing VBG something NNthat WDT looks VBZ like IN the DT same JJ

2 9 Inanimate Minimal Sponge First The DT woman NN is VBZ cleaning VBG theDT sink NN with IN a DT sponge NN

2 11 Inanimate Cluttered Sponge First The DT girl NN is VBZ cleaning VBG with INthe DT sponge NN

104

2 12 Animate Minimal Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN scrubbingVBG a DT bathroom NN sink NN with IN a DTsponge NN and CC another DT woman NNwho WP looks VBZ to RP be VB dusting VBGa DT wall NN

2 14 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ one CD woman NN cleaningNN in IN shorts NNS and CC one CD womanNN polishing VBG glass NN

2 15 Inanimate Cluttered Sponge Second The DT sponge NN is VBZ on IN the DT edgeNN of IN the DT bathtube NN

2 16 Animate Minimal Woman Both A DT woman NN and CC her PRP$ friend NNbusy JJ cleaning NN a DT bathroom NN

2 17 Inanimate Minimal Sponge Second The DT sponge NN is VBZ on IN the DT bathNN

2 18 Animate Cluttered Woman First There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN who WP isVBZ scrubbing VBG down RP the DT worktopNN

2 19 Inanimate Cluttered Sponge First The DT lady NN is VBZ cleaning VBG with INthe DT sponge NN

2 20 Animate Minimal Woman Both The DT woman NN and CC her PRP$ friendNN clean VB the DT bathroom NN

2 21 Inanimate Minimal Sponge Second The DT sponge NN is VBZ by IN the DT bathNN

2 22 Animate Cluttered Woman Both A DT woman NN cleans VBZ the DT bathroomNN another DT woman NN helps VBZ

2 23 Inanimate Cluttered Sponge Second There EX is VBZ a DT sponge NN by IN theDT bath NN with IN two CD women NNScleaning VBG it PRP

2 24 Animate Minimal Woman Both One CD woman NN is VBZ cleaning VBG theDT bathroom NN while IN the DT other JJ oneCD cleans VBZ the DT glasses NNS

3 2 Inanimate Cluttered Toilet-paper

First The DT baby NN is VBZ playing VBG with INthe DT toilet-paper NN

3 3 Animate Minimal Baby First The DT baby NN sat VBD on IN the DT toiletNN

3 4 Inanimate Minimal Toilet-paper

First Baby NNP playing NN with IN toilet NN paperNN

3 8 Inanimate Minimal Toilet- First One CD child NN is VBZ wasting VBG toilet-

105

paper paper NN

3 9 Animate Cluttered Baby First There EX is VBZ a DT baby NN playing NNwith IN the DT toilet-roll NN

3 10 Inanimate Cluttered Toilet-paper

First The DT baby NN used VBD too RB much JJtoilet-paper NN when WRB using VBG the DTtoilet NN

3 11 Animate Minimal Baby First The DT baby NN is VBZ playing VBG with INthe DT toilet-paper NN

3 14 Inanimate Cluttered Toilet-paper

First The DT child NN playing NN with IN the DTtoilet-paper NN on IN the DT loo JJ seat NN

3 15 Animate Minimal Baby First The DT baby NN is VBZ playing VBG with INtoilet-paper NN

3 16 Inanimate Minimal Toilet-paper

First Toilet-paper NN has VBZ been VBN unravelledVBN by IN an DT unruly JJ toddler NN on INtop NN of IN a DT lavatory NN

3 17 Animate Cluttered Baby First Baby NN is VBZ on IN the DT toilet NN

3 18 Animate Cluttered Toilet-paper

First The DT child NN is VBZ playing VBG with INthe DT toilet-paper NN

3 19 Animate Minimal Baby First The DT baby NN is VBZ sitting VBG on IN theDT toilet NN

3 20 Inanimate Minimal Toilet-paper

First The DT baby NN used VBD all PDT the DT toi-let-paper NN and CC trashed VBD it PRP overIN the DT floor NN

3 21 Animate Cluttered Baby First The DT baby NN is VBZ playing VBG with INthe DT toilet-roll NN

3 22 Inanimate Cluttered Toilet-paper

First The DT child NN plays VBZ with IN the DT toi-let-paper NN

3 23 Animate Minimal Baby Both There EX is VBZ a DT baby NN learning VBGhow WRB to RP walk VB within IN a DT toiletNN while IN another DT baby NN is VBZ pottyJJ training NN himself PRP

4 1 Inanimate Cluttered Bucket Second The DT bucket NN is VBZ in IN the DT blue JJbasket NN

4 2 Animate Minimal Man First A DT man NN is VBZ washing VBG the DTbath NN

4 3 Inanimate Minimal Bucket First The DT man NN cleaned VBD the DT tub NNrinsing VBG his PRP$ rug NN in IN a DTbucket NN

106

4 4 Animate Cluttered Man First A DT man NN washing VBG clothes NNS in INa DT bathtub NN

4 5 Inanimate Cluttered Bucket First The DT bucket NN is VBZ on IN the DT floorNN

4 6 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ bringing VBG hisPRP$ clothes NNS in IN the DT bathtube NNoh UH no DT cleaning NN the DT bathtube NN

4 8 Animate Cluttered Man Both One CD man NN is VBZ washing VBG some-thing NN in IN the DT sink NN while IN anotherDT man NN is VBZ observing VBG

4 9 Inanimate Cluttered Bucket Second There EX is VBZ a DT blue JJ bucket NN in INthe DT basket NN

4 10 Animate Minimal Man Both The DT man NN cleaned VBD the DT bath-tube NN as IN his PRP$ friend NN watchedVBD

4 11 Inanimate Minimal Bucket First A DT man NN is VBZ cleaning VBG the DTbucket NN

4 12 Animate Cluttered Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN leaning VBGover RP into IN a DT bathtube NN he PRPlooks VBZ like IN is VBZ dipping VBG a DTcloth NN into IN the DT water NN and CCthere EX is VBZ another DT man NN with INhis PRP$ back NN to TO the DT scene NNnear IN many JJ cleaning NN products NNS

4 13 Inanimate Cluttered Bucket Both The DT bucket NN in IN the DT picture NN isVBZ next JJ to TO the DT cleaning NN prod-ucts NNS and CC in IN a DT basket NN

4 14 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN washing VBG the DT clothesNNS in IN the DT bath NN

4 16 Animate Cluttered Man Both A DT man NN cleaning VBG a DT bath NNand CC another DT man NN possibly RB chat-ting VBG to TO him PRP

4 17 Inanimate Cluttered Bucket Both There EX is VBZ a DT bucket NN next JJ toTO the DT bath NN and CC a DT bucket NNnext JJ to TO the DT door NN

4 18 Animate Minimal Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN watching VBGanother DT man NN in IN the DT bathroom NN

4 19 Inanimate Minimal Bucket First The DT man NN is VBZ using VBG a DTbucket NN to RP clean VB with IN

4 20 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN washed VBD in IN the DT

107

bath NN

4 21 Inanimate Cluttered Bucket First There EX is VBZ a DT bucket NN in IN the DTbathroom NN being VBG used VBN in INcleaning VBG the DT bathroom NN

4 22 Animate Minimal Man Both One CD man NN watches VBZ another DTman NN wash VBP an DT item NN in IN theDT bath NN

4 24 Animate Cluttered Man Both The DT man NN is VBZ washing VBG the DTtube NN while IN the DT other JJ man NNlooks VBZ at IN him PRP

5 1 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ sitting VBG on INthe DT bed NN

5 2 Inanimate Minimal Shoe Second The DT shoe NN is VBZ on IN the DT floor NN

5 3 Animate Cluttered Woman Both This DT catholic JJ glad JJ woman NN satVBD on IN the DT edge NN of IN the DT bedNN talking VBG to TO her PRP$ friend NN

5 4 Inanimate Cluttered Shoe First A DT shoe NN in IN a DT box NN

5 5 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ sitting VBG on INthe DT bed NN

5 7 Animate Cluttered Woman First The DT woman NN sits VBZ on IN the DT bedNN

5 8 Inanimate Cluttered Shoe Second There EX is VBZ a DT shoe NN on IN the DTfloor NN beside IN two CD women NNS

5 9 Animate Minimal Woman First There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN sitting VBGon IN the DT bed NN

5 11 Animate Cluttered Woman Second The DT woman NN is VBZ looking VBG at INthe DT toys NNS

5 12 Inanimate Cluttered Shoe Both There EX is VBZ one CD shoe NN in IN a DTfiling NN box NN next JJ to TO a DT womanNN on IN a DT bed NN in IN a DT bedroomNN and CC another DT shoe NN on IN the DTfloor NN near IN another DT woman NN alsoRB in IN the DT bedroom NN

5 13 Animate Minimal Woman Both The DT woman NN is VBZ sitting VBG on INthe DT bed NN and CC standing VBG

5 14 Inanimate Minimal Shoe Both Two CD shoes NNS on IN the DT cha NN onIN the DT bed NN and CC on IN the DT floorNN

108

5 15 Animate Cluttered Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ sitting VBG on INthe DT bed NN

5 16 Inanimate Cluttered Shoe First A DT woman NN wearing VBG high JJ heelNN shoes NNS sits VBZ on IN a DT bed NNnext JJ to TO a DT box NN of IN new JJ shoesNNS

5 17 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ on IN the DT bedNN

5 18 Inanimate Minimal Shoe First There EX is VBZ a DT shoe NN in IN a DT boxNN

5 19 Animate Cluttered Woman Second The DT woman NN is VBZ looking VBG at INthe DT teddy JJ bear NN

5 20 Inanimate Cluttered Shoe First The DT girl NN looked VBD at IN the DT newJJ shoe NN she PRP bought VBD

5 21 Animate Minimal Woman Both The DT woman NN is VBZ sat VBN on IN theDT bed NN next JJ to TO another DT womanNN

5 22 Inanimate Minimal Shoe Both One CD shoe NN is VBZ in IN a DT box NN onIN the DT bed NN another DT shoe NN is VBZbeside RB of IN the DT bed NN

5 23 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ woman NN sat VBD on INthe DT bed NN and CC a DT woman NNstanding VBG up RP within IN a DT bedroomNN of IN furniture NN

5 24 Inanimate Cluttered Shoe Both There EX is VBZ one CD shoe NN right RBnext JJ to TO the DT bed NN and CC one CDshoe NN inside IN a DT box NN

6 1 Inanimate Minimal Towel Second The DT towel NN is VBZ on IN the DT basketNN case NN

6 2 Animate Cluttered Kid First The DT kid NN is VBZ sleeping VBG

6 3 Inanimate Cluttered Towel First The DT towel NN was VBD placed VBN nextJJ to TO the DT child NN who WP was VBDlaying VBG upon IN the DT bed NN

6 4 Animate Minimal Kid First A DT kid NN on IN a DT bed NN

6 5 Inanimate Minimal Towel First The DT towel NN is VBZ on IN the DT end NNof IN the DT bed NN

6 7 Inanimate Cluttered Towel First The DT towel NN lays VBZ bordered VBN onIN the DT bed NN

109

6 8 Animate Minimal Kid Both One CD kid NN is VBZ sleaping VBG as IN theDT other JJ kid NN is VBZ beside IN him PRPplaying VBG

6 10 Animate Cluttered Kid Both The DT kid NN played VBD while IN his PRP$baby NN brother NN slept VBD

6 12 Animate Minimal Kid Both There EX is VBZ a DT little JJ kid NN passedVBD out RP on IN his PRP$ mum NN 's POSand CC dad NN 's POS bed NN and CC a DTkid NN standing NN next JJ to TO him PRPwith IN some DT sort NN of IN holes NNS inIN the DT crouch NN of IN his PRP$ pantsNNS

6 13 Inanimate Minimal Towel Both The DT towel NN is VBZ on IN the DT bed NNand CC on IN the DT sh NN drawer NN

6 14 Animate Cluttered Kid Both There EX is VBZ one CD little JJ kid NNasleep RB on IN the DT bed NN and CC an-other DT standing NN playing VBG

6 15 Inanimate Cluttered Towel First The DT towel NN is VBZ folded VBN on IN theDT bed NN

6 16 Animate Minimal Kid Both A DT kid NN asleep RB at IN the DT foot NNof IN a DT double JJ bed NN and CC anotherDT kid NN staring VBG at IN the DT cameraNN

6 17 Inanimate Minimal Towel Both Towel NNP is VBZ on IN the DT bed NN andCC on IN the DT chest NN

6 18 Animate Cluttered Kid First There EX is VBZ a DT kid NN asleep RB on INthe DT bed NN

6 19 Inanimate Cluttered Towel First There EX are VBP two CD towels NNS on INthe DT bed NN

6 20 Animate Minimal Kid First The DT kid NN lies VBZ on IN the DT bed NN

6 21 Inanimate Minimal Towel Both There EX are VBP two CD towels NNS on INthe DT bed NN and CC two CD towels NNS onIN the DT basket NN

6 22 Animate Cluttered Kid Both One CD kid NN sleeps NNS on IN the DT bedNN whilst VBD another DT plays VBZ

6 23 Inanimate Cluttered Towel First A DT folded VBN towel NN was VBD left VBNon IN a DT bed NN next JJ to TO an DT unat-tended JJ baby NN with IN his PRP$ older JJRbrother NN playing NN with IN the DT toy NN

6 24 Animate Minimal Kid Both One CD kid NN is VBZ sleeping VBG on IN

110

the DT bed NN and CC the DT other JJ oneCD is VBZ playing VBG

7 1 Animate Cluttered Man First Man NN is VBZ lying VBG down RP

7 2 Inanimate Cluttered Mobile First The DT mobile JJ is VBZ on IN the DT bed NN

7 3 Animate Minimal Man Both The DT man NN laid VBD upon IN the DT bedNN while IN his PRP$ friend NN read VBD theDT newspaper NN

7 4 Inanimate Minimal Mobile First A DT mobile JJ phone NN sitting VBG on IN aDT bed NN

7 5 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ lying VBG on IN theDT bed NN

7 6 Inanimate Cluttered Mobile First The DT mobile JJ is VBZ open JJ on IN the DTbed NN

7 7 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN lies VBZ in IN the DT bed NN

7 8 Inanimate Minimal Mobile First A DT man NN laid VBN down RP on IN hisPRP$ bed NN with IN his PRP$ mobile JJ be-side IN him PRP

7 9 Animate Cluttered Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN resting VBGon IN the DT bed NN as IN another DT manNN unpacks VBZ his PRP$ clothes NNS

7 10 Inanimate Cluttered Mobile First The DT man NN 's POS mobile JJ phone NNrang VBD

7 11 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ in IN police NN uni-form NN

7 12 Inanimate Minimal Mobile Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN asleep RB onIN a DT bed NN and CC an DT open JJ mobileJJ next JJ to TO him PRP there EX is VBZ an-other DT mobile JJ perched NN on IN the DTehh UH perched VBD on IN the DT wall NNsorry RB charging VBG

7 13 Animate Cluttered Man Both The DT man NN is VBZ reading VBG the DTnewspaper NN and CC lying VBG on IN theDT bed NN

7 14 Inanimate Cluttered Mobile Second A DT mobile JJ phone NN charging VBG at INthe DT wall NN

7 15 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ lying VBG in IN bedNN

7 16 Inanimate Minimal Mobile Both A DT mobile JJ phone NN occupies VBZ its

111

PRP$ hoister NN on IN the DT wall NN of IN aDT hotel NN room NN while IN a DT secondJJ mobile JJ phone NN lies VBZ at IN the DThand NN of IN a DT chinese JJ male NN

7 17 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ on IN the DT bed NN

7 18 Animate Cluttered Mobile First There EX is VBZ a DT mobile JJ phone NNopen JJ on IN the DT bed NN

7 19 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ lying VBG on IN theDT bed NN

7 20 Inanimate Minimal Mobile First The DT man NN used VBD his PRP$ mobileJJ to RP call VB his PRP$ friend NN

7 21 Animate Cluttered Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN sleeping VBGin IN an DT hotel NN room NN and CC an-other DT man NN reading VBG a DT newspa-per NN

7 22 Inanimate Cluttered Mobile First The DT mobile JJ is VBZ on IN the DT bed NNnext JJ to TO the DT man NN

7 23 Animate Minimal Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN asleep RB onIN a DT bed NN with IN his PRP$ phone NNopen JJ while IN another DT man NN stum-bles VBZ reading VBG a DT paper NN in IN aDT hotel NN room NN

7 24 Inanimate Minimal Mobile First The DT person NN on IN the DT bed NN wasVBD holding VBG the DT mobile NN

8 1 Inanimate Cluttered Teddy First The DT teddy NN is VBZ in IN the DT girl NN's POS harms NNS

8 2 Animate Minimal Girl First The DT girl NN is VBZ hugging VBG a DTteddy JJ bear NN

8 3 Inanimate Minimal Teddy Both The DT girl NN resting VBG upon IN the DTbed NN held VBD her PRP$ teddy NN tightlyRB while IN another DT teddy NN sat VBD onIN the DT ground NN

8 4 Animate Cluttered Girl First A DT girl NN holding VBG a DT bonny JJ rab-bit NN

8 5 Inanimate Cluttered Teddy First The DT child NN is VBZ holding VBG a DTteddy NN

8 6 Animate Minimal Girl Both The DT girl NN holding VBG the DT teddy JJbear NN is VBZ sitting VBG on IN the DT bedNN and CC the DT girl NN in IN the DT nighty

112

NN is VBZ next JJ to TO the DT bed NN

8 7 Inanimate Minimal Teddy Second Teddy NNP is VBZ on IN the DT ground NN

8 8 Animate Cluttered Girl Both There EX is VBZ a DT girl NN hugging VBG aDT teddy JJ bear NN while IN another DT girlNN observes VBZ her PRP$

8 9 Inanimate Cluttered Teddy First The DT little JJ girl NN is VBZ sitting VBG onIN the DT bed NN cuddling VBG her PRP$teddy NN

8 10 Animate Minimal Girl First The DT girl NN hugged VBD her PRP$ teddyNN

8 11 Inanimate Minimal Teddy First The DT girl NN is VBZ holding VBG a DTteddy NN

8 12 Animate Cluttered Girl Both There EX is VBZ a DT girl NN sitting VBG onIN her PRP$ bed NN hugging VBG her PRP$teddy JJ bear NN and CC another DT little JJgirl NN next JJ to TO her PRP she PRP looksVBZ like IN she PRP wants VBZ the DT teddyJJ bear NN

8 13 Inanimate Cluttered Teddy Both The DT teddy NN is VBZ on IN the DT floorNN next JJ to TO the DT bed NN and CC be-ing VBG held VBN by IN the DT girl NN

8 14 Animate Minimal Girl First The DT little JJ girl NN on IN the DT bed NNcuddling VBG a DT teddy NN two CD little JJgirls NNS

8 15 Inanimate Minimal Teddy First The DT girl NN is VBZ holding VBG a DTteddy JJ bear NN

8 16 Animate Cluttered Girl Both A DT girl NN sits VBZ cross NN legged VBDon IN a DT bed NN clutching VBG a DT teddyJJ bear NN while IN another DT girl NN looksVBZ thoughtfully RB at IN the DT room NN

8 17 Inanimate Cluttered Teddy First The DT girl NN is VBZ holding VBG a DTteddy JJ

8 18 Animate Minimal Girl First There EX is VBZ a DT girl NN holding VBG aDT teddy NN on IN the DT bed NN

8 19 Inanimate Minimal Teddy First The DT girl NN is VBZ holding VBG the DTteddy NN

8 20 Animate Cluttered Girl First The DT girl NN sat VBD on IN the DT bed NNhugging VBG her PRP$ teddy NN

8 22 Animate Minimal Girl Both One CD girl NN watches VBZ another DT girl

113

NN sitting VBG on IN the DT bed NN

8 23 Inanimate Minimal Teddy Both There EX is VBZ two CD girls NNS in IN a DTbedroom NN one CD of IN which WDT hug-ging VBG a DT teddy NN the DT other JJ hasVBZ been VBN left VBN by IN end NN of INthe DT bed NN

8 24 Animate Cluttered Girl Both One CD girl NN is VBZ on IN the DT bed NNhugging VBG a DT teddy JJ bear NN and CCthe DT other JJ one CD is VBZ on IN the DTfloor NN looking VBG at IN her PRP$

9 1 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ cutting VBG the DTpie NN

9 4 Inanimate Cluttered Soup First A DT man NN eating VBG soup NN

9 6 Inanimate Minimal Soup First The DT soup NN is VBZ on IN the DT diningVBG room NN table NN

9 7 Animate Cluttered Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ drinking VBG wine NN

9 8 Inanimate Cluttered Soup First A DT man NN is VBZ about IN to RP serve VBanother DT man NN soup NN

9 9 Animate Minimal Man Second There EX is VBZ a DT man NN drinking NNwine NN waiting VBG for IN his PRP$ food NN

9 10 Inanimate Minimal Soup First The DT soup NN was VBD made VBN and CCplaced VBN on IN the DT table NN

9 11 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ making VBG a DTmeal NN

9 12 Inanimate Cluttered Soup First There EX is VBZ a DT man NN serving VBGsoup NN to TO his PRP$ friend NN

9 13 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN lifts VBZ the DT dish NN fromIN the DT table NN

9 14 Inanimate Minimal Soup First The DT man NN dishing VBG soup NN to TOhis PRP$ guest NN

9 15 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ serving VBG dinnerNN

9 17 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ serving VBG food NN

9 18 Inanimate Minimal Soup First The DT man NN is VBZ preparing VBG the DTbowl NN of IN soup NN

9 19 Animate Cluttered Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ drinking NN wine NN

114

9 20 Inanimate Cluttered Soup First The DT man NN enjoyed VBD his PRP$ soupNN

9 21 Animate Minimal Man Both The DT man NN is VBZ sat VBN at IN the DTtable NN with IN another DT man NN

9 23 Animate Cluttered Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN serving VBGfood NN to RP an DT empty JJ table NNwhere WRB one CD man NN with IN wine NNis VBZ about IN to RP sit VB down RP

9 24 Inanimate Cluttered Soup First The DT waiter NN is VBZ serving VBG soupNN to TO the DT guest NN

10 2 Animate Cluttered Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ eating JJ breakfastNN

10 3 Inanimate Cluttered Juice First The DT female JJ drinks NNS juice NN with INher PRP$ breakfast NN while IN speakingVBG to TO a DT female JJ friend NN

10 4 Animate Minimal Woman First A DT woman NN sitting VBG in IN a DT tableNN drinking NN orange NN juice NN

10 5 Inanimate Minimal Juice First There EX is VBZ juice NN on IN the DT tableNN

10 6 Animate Cluttered Woman Both The DT woman NN is VBZ having VBG break-fast NN with IN another DT woman NN at INthe DT table NN

10 7 Inanimate Cluttered Juice First The DT woman NN drinks NNS orange NNjuice NN for IN breakfast NN

10 8 Animate Minimal Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN drinking NNorange NN juice NN and CC another DTwoman NN speaking NN to TO her PRP$

10 10 Animate Cluttered Woman Both The DT woman NN enjoyed VBD her PRP$breakfast NN while IN the DT nanny NN ar-rived VBD for IN the DT day NN

10 11 Inanimate Cluttered Juice First The DT juice NN is VBZ on IN the DT table NN

10 12 Animate Minimal Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN sitting VBGat IN the DT table NN drinking VBG a DT juiceNN laughing VBG and CC an DT older JJRwoman NN facing VBG her PRP she PRPlooks VBZ like IN she PRP is VBZ about IN toRP say VB something NN

10 13 Inanimate Minimal Juice First The DT women NNS are VBP drinking VBGthe DT juice NN

115

10 14 Animate Cluttered Woman Both One CD woman NN is VBZ sitting VBG at INthe DT table NN eating NN breakfast NN andCC another DT is VBZ standing VBG up RP

10 15 Inanimate Cluttered Juice First The DT woman NN is VBZ having VBG juiceNN for IN breakfast NN

10 16 Animate Minimal Woman Both A DT woman NN drinking NN orange NN juiceNN sitting VBG on IN a DT seat NN speakingNN to TO another DT woman NN holding VBGan DT handbag NN

10 17 Inanimate Minimal Juice First Woman NNP is VBZ drinking VBG juice NN

10 18 Animate Cluttered Woman First There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN eating VBGher PRP$ breakfast NN

10 19 Inanimate Cluttered Juice First The DT lady NN is VBZ drinking NN juice NN

10 20 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN drank VBD a DT glass NNof IN orange JJ juice NN

10 21 Inanimate Minimal Juice First The DT woman NN drinks NNS the DT juiceNN in IN the DT morning NN

10 22 Animate Cluttered Woman Both One CD woman NN stands VBZ while IN an-other DT woman NN sits VBZ and CC eatsVBZ her PRP$ breakfast NN

10 23 Inanimate Cluttered Juice First A DT woman NN is VBZ drinking VBG juiceNN at IN a DT coffee NN table NN chattingVBG to TO her PRP$ friend NN

10 24 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ drinking VBG or-ange JJ juice NN

11 1 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ writing VBG notesNNS

11 2 Inanimate Cluttered Clip-board

First The DT man NN is VBZ writing VBG on IN aDT clipboard NN

11 3 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN filled VBD out RP an DT ap-plication NN

11 4 Inanimate Minimal Clip-board

First Soldier NN writing VBG on IN a DT clipboardNN

11 7 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ filling VBG a DT paperNN

11 8 Inanimate Minimal Clip-board

First One CD man NN writes VBZ on IN a DT clip-board NN as IN another DT man NN observesVBZ a DT piece NN of IN paper NN

116

11 9 Animate Cluttered Man First There EX is VBZ a DT man NN taking VBGnotes NNS

11 10 Inanimate Cluttered Clip-board

Second The DT empty JJ clipboard NN laid VBN be-side IN the DT two CD soldiers NNS

11 11 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ writing VBG

11 12 Inanimate Minimal Clip-board

Both There EX is VBZ a DT clipboard NN sittingVBG on IN a DT coffee NN table NN and CCanother DT clipboard NN next JJ to TO it PRPon IN which WDT a DT US NNP army NN manNN is VBZ writing VBG

11 14 Inanimate Cluttered Clip-board

First The DT man NN is VBZ writing VBG informa-tion NN soldier NN I PRP guess VB or CC ma-rine NN was VBD writing VBG information NNon IN the DT paper NN on IN the DT clipboardNN

11 15 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ signing VBG a DT pa-per NN

11 16 Inanimate Minimal Clip-board

Both A DT man NN jots VBZ notes NNS on IN a DTclipboard NN while IN his PRP$ friend NN ob-serves VBZ a DT second JJ clipboard NN andCC a DT third JJ clipboard NN lies VBZ un-used JJ on IN a DT coffee NN table NN

11 17 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ writing VBG

11 18 Animate Cluttered Clip-board

First There EX is VBZ an DT army NN office NNwriting VBG on IN the DT clipboard NN

11 19 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ filling VBG out RP pa-perwork NN

11 20 Inanimate Minimal Clip-board

First The DT man NN wrote VBD on IN his PRP$clipboard NN

11 21 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ signing VBG papersNNS in IN the DT army NN

11 22 Inanimate Cluttered Clip-board

Both Two CD men NNS hold NN clipboard NN eachDT another DT clipboard NN rests VBZ on INthe DT table NN

11 23 Animate Minimal Man Both A DT man NN signing VBG a DT form NN in INarmy NN costume NN next JJ to TO an DTolder JJR member NN possibly RB a DT se-nior JJ

11 24 Inanimate Minimal Clip- First The DT militar NN is VBZ writing VBG on IN

117

board his PRP$ clipboard NN

12 3 Inanimate Minimal Pen Second As IN the DT two CD women NNS thoughtVBD the DT pens NNS sat VBD neatly RB onIN the DT table NN next JJ to TO them PRP

12 4 Animate Cluttered Woman First A DT woman NN talking VBG on IN the DTphone NN

12 5 Inanimate Cluttered Juice Both There EX is VBZ juice NN on IN the DT mantelNN piece NN and CC on IN the DT table NN

12 6 Animate Minimal Woman Second The DT woman NN is VBZ sitting VBG in IN aDT chair NN in IN the DT corner NN

12 7 Inanimate Minimal Pen First The DT woman NN has VBZ a DT pen NN inIN her PRP$ hand NN

12 8 Animate Cluttered Woman Both One NN woman NN sits VBZ in IN the DTchair NN relaxing VBG as IN another DTwoman NN sits VBZ on IN the DT phone NN

12 9 Inanimate Cluttered Juice First There EX is VBZ a DT jug NN of IN juice NNsitting VBG on IN the DT table NN

12 11 Inanimate Minimal Pen First The DT pen NN is VBZ lying VBG on IN theDT sofa NN

12 12 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN in IN a DTparty NN jazz NN lying VBG back RB againstIN a DT chair NN and CC another DT womanNN directly RB across IN from IN her PRP onIN the DT phone NN in IN a DT living NN roomNN with IN a DT lot NN of IN liquor NN on INthe DT mantel NN

12 13 Inanimate Cluttered Juice Both The DT juice NN is VBZ in IN two CD jugsNNS on IN the DT table NN and CC the DTmantel NN

12 14 Animate Minimal Woman Both One CD woman NN is VBZ on IN the DTphone NN while IN the DT other JJ is VBZ sit-ting VBG relaxing JJ in IN her PRP$ seat NN

12 15 Inanimate Minimal Pen Both The DT pen NN is VBZ in IN the DT womanNN 's POS hand NN oh UH no DT the DT penNN is VBZ on IN the DT table NN

12 16 Animate Cluttered Woman Both A DT woman NN is VBZ relaxing VBG at INhome NN while IN another DT woman NN pos-sibly RB her PRP$ mother NN speaks VBZ onIN the DT telephone NN

12 18 Animate Minimal Woman First There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN on IN tele-

118

phone NN

12 19 Inanimate Minimal Pen Second The DT pen NN is VBZ sitting VBG on IN theDT chair NN

12 20 Animate Cluttered Woman Second The DT woman NN sat VBD on IN the DTchair NN and CC looked VBD at IN her PRP$wine NN collection NN

12 22 Animate Minimal Woman Both One CD woman NN talks NNS on IN the DTphone NN whilst VBD another DT sits VBZ onIN the DT chair NN

12 23 Inanimate Minimal Pen Second A DT pen NN has VBZ been VBN left VBN onIN a DT table NN while IN two CD womenNNS sit VBP in IN a DT very RB empty JJ liv-ing NN room NN

12 24 Animate Cluttered Woman Both One NN of IN the DT women NNS is VBZ talk-ing VBG on IN the DT phone NN while IN theDT other JJ one CD is VBZ looking VBG at INthe DT flowers NNS

13 1 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ paying VBG for IN hisPRP$ room NN

13 2 Inanimate Minimal Lamp First The DT lamp NN is VBZ next JJ to TO the DTreception NN desk NN

13 3 Animate Cluttered Man Both The DT man NN spoke VBD to TO the DT em-ploy VB at IN the DT registration NN desk NNat IN the DT hotel NN

13 5 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ at IN reception NN

13 7 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ working VBG at IN theDT hotel NN

13 8 Inanimate Cluttered Lamp First There EX is VBZ man NN checking VBG intoIN a DT hotel NN in IN front NN of IN a DTlamp NN

13 9 Animate Minimal Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN in IN a DT pinkJJ shirt NN serving VBG another DT gentle-man NN

13 12 Inanimate Cluttered Lamp Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN at IN the DTdesk NN in IN what WP looks VBZ to TO beVB an DT hotel NN and CC there EX is VBZ aDT bed NN side NN table NN with IN a DTlamp NN on IN top NN of IN it PRP next JJ toTO him PRP ahh UH there EX is VBZ also RBanother DT lamp NN in IN a DT sitting VBG

119

area NN to TO his PRP$ right NN

13 14 Inanimate Minimal Lamp Both There EX are VBP two CD lamps NNS on INone CD on IN the DT table NN and CC oneCD on IN the DT cabinet NN

13 15 Animate Cluttered Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ checking VBG in IN

13 16 Inanimate Cluttered Lamp Second A DT lamp NN a DT top NN a DT side NN ta-ble NN in IN the DT lobby NN of IN a DT guestNN house NN

13 17 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ at IN the DT desk NN

13 18 Inanimate Minimal Lamp First There EX is VBZ a DT lamp NN beside IN theDT reception NN

13 19 Animate Cluttered Man First There EX is VBZ a DT man NN behind IN theDT desk NN

13 21 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN books NNS into IN the DT ho-tel NN

13 22 Inanimate Minimal Lamp Both There EX is VBZ a DT lamp NN to TO the DTleft NN of IN the DT man NN another DT lampNN is VBZ beside IN the DT stairs NNS

13 23 Animate Cluttered Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN at IN receptionNN talking VBG to TO another DT man NN be-hind IN the DT counter NN within IN a DT hotelNN lobby NN

14 2 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ checking VBG out INof IN the DT hotel NN

14 3 Inanimate Cluttered Suitcase Both As IN the DT man NN checked VBN into INthe DT hotel NN his PRP$ suitcases NNS satVBN by IN his PRP$ feet NNS and CC anotherDT sat VBD on IN the DT counter NN

14 4 Animate Minimal Man First A DT man NN standing NN at IN an DT hotelNN counter NN

14 5 Inanimate Minimal Suitcase Both There EX is VBZ a DT suitcase NN on IN re-ception NN and CC on IN the DT floor NN

14 6 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ signing VBG papersNNS at IN the DT lobby NN

14 7 Inanimate Cluttered Suitcase First A DT small JJ suitcase NN is VBZ being VBGcarried VBN by IN the DT man NN

14 8 Animate Minimal Man Both One CD man NN waits VBZ for IN another DTman NN to RP sign VB in RB to RP fill VB out

120

RP the DT registration NN form NN for IN a DThotel NN

14 9 Inanimate Minimal Suitcase Both There EX is VBZ a DT suitcase NN on IN theDT desk NN and CC a DT suitcase NN by INthe DT gentleman NN 's POS feet NNS

14 10 Animate Cluttered Man Both The DT man NN at IN the DT hotel NN deskNN helped VBD the DT tourist NN check-in NN

14 11 Inanimate Cluttered Suitcase First The DT suitcase NN is VBZ lying VBG on INthe DT ground NN

14 12 Animate Minimal Man Both A DT man NN is VBZ standing VBG behind INa DT reception NN desk NN facing VBG di-rectly RB forward RB there EX is VBZ anotherDT man NN to TO his PRP$ right JJ signingNN form NN on IN the DT desk NN

14 13 Inanimate Minimal Suitcase Both The DT suitcases NNS on IN the DT desk NNand CC on IN the DT floor NN

14 14 Animate Cluttered Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN signing NN pa-pers NNS at IN the DT front JJ desk NN andCC another DT man NN sit VB eh UH thatWDT works VBZ at IN the DT front JJ desk NN

14 16 Animate Minimal Man Both A DT man NN stands VBZ behind IN a DT re-ception NN desk NN while IN a DT second JJman NN scribbles VBZ some DT notes NNS inIN a DT pad NN

14 17 Inanimate Minimal Suitcase First The DT suitcase NN is VBZ on IN the DT floorNN

14 18 Animate Cluttered Man First There EX is VBZ a DT man NN signing VBGoff RP papers NNS at IN the DT reception NN

14 20 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN stood VBD behind IN the DTdesk NN

14 22 Animate Cluttered Man Both One CD man NN is VBZ standing VBG at INthe DT desk NN the DT other JJ is VBZ sign-ing VBG a DT paper NN

14 23 Inanimate Cluttered Suitcase First A DT man NN with IN a DT red JJ suitcase NNis VBZ signing VBG in RP to TO a DT hotelNN while IN the DT receptionist NN posesVBZ for IN the DT camera NN

14 24 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ checking VBG out RPfrom IN the DT hotel NN

15 1 Animate Cluttered Man Second Man NN is VBZ sitting VBG in IN the DT chair

121

NN

15 2 Inanimate Cluttered Tele-phone

First The DT telephone NN is VBZ on IN the DTdesk NN

15 3 Animate Minimal Man Second A DT man NN sits VBZ in IN a DT rockingVBG chair NN

15 4 Inanimate Minimal Tele-phone

Second Telephone NNP on IN a DT pedestal NN

15 6 Inanimate Cluttered Tele-phone

Both One CD telephone NN is VBZ on IN an DTelaborate JJ side NN table NN and CC the DTother JJ telephone NN is VBZ on IN the DTcounter NN

15 7 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN sits VBZ waiting VBG in INthe DT chair NN

15 8 Inanimate Minimal Tele-phone

First There EX is VBZ a DT telephone NN in INfront NN of IN a DT man NN who WP is VBZchecking VBG another DT man NN into IN aDT hotel NN

15 9 Animate Cluttered Man Second There EX is VBZ a DT man NN relaxing VBGin IN a DT chair NN

15 11 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ waiting VBG at IN theDT reception NN

15 12 Inanimate Minimal Tele-phone

Both There EX is VBZ some DT sort NN of IN re-ception NN counter NN and CC a DT tele-phone NN on IN the DT reception NN counterNN next JJ to TO a DT man NN there EX isVBZ another DT telephone NN on IN a DTpedestal NN to TO his PRP$ left NN

15 13 Animate Cluttered Man Both The DT man NN is VBZ sitting VBG and CCthe DT man NN is VBZ standing VBG

15 14 Inanimate Cluttered Tele-phone

Both One CD telephone NN on IN the DT stand NNand CC one CD telephone NN on IN the DTdesk NN

15 15 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ near IN a DT fax NNmachine NN

15 16 Inanimate Minimal Tele-phone

Both A DT man NN sits VBZ behind IN ... : standsVBZ behind IN a DT counter NN with IN a DTtelephone NN while IN a DT second JJ tele-phone NN rests VBZ a DT top NN a DTpedestal NN

15 17 Animate Cluttered Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ sitting VBG in IN the

122

DT chair NN

15 18 Animate Cluttered Tele-phone

First There EX is VBZ a DT telephone NN behindIN the DT receptionist NN

15 19 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ sitting VBG in IN theDT lobby NN

15 20 Inanimate Minimal Tele-phone

First There EX was VBD a DT telephone NN on INthe DT polished JJ desk NN

15 21 Animate Cluttered Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ relaxing VBG in IN aDT hotel NN lobby NN

15 22 Inanimate Cluttered Tele-phone

Both There EX is VBZ a DT telephone NN on IN theDT desk NN another DT telephone NN is VBZon IN a DT stand NN

15 23 Animate Minimal Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN sitting VBG inIN the DT lobby NN of IN a DT reception NNwhile IN another DT man NN is VBZ on IN theDT computer NN

16 2 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ paying VBG an DThotel NN bill NN

16 5 Inanimate Cluttered Flower First The DT flower NN is VBZ sitting VBG on INthe DT reception NN

16 6 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ chatting VBG to TOthe DT reception NN

16 7 Inanimate Minimal Flower Second On IN the DT table NN sits VBZ the DT beauti-ful JJ flowers NNS

16 8 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN ahead RBwaiting VBG to RP check VB in IN an DT hotelNN room NN and CC she PRP is VBZ beingVBG served VBN by IN another DT womanNN

16 10 Animate Minimal Woman First A DT woman NN arrived VBN at IN her PRP$hotel NN and CC was VBD greated VBN kindlyRB

16 12 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN checkingVBG into IN a DT hotel NN she PRP is VBZhanding VBG her PRP$ credit NN card NN toTO another DT woman NN that WDT is VBZstanding VBG behind IN the DT desk NN

16 13 Inanimate Cluttered Flower Both The DT flowers NNS are VBP in IN a DT vaseNN on IN the DT desk NN and CC on IN the

123

DT table NN with IN the DT chairs NNS

16 16 Animate Cluttered Woman Both A DT woman NN behind IN a DT reception NNdesk NN is VBZ speaking VBG to TO anotherDT woman NN checking NN in IN to TO theDT hotel NN

16 18 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ booking VBG intoIN reception NN

16 19 Inanimate Minimal Flower Second There EX are VBP flowers NNS on IN the DTside NN table NN

16 20 Animate Cluttered Woman Both The DT woman NN greeted VBD the DT re-ceptionist NN

16 22 Animate Minimal Woman Both One CD woman NN checks NNS on IN with INanother DT woman NN

16 23 Inanimate Minimal Flower First A DT woman NN is VBZ handing VBG anotherDT woman NN roomkey NN for IN the DT ho-tel NN next JJ to TO a DT set NN of IN lovelyJJ flower NN

16 24 Animate Cluttered Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ checking VBG inRP to TO the DT hotel NN

17 1 Animate Minimal Kid Second Kid NN is VBZ playing VBG the DT drum VBP

17 2 Inanimate Minimal Apple First The DT baby NN is VBZ playing VBG with INthe DT apple NN

17 3 Animate Cluttered Kid Second The DT kid NN banged VBD his PRP$ drum-stick NN against IN the DT floor NN

17 4 Inanimate Cluttered Apple Second An DT apple NN on IN a DT plate NN

17 5 Animate Minimal Kid Second The DT kid NN plays VBZ the DT drum VBP

17 6 Inanimate Minimal Apple Both The DT apple NN is VBZ in IN the DT toddlerNN 's POS bowl NN and CC the DT other JJapple NN is VBZ on IN the DT counter NN

17 9 Animate Minimal Kid Both There EX is VBZ a DT kid NN playing VBG theDT drums NNS and CC a DT kid NN playingNN with IN a DT fruit NN bowl NN on IN theDT floor NN

17 10 Inanimate Minimal Apple Second The DT apple NN on IN the DT counter NNwent VBD unnoticed JJ

17 12 Inanimate Cluttered Apple Second There EX is VBZ an DT apple NN sitting VBGon IN a DT plate NN on IN a DT kitchen NNcounter NN and CC two CD little JJ boys NNS

124

playing VBG on IN the DT floor NN with INsome DT toys NNS

17 14 Inanimate Minimal Apple Both There EX is VBZ an DT apple NN on IN theDT bowl NN on IN the DT floor NN with IN theDT child NN and CC an DT apple NN on INthe DT work NN surface NN

17 15 Animate Cluttered Kid Second The DT kid NN is VBZ playing VBG with INsticks NNS

17 16 Inanimate Cluttered Apple First A DT child NN sitting VBG on IN the DT floorNN playing NN with IN a DT pot NN holdingVBG an DT apple NN

17 17 Animate Minimal Kid Second The DT kid NN is VBZ playing VBG with IN theDT drum VBP

17 18 Inanimate Minimal Apple First The DT child NN has VBZ an DT apple NN inIN the DT pot NN

17 19 Animate Cluttered Kid Second The DT kid NN is VBZ playing VBG the DTdrums NNS

17 20 Inanimate Cluttered Apple Second There EX was VBD an DT apple NN on IN theDT counter NN

17 22 Inanimate Minimal Apple Both There EX is VBZ an DT apple NN on IN theDT counter NN another DT is VBZ in IN a DTbowl NN

17 23 Animate Cluttered Kid Both There EX is VBZ kid NN pretending VBG toRP play VB the DT drums NNS with IN hisPRP$ little JJ brother NN playing VBG with INtoys NNS in IN the DT kitchen NN

17 24 Inanimate Cluttered Apple Second The DT apple NN is VBZ on IN the DT counterNN

18 2 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ carving VBG a DTchicken NN

18 3 Inanimate Cluttered Knife First The DT man NN disected VBD the DT roastNN chicken NN with IN his PRP$ knife NN

18 4 Animate Minimal Man First A DT man NN preparing VBG chicken NN

18 5 Inanimate Minimal Knife Second The DT knife NN is VBZ on IN the DT chop-ping VBG board NN

18 6 Animate Cluttered Man Both The DT men NNS are VBP sitting VBG at INthe DT kitchen NN counter NN wow UH oneCD man NN is VBZ sitting VBG at IN the DTkitchen NN counter NN and CC the DT other

125

JJ man NN is VBZ carving VBG a DT chickenNN

18 7 Inanimate Cluttered Knife Second The DT knife NN sits VBZ on IN the DT cuttingVBG board NN

18 8 Animate Minimal Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN preparing VBGa DT turkey NN while IN another DT man NNis VBZ smelling VBG it PRP

18 9 Inanimate Minimal Knife First A DT gentleman NN is VBZ cutting VBGchicken NN with IN a DT knife NN

18 10 Animate Cluttered Man Both The DT man NN made VBD lunch NN for INhis PRP$ friend NN

18 11 Inanimate Cluttered Knife First The DT knife NN is VBZ lying VBG on IN theDT table NN

18 12 Animate Minimal Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN preparing VBGwhat WP looks VBZ to RP be VB a DT chickenNN or CC a DT turkey NN to RP eat VB andCC another DT man NN sitting VBG across INfrom IN him PRP

18 13 Inanimate Minimal Knife Second The DT knife NN is VBZ on IN the DT breadNN board NN

18 14 Animate Cluttered Man Both There EX is VBZ one CD man NN preparingVBG chicken NN and CC one CD sitting VBG

18 15 Inanimate Cluttered Knife Second The DT knife NN is VBZ sitting VBG on IN theDT cutting VBG board NN

18 16 Animate Minimal Man Both A DT man NN sitted VBN at IN the DT tableNN watching VBG another DT man NN pre-pare VBP a DT chicken NN

18 17 Inanimate Minimal Knife Second The DT knife NN is VBZ on IN the DT boardNN

18 18 Animate Cluttered Man First There EX is VBZ a DT man NN preparing VBGa DT chicken NN

18 19 Inanimate Cluttered Knife First The DT man NN is VBZ using VBG a DT knifeNN to RP cut VB the DT turkey NN

18 20 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN used VBD the DT knife NN toRP cut VB the DT meat NN

18 21 Inanimate Minimal Knife First The DT knife NN is VBZ being VBG used VBNin IN cooking NN

18 23 Inanimate Cluttered Knife Both A DT knife NN is VBZ being VBG left VBN on

126

IN a DT board NN one CD man NN uses VBZanother DT knife NN to RP prepare VB a DTkitchen NN for IN his PRP$ friend NN

18 24 Animate Minimal Man Both One CD man NN is VBZ cutting VBG the DTchicken NN while IN the DT other JJ one CDlooks VBZ at IN him PRP

19 1 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ cutting VBG up RPmeat NN

19 3 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN prepares VBZ food NN in INthe DT kitchen NN

19 4 Inanimate Minimal Waffle First A NN man NN preparing VBG a DT waffle NN

19 6 Inanimate Cluttered Waffle First The DT chef NN on IN the DT left NN is VBZmaking VBG a DT waffle NN

19 8 Inanimate Minimal Waffle First Two CD one CD chef NN is VBZ preparingVBG a DT waffle NN

19 9 Animate Cluttered Man First There EX is VBZ a DT man NN chopping VBGmeat NN on IN the DT counter NN

19 10 Inanimate Cluttered Waffle First The DT waffle NN was VBD made VBN espe-cially RB that DT morning NN

19 11 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ cooking VBG

19 12 Inanimate Minimal Waffle First There EX is VBZ a DT japanese JJ man NN IPRP think VBP in IN a DT kitchen NN cookingNN waffles VBZ

19 14 Inanimate Cluttered Waffle Both The DT chef NN is VBZ making VBG wafflesNNS and CC there EX is VBZ waffles NNS inIN the DT microwave NN

19 15 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ wearing VBG a DTyellow JJ apron NN

19 16 Inanimate Minimal Waffle First A NN chef NN preparing VBG a DT waffle NNwhile IN a DT separate JJ chef NN carves VBZa DT chicken NN

19 18 Animate Cluttered Waffle First The DT chefs NNS are VBP preparing VBGwaffles NNS

19 20 Inanimate Minimal Waffle First The DT chef NN prepared VBD a DT waffleNN

19 21 Animate Cluttered Man Both The DT man NN is VBZ cooking JJ with IN an-other DT man NN

127

19 22 Inanimate Cluttered Waffles First The DT chef NN prepares VBZ some DT waf-fles NNS

19 24 Inanimate Minimal Waffle First The DT chefs NNS are VBP cooking VBG ... :one CD of IN the DT chef NN is VBZ cookingJJ waffles NNS

20 2 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ making VBG a DTsalad NN

20 3 Inanimate Minimal Fruit First The DT woman NN cuts VBZ the DT fruit NN

20 4 Animate Cluttered Woman First A DT woman NN preparing VBG food NN

20 6 Animate Minimal Woman Both The DT woman NN is VBZ having VBG coffeeNN and CC the DT other JJ woman NN is VBZarranging VBG the DT food NN on IN the DTtable NN

20 7 Inanimate Minimal Fruit First The DT woman NN puts VBZ fruit NN on INthe DT table NN

20 8 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN standingVBG up RP and CC drinking NN coffee NNwhile IN another DT woman NN prepares VBZappetizers NNS

20 10 Animate Minimal Woman Both The DT woman NN tried VBD some DT of INdinner NN she PRP just RB made VBD for INher PRP$ friend NN

20 12 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN makingVBG a DT platter NN of IN fruit NN in IN theDT kitchen NN and CC another DT woman NNdrinking VBG a DT cup NN of IN tee NN andCC talking VBG to TO her PRP

20 14 Animate Minimal Woman Second The DT woman NN standing VBG drinking NNtea NN

20 15 Inanimate Minimal Fruit First The DT woman NN is VBZ picking VBG a DTpiece NN of IN fruit NN

20 16 Animate Cluttered Woman Both A DT woman NN sips VBZ coffee NN while INanother DT woman NN idly RB interacts VBZwith IN food NN

20 18 Animate Minimal Woman First There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN who WP isVBZ preparing VBG the DT fruit-salad NN

20 19 Inanimate Minimal Fruit First The DT woman NN is VBZ eating JJ fruit NN

20 20 Animate Cluttered Woman Second The DT woman NN drank VBD a DT cup NN

128

of IN tea NN

20 22 Animate Minimal Woman Both One CD woman NN drinks NNS tea NN whilstVBD another DT prepares VBZ dinner NN

20 23 Inanimate Minimal Fruit First A DT woman NN is VBZ about IN to RP haveVB some DT fruit NN while IN chatting VBG toRP her PRP$ friend NN in IN a DT kitchen NN

20 24 Animate Cluttered Woman Both One NN of IN the DT women NNS is VBZ eat-ing VBG fruit NN while IN the DT other JJ oneCD drinks NNS tea NN

21 1 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ sorting VBG thingsNNS out RP

21 2 Inanimate Minimal Mug Second The DT mug NN is VBZ on IN top NN of IN theDT intray NN

21 5 Animate Minimal Man Both The DT man NN is VBZ on IN the DT desk NNand CC counting VBG out RP some DTleaflets NNS

21 8 Inanimate Cluttered Mug Second There EX is VBZ a DT mug NN on IN the DTdesk NN behind IN the DT man NN who WP isVBZ sorting VBG out RP files NNS

21 9 Animate Minimal Man Second There EX is VBZ a DT man NN unpackingVBG a DT box NN

21 12 Inanimate Cluttered Mug Both There EX is VBZ a DT mug NN sitting VBG onIN an DT office NN desk NN with IN a DTbunch NN of IN encils NNS and CC rulersNNS and CC office NN supplies NNS in IN itPRP and CC another DT mug NN across INfrom IN it PRP with IN the DT same JJ con-tents NNS there EX are VBP also RB two CDlarger JJR mugs NNS that WDT look VBP likeIN travel NN mugs NNS on IN the DT desk NN

21 13 Animate Minimal Man Both The DT man NN is VBZ standing JJ readingNN and CC the DT man NN is VBZ sittingVBG

21 15 Animate Cluttered Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ emptying VBG the DTbox NN

21 17 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ standing VBG

21 21 Animate Minimal Man Second The DT man NN is VBZ sorting VBG two CDfiles NNS

21 23 Animate Cluttered Man Both There EX is VBZ man NN standing NN in INan DT office NN unpacking VBG a DT box NN

129

while IN his PRP$ colleague NN does VBZsome DT work NN on IN a DT computer NN

22 1 Inanimate Minimal Book Second The DT book NN is VBZ lying VBG open JJ onIN the DT table NN

22 2 Animate Cluttered Woman Second A DT woman NN is VBZ cleaning VBG the DTfloor NN

22 3 Inanimate Cluttered Book Second The DT book NN sits VBZ open JJ on IN theDT desk NN

22 4 Animate Minimal Woman Second Woman NNP cleaning VBG the DT floor NN

22 6 Animate Cluttered Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ sitting VBG on INthe DT chair NN

22 7 Inanimate Cluttered Book Second The DT book NN is VBZ on IN the DT shelf NN

22 8 Animate Minimal Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN sitting VBGin IN a DT chair NN as RB well RB as IN a DTwoman NN cleaning VBG the DT waiting VBGarea NN

22 9 Inanimate Minimal Book Second There EX is VBZ a DT book NN sitting VBGopen JJ on IN the DT desk NN

22 10 Animate Cluttered Woman Second The DT woman NN cleaned VBD the DT floorNN in IN the DT office NN

22 12 Animate Minimal Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN who WPlooks VBZ to RP be VB mopping VBG a DTfloor NN pushing VBG a DT broom NN in INthe DT left JJ hand NN corner NN and CC an-other DT woman NN sitting VBG at IN ehh UHin IN a DT chair NN at IN a DT table NN eatingNN toast NN

22 14 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ one CD woman NN eatingNN and CC one CD woman NN standing NNcleaning VBG I PRP think VBP

22 16 Animate Minimal Woman Both A DT woman NN cleaning VBG a DT public JJarea NN while IN another DT woman NN sitsVBZ with IN a DT plate NN holding VBG toastsNNS

22 18 Animate Cluttered Woman Second There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN cleaningVBG the DT floor NN

22 20 Animate Minimal Woman Second The DT woman NN cleaned VBD the DT floorNN

22 21 Inanimate Minimal Book Second There EX is VBZ a DT book NN on IN the DT

130

side NN

22 22 Animate Cluttered Woman Both One CD woman NN eats VBZ whilst RB an-other DT woman NN cleans VBZ

22 23 Inanimate Cluttered Book Second A DT book NN is VBZ being VBG left VBNopen JJ on IN a DT table NN while IN a DTwoman NN is VBZ eating VBG some DT foodNN in IN a DT chair NN with IN a DT cleanerNN behind IN her PRP$

22 24 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ eating VBG whileIN she PRP waits VBZ

23 1 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ tired VBN at IN workNN

23 2 Inanimate Cluttered Laptop First The DT man NN is VBZ working VBG on INhis PRP$ laptop NN

23 3 Animate Minimal Man Both The DT man NN sat VBD exasperated VBN atIN his PRP$ computer NN speaking NN to TOhis PRP$ friend NN

23 4 Inanimate Minimal Laptop First A DT laptop NN on IN a DT desk NN

23 5 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ in IN his PRP$ officeNN

23 6 Inanimate Cluttered Laptop First The DT laptop NN is VBZ on IN the DT officeNN desk NN

23 8 Inanimate Minimal Laptop First There EX is VBZ a DT man NN scratchingVBG his PRP$ head NN in IN front NN of INhis PRP$ laptop NN

23 9 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ overworked VBN

23 10 Inanimate Cluttered Laptop First The DT laptop NN stopped VBD working VBG

23 11 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ tired VBN

23 12 Inanimate Minimal Laptop Both There EX is VBZ a DT man NN leaning VBGback RB sitting VBG on IN a DT desk NNwhereas IN a DT laptop NN is VBZ openedVBN in IN front NN of IN him PRP there EX isVBZ another DT opened VBN laptop NN ehhUH further RB to TO the DT front NN of IN theDT picture NN

23 13 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ in IN his PRP$ officeNN leaning VBG back RB

23 14 Inanimate Cluttered Laptop First The DT laptop NN on IN the DT desk NN

131

23 15 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ tired VBN

23 17 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ tired VBN

23 18 Animate Cluttered Laptop First There EX is VBZ a DT laptop JJ open NN onIN the DT desk NN

23 19 Animate Minimal Man First The DT man NN is VBZ streching VBG

23 20 Inanimate Minimal Laptop First The DT laptop NN was VBD on IN the DT deskNN

23 21 Animate Cluttered Man First The DT man NN is VBZ tired VBN of IN workNN

23 22 Inanimate Cluttered Laptop Both A DT laptop NN sits VBZ on IN the DT deskNN another DT laptop NN is VBZ on IN top NNof IN a DT box NN

23 23 Animate Minimal Man Both There EX is VBZ a DT tired JJ man NN at INwork NN being VBG chatted VBN to TO by INhis PRP$ boss NN in IN a DT very RB blankJJ bare JJ office NN

23 24 Inanimate Minimal Laptop First The DT laptop NN is VBZ on IN the DT deskNN

24 1 Inanimate Cluttered Phone Second The DT phone NN lies VBZ next JJ to TO theDT screen NN

24 2 Animate Minimal Woman First The DT woman NN is VBZ talking VBG on INthe DT telephone NN

24 3 Inanimate Minimal Phone Both The DT woman NN at IN the DT desk NNspoke VBD on IN the DT phone NN while INanother DT phone NN sat VBD unused JJ nextJJ to TO her PRP

24 5 Inanimate Cluttered Phone First The DT woman NN is VBZ on IN the DT phoneNN

24 6 Animate Minimal Woman Both The DT woman NN approaches VBZ the DTreceptionist NN who WP is VBZ on IN the DTphone NN

24 7 Inanimate Minimal Phone First The DT woman NN is VBZ on IN the DT phoneNN

24 8 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN talking VBGwith IN someone NN at IN the DT phone NNas IN another DT woman NN waits VBZ for INher PRP$ attention NN

24 9 Inanimate Cluttered Tele- First The DT woman NN is VBZ talking VBG on IN

132

phone the DT telephone NN

24 10 Animate Minimal Woman Second The DT woman NN went VBD to TO the DThelp NN desk NN

24 11 Inanimate Minimal Phone First The DT girl NN is VBZ talking VBG on IN theDT phone NN

24 12 Animate Cluttered Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN talking VBGon IN the DT phone NN behind IN her PRP$desk NN and CC another DT woman NN whoWP looks VBZ to RP be VB waiting VBG to RPsee VB her PRP when WRB she PRP is VBZdone VBN

24 13 Inanimate Cluttered Phone First The DT woman NN is VBZ talking VBG on INthe DT phone NN

24 14 Animate Minimal Woman Both There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN standingNN by IN the DT desk NN and CC another DTlike JJ woman NN on IN the DT phone NN

24 15 Inanimate Minimal Phone First The DT woman NN is VBZ on IN the DT phoneNN

24 16 Animate Cluttered Woman Both A DT woman NN speaking VBG on IN the DTphone NN and CC another DT woman NNwaiting VBG at IN her PRP$ desk NN

24 17 Inanimate Cluttered Phone First Woman NNP is VBZ on IN the DT phone NN

24 18 Animate Minimal Woman Second There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN answeringVBG the DT telephone NN

24 19 Inanimate Minimal Phone First The DT phone NN is VBZ being VBG usedVBN by IN the DT lady NN

24 20 Animate Cluttered Woman Both The DT woman NN was VBD greeted VBN byIN the DT receptionist NN

24 21 Inanimate Cluttered Phone First The DT phone NN is VBZ being VBG usedVBN by IN a DT receptionist NN

24 22 Animate Minimal Woman Both One CD woman NN waits VBZ to TO speakVB to TO another DT woman NN who WP shePRP is VBZ in IN the DT phone NN

24 23 Inanimate Minimal Phone First There EX is VBZ a DT woman NN on IN a DTphone NN at IN reception NN with IN a DTcustomer NN waiting VBG

24 24 Animate Cluttered Woman Both The DT woman NN waits VBZ while IN the DTother JJ one CD is VBZ on IN the DT phone

133

NN

134

Appendix E Distractor Image Stimuli

135

136

Appendix F Experimental Image Stimuli

Scheme retrieved from Coco and Keller (2015), Supplementary Materials

137

138

Appendix G Experiment Instructions

Caro/Cara participante,

Muito obrigado por participar neste estudo.Nesta experiência pedimos que observe e descreva um conjunto de imagens enquanto registamos osmovimentos dos seus olhos e gravamos a sua voz. Não se conhece qualquer risco associado a esta experiência.

Sentar-se-à em frente a um ecrã no qual verá uma série de imagens, cada uma precedida por uma palavra que se refere a um objeto da cena.

Cada trial consiste em três passos:

• Um ponto do fixação, para o qual deve olhar;• A visualização de uma palavra;• A apresentação da imagem e gravação da descição.

139

A sua tarefa consiste simplesmente em observar a imagem e descrevê-la usando sempre a palavra que lhe foi dada anteriormente.Tente ser conciso e informativo e baseie a sua descrição apenas naquilo que vê. Quando acabar de descrever a imagem, carregue na barra de espaços para avançar para a próxima image.

Por favor tente ficar o mais parado possível durante a experiência, dado que movimentos grandes dacabeça podem interferir com a qualidade dos dados. Se tiver alguma dúvida, não hesite em perguntar!

Muito obrigado e divirta-se!

140

Appendix H Cue-Words

Portuguese English

Item Animate Inanimate Animate Inanimate

1 Mulher Balança Woman Scale

2 Mulher Esponja Woman Sponge

3 Bebé Rolo Baby Toilet-paper

4 Homem Balde Man Bucket

5 Mulher Sapato Woman Shoe

6 Bebé Toalha Baby Towel

7 Homem Telefone Man Mobile

8 Menina Peluche Girl Teddy

9 Homem Empadão* Man Soup

10 Mulher Sumo Woman Juice

11 Homem Caderno* Man Clipboard

12 Mulher Caneta/Sumo** Woman Pen/Juice**

13 Homem Candeeiro Man Lamp

14 Homem Mala Man Suitcase

15 Homem Telefone Man Telephone

16 Mulher Flores Woman Flowers

17 Bebé Maçã Baby Apple

18 Homem Faca Man Knife

19 Homem Tostas* Man Waffle

20 Mulher Fruta Woman Fruit

21 Homem Caneca Man Mug

22 Mulher Livro Woman Book

23 Homem Portátil Man Laptop

24 Mulher Telefone Woman Telephone

* Denotes that the cue-word was changed from the original English.

** Due to a programming error, item 12 has different cue-words between the minimal clutter andcluttered versions of the scene.

141