Editing Syntactic ambiguity (section)

===Reanalysis model===
According to the reanalysis model, processing is hard once the reader has realised that their analysis is false (with respect to the already adopted syntactic structure) and he or she must then return and recheck the structure. Most reanalysis models, like the unrestricted race model, work in series, which implies that only one analysis can be supported at a time.

'''Consider the following statements''':
# "The dog of the woman that had the parasol was brown."
# "The woman with the dog that had the parasol was brown."
# "The dog with the woman that had the parasol was brown."

Research supports the reanalysis model as the most likely reason for why interpreting these ambiguous sentences is hard. <ref name="Gompel">{{Cite journal|title = Evidence against competition during syntactic ambiguity resolution|date = 4 January 2005|last1 = van Gompel|journal = Journal of Memory and Language|volume = 52|issue = 2|pages = 284–307|doi=10.1016/j.jml.2004.11.003|first1 = Roger P.G.|last2 = Pickering|first2 = Martin J.|last3 = Pearson|first3 = Jamie|last4 = Liversedge|first4 = Simon P.|display-authors=etal|citeseerx = 10.1.1.165.8161}}</ref> Results of many experiments tracking the eye-movements of subjects have demonstrated that it is just as hard to process a persistently ambiguous sentence (1) as an unambiguous sentence (2 and 3) because information before the ambiguity only weakly leans towards each possible syntax.<ref name="Gompel"/>