Various processing principles have been suggested to be governing the
resolution of quantifier scope ambiguities in sentences such as Every
kid climbed a tree. This paper investigates structural principles, tha
t is, those which refer to the syntactic or semantic positions of the
quantified phrases. To test these principles, the preferred interpreta
tions for three grammatical constructions were determined in a task in
which participants made speeded judgments of whether a sentence follo
wing a doubly quantified sentence was a reasonable discourse continuat
ion of the quantified sentence. The observed preferences cannot be exp
lained by any single structural principle, but point instead to the in
teraction of several principles. Contrary to many proposals, there is
little or no effect of a principle that assigns scope according to the
linear order of the phrases. The interaction of principles suggests t
hat alternative interpretations of the ambiguity may be initially cons
idered in parallel, followed by selection of the single interpretation
that best satisfies the principles. These results are discussed in re
lation to theories of ambiguity resolution at other levels of linguist
ic representation.