Language Processing Evidence for Linguistic Structure
Keywords:
Language processing, English, Japanese, scrambling, wh-movement, raising, controlAbstract
This article illustrates how data from language processing experiments might bear on theoretical linguistic issues and controversies. Based on the results from real-time processing studies of subject raising vs. subject control structures and successive-cyclic wh-movement in English, and of long-distance scrambling in Japanese, this article examines how language processing data can help shed light on the nature of the linguistic representations of different types of non-canonically ordered sentences.
Downloads
References
Alexopoulou, Theodora & Frank Keller. 2007. Locality, cyclicity and resumption: At the interface between the grammar and the human sentence processor. Language 83, 110-160.
Bader, Markus & Lyn Frazier. 2005. Interpretation of leftward-moved constituents: Processing topicalizations in German. Linguistics 43, 49-88.
Bard, Ellen G., Dan Robertson & Antonella Sorace. 1996. Magnitude Estimation of linguistic acceptability. Language 72, 32-68.
Batterham, Claire. 2009. Constraints on covert anaphora in sentence processing: An investigation of control, raising and wh-dependencies. PhD dissertation, University of Essex, UK.
Bever, Thomas G. & Brian McElree (1988). Empty categories access their antecedents during comprehension. Linguistic Inquiry 19, 35-43.
Bošković, Željko & Daiko Takahashi. 1998. Scrambling and Last Resort. Linguistic Inquiry 29, 347-366.
Bresnan, Joan. 2001. Lexical-Functional Syntax. Oxford: Blackwell.
Chomsky, Noam. 1973. Conditions on transformations. In Stephen R. Anderson & Paul Kiparsky (eds.), A Festschrift for Morris Halle. 232-286. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Chomsky, Noam. 1981. Lectures on Government and Binding. Dordrecht: Foris. Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Minimalist inquiries. In Roger Martin, David Michaels & Juan Uriagereka (eds.), Step by Step: Essays on Minimalist Syntax in Honor of Howard Lasnik. 89-156. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), Ken Hale: A Life in Language. 1-52. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Chung, Sandra. 1982. Unbounded dependencies in Chamorro grammar. Linguistic Inquiry 13, 39-77.
Clahsen, Harald & Samuel Featherston. 1999. Antecedent priming at trace positions: evidence from German scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 28, 415-437.
Clements, George, James McCloskey, Joan Maling & Annie Zaenen. 1983. String-vacuous rule application. Linguistic Inquiry 14, 1-17.
Cowart, Wayne. 1997. Experimental Syntax: Applying Objective Methods to Sentence Judgments. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Craenenbroeck, Jeroen van. 2010. Complex wh-phrases don’t move. On the interaction between the split CP-hypothesis and the syntax of wh- movement. In Phoevos Panagiotidis (ed.), The Complementizer Phase. Subjects and Operators. New York: Oxford University Press, 236-260.
Culicover, Peter & Ray Jackendoff. 2006. Turn over control to the semantics! Syntax 9, 131–152.
De Goede, Dieuwke. 2006. Verbs in Spoken Sentence Processing: Unraveling the Activation Pattern of the Matrix Verb. PhD dissertation, University of Groningen.
Dowty, David R. 1985. On recent analyses of the semantics of control. Linguistics and Philosophy 8, 291-331.
Fanselow, Gisbert & Caroline Féry. 2008. Missing superiority effects: Long movement in German (and other languages) (with). In Jacek Witkos & Gisbert Fanselow (eds.), Elements of Slavic and Germanic Grammars: A Comparative View. Frankfurt: Peter Lang, 67-87.
Farmer, Ann. 1984. Modularity in syntax: A study of Japanese and English. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Featherston, Sam. 2005. Magnitude estimation and what it can do for your syntax: Some wh-constraints in German. Lingua 115, 1525–1550.
Featherston, Samuel, Matthias Gross, Thomas F. Münte & Harald Clahsen. 2000. Brain potentials in the processing of complex sentences: An ERP study of control and raising constructions. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 29, 141-154.
Felser, Claudia. 2004. Wh-copying, phases, and successive cyclicity. Lingua 114, 543-574.
Felser, Claudia. In press. Syntax and language processing. In Tibor Kiss & Artemis Alexiadou (eds.), Syntax: An International Handbook, 2nd Edition. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.
Felser, Claudia, Harald Clahsen & Thomas F. Münte. 2003. Storage and integration in the processing of filler-gap dependencies: An ERP study of topicalization and wh-movement in German. Brain and Language 87, 345- 354.
Ferreira, Fernanda. 2005. Psycholinguistics, formal grammars, and cognitive science. The Linguistic Review 22, 365-380.
Franck, Julie, Gabriela Soare, Ulrich H. Frauenfelder & Luigi Rizzi. 2010. Object interference in subject–verb agreement: The role of intermediate traces of movement. Journal of Memory and Language 62, 166–182.
Frazier, Lyn & Charles Clifton Jr. 1989. Successive cyclicity in the grammar and the parser. Language and Cognitive Processes 4, 93-126.
Frazier, Lyn & Charles Clifton Jr. 2002. Processing ‘d-linked’ phrases. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 31, 633-660.
Friedmann, Naama, Gina Taranto, Lewis P. Shapiro & David Swinney. 2008. The leaf fell (the leaf): The online processing of unaccusatives. Linguistic Inquiry 39, 355–377.
Gibson, Edward. 1998. Linguistic complexity: locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition 68, 1-76.
Gibson, Edward & Evelina Fedorenko. 2010. The need for quantitative methods in syntax and semantics research. Language and Cognitive Processes. DOI:10.1080/01690965.2010.515080
Gibson, Edward & Tessa Warren. 2004. Reading-time evidence for intermediate linguistic structure in long-distance dependencies. Syntax 7, 55-78.
Hale, Kenneth. 1980. Remarks on Japanese phrase structure: Comments on the papers on Japanese syntax. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 2, 185–203.
Hofmeister, Philip & Ivan A. Sag. 2010. Cognitive constraints and island effects. Language 86, 366-415.
Hornstein, Norbert. 1999. Movement and control. Linguistic Inquiry 30, 69-96. Hornstein, Norbert. 2003. On control. In Randall Hendrick (ed.), Minimalist Syntax,
-81, Oxford: Blackwell.
Just, Marcel A., Patricia A. Carpenter & Jacqueline D. Woolley. 1982. Paradigms and processes in reading comprehension. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 111, 228-238.
Kaan, Edith. 2007. Event-related potentials and language processing. A brief introduction. Language and Linguistics Compass 1(6), 571-591.
Kirby, Susannah, William D. Davies & Stanley Dubinsky. 2010. Up to d[eb]ate on raising and control, Part 1. Language and Linguistics Compass 4(6), 390- 400.
Kluender, Robert. 1998. On the distinction between strong and weak islands: a processing perspective. In Peter Culicover and Louise McNally (eds.), Syntax and Semantics 29: The Limits of Syntax, 241–279. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Koizumi, Masatoshi & Katsuo Tamaoka. 2010. Psycholinguistic evidence for the VP-internal subject position in Japanese. Linguistic Inquiry 41, 663-680.
Koornneef, Arnout, Sergey Avrutin, Frank Wijnen & Eric Reuland. 2011. Tracking the preference for bound-variable dependencies in ambiguous ellipses and only-structures. In Jeffrey Runner (ed.), Syntax and Semantics 37: Experiments at the Interfaces, 69-100. Bingley, UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
Levine, Robert & Thomas Hukari. 2004. The Unity of Unbounded Dependencies. Stanford: CSLI Publications.
Marantz, Alec. 2005. Generative linguistics within a cognitive neuroscience of language. The Linguistic Review 22, 429-445.
Marinis, Thodoris, Leah Roberts, Claudia Felser & Harald Clahsen. 2005. Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 27, 53-78.
Mauner, Gail, Michael K. Tanenhaus & Gregory N. Carlson. 1995. Implicit arguments in sentence processing. Journal of Memory and Language 34, 357-382.
McCloskey, James. 2001. The morphosyntax of wh-extraction in Irish. Journal of Linguistics 37, 67-100.
Nakano, Yoko, Claudia Felser & Harald Clahsen. 2002. Antecedent priming at trace positions in Japanese long-distance scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 31, 531-571.
Nemoto, Naoko. 1995. Scrambling in Japanese, AGRoP, and economy of derivation. Lingua 97, 257-273.
Nicol, Janet L. & David Swinney. 1989. The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 18, 5-20.
Pesetsky, David. 1987. Wh-in-Situ: Movement and unselective binding. In Eric Reuland and Alice ter Meulen (eds.), The Representation of (In)definiteness. 98-129. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Phillips, Colin. 2006. The real-time status of island phenomena. Language 82, 795-823.
Phillips, Colin. 2009. Should we impeach armchair linguists? In S. Iwasaki, H. Hoji, P. Clancy, & S.-O. Sohn (eds.), Japanese-Korean Linguistics (Vol. 17). Stanford, CA: CSLI Publications.
Pickering, Martin & Guy Barry. 1991. Sentence processing without empty categories. Language and Cognitive Processes 6, 229-259.
Pollard, Carl & Ivan A. Sag. 1994. Head-driven phrase structure grammar. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Postal, Paul. 1972. On cyclic rules that are not successive cyclic. Linguistic Inquiry 3, 211-222.
Radford, Andrew, Claudia Felser & Oliver Boxell. 2012. Preposition copying and pruning in present-day English. English Language and Linguistics 16, 403-426.
Rizzi, Luigi. 2003. Relativized minimality effects. In Mark Baltin & Chris Collins, (eds.), The Handbook of Contemporary Syntax. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Rooryck, Johan. 1992. On the distinction between raising and control. Romance Languages and Modern Linguistic Theory. In Paul Hirschbühler & Konrad Koerner (eds.), Papers from the 20th Linguistic Symposium on Romance Languages, 225-250, Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Sag, Ivan & Janet Dean Fodor. 1994. Extraction without traces. Proceedings of the 13th West Coast Conference on Formal Linguistics, 365-384.
Saito, Mamoru. 1985. Some asymmetries in Japanese and their theoretical implications. PhD dissertation, Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Saito, Mamoru. 1992. Long-distance scrambling in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 1, 69–118.
Schütze, Carson T. 1996. The Empirical Base of Linguistics: Grammaticality Judgments and Linguistic Methodology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sekerina, Irina. 2003. Scrambling and processing: Complexity, dependencies, and constraints. In Simin Karimi (ed.), Word Order and Scrambling, 301- 324. Malden, MA: Blackwell.
Sprouse, Jon & Diogo Almeida. 2012. Assessing the reliability of textbook data in syntax: Adger'ʹs Core Syntax. Journal of Linguistics 48, 609-652.
Staub, Adrian & Keith Rayner. 2007. Eye movements and online comprehension processes. In M. Gareth Gaskell (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Psycholinguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Staub, Adrian, Charles Clifton Jr. & Lyn Frazier. 2006. Heavy NP shift is the parser’s last resort: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language 54, 389-406.
Staum Casasanto, Laura & Ivan A. Sag. 2008. The Advantage of the Ungrammatical. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Washington, D.C.
Thornton, Rosalind. 1990. Adventures in long-distance moving: The acquisition of complex wh-questions. PhD dissertation, University of Connecticut.
Wagers, Matthew & Colin Phillips. 2009. Multiple dependencies and the role of the grammar in real-time comprehension. Journal of Linguistics 45, 395- 433.
Wasow, Thomas & Jennifer Arnold. 2005. Intuitions in linguistic argumentation. Lingua 115, 1481-1496.
Downloads
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Las ediciones impresa y electrónica de esta Revista son editadas por el Secretariado de Publicaciones de la Universidad de Sevilla, siendo necesario citar la procedencia en cualquier reproducción parcial o total.Salvo indicación contraria, todos los contenidos de la edición electrónica se distribuyen bajo una licencia de uso y distribución “Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivar 4.0 Internacional”
. Puede consultar desde aquí la versión informativa y el texto legal de la licencia. Esta circunstancia ha de hacerse constar expresamente de esta forma cuando sea necesario.
