Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel
The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-018-1014-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
When the middle verb phrase is removed from an English double-embedded sentence, the remainder of the sentence is read faster in spite of the ungrammaticality. It has been shown that this “missing-VP effect” is reversed in German and Dutch. The current study demonstrates that the same cross-linguistic difference holds for sentences judgments: Native speakers consider English double-embedded sentences more comprehensible and acceptable when the middle verb phrase is removed, whereas the same is not the case in Dutch. This interaction between language and grammaticality also appears in a within-subjects replication that tests Dutch native speakers in both languages. These results, in combination with earlier findings, give rise to a hybrid account according to which the missing-VP effect is caused by properties of the language as well as properties of working memory.
Supplementary material 1 (csv 13 KB)426_2018_1014_MOESM1_ESM.csv
Supplementary material 2 (R 3 KB)426_2018_1014_MOESM2_ESM.r
Supplementary material 3 (csv 29 KB)426_2018_1014_MOESM3_ESM.csv
Supplementary material 4 (R 3 KB)426_2018_1014_MOESM4_ESM.r
Supplementary material 5 (csv 11 KB)426_2018_1014_MOESM5_ESM.csv
Supplementary material 6 (R 3 KB)426_2018_1014_MOESM6_ESM.r
Christensen, R. H. B. (2015). ordinal - Regression Models for Ordinal Data. R package version 2015.6-28. https://cran.r-project.org/package=ordinal.
Christiansen, M. H., & Chater, N. (2016). Creating language: Integrating evolution, acquisition, and processing. Cambridge: The MIT Press. CrossRef
Christiansen, M. H., & MacDonald, M. C. (2009). A usage-based approach to recursion in sentence processing. Language Learning, 59, 126–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00538.x. CrossRef
Engelmann, F., & Vasishth, S. (2009). Processing grammatical and ungrammatical center embeddings in English and German: A computational model. In A. Howes, D. Peebles & R. Cooper (Eds.), Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Cognitive Modeling (pp. 240–245).
Frank, S. L., Otten, L. J., Galli, G., & Vigliocco, G. (2015). The ERP response to the amount of information conveyed by words in sentences. Brain and Language, 140, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2014.10.006. CrossRef
Futrell, R. & Levy, R. 2017. Noisy-context surprisal as a human sentence processing cost model. In Proceedings of the 15th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (pp. 688–698). Association for Computational Linguistics.
Gibson, E. (1998). Syntactic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1. CrossRef
Green, P., MacLeod, C., & Alday, P. (2017). simr - power analysis for generalised linear mixed models by simulation. R package version 1.0.3. https://cran.r-project.org/package=simr.
Hale, J. T. (2001). A probabilistic Early parser as a psycholinguistic model. In Proceedings of the second conference of the North American chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics (Vol 2, pp. 159–166). Pittsburgh, PA: Association for Computational Linguistics.
Hedderly, R. (1996). Vernon-Warden reading test, restandardised 1993 and 1994. Dyslexia Review, 7, 11–16.
Lanfranchi, S., & Swanson, H. L. (2005). Short-term memory and working memory in children as a function of language-specific knowledge in English and Spanish. Learning and Individual Differences, 15, 299–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2005.05.003. CrossRef
Levy, R. (2008). Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106, 1126–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006. CrossRef
Mak, W. M., Vonk, W., & Schriefers, H. (2006). Animacy in processing relative clauses: The hikers that rocks crush. Journal of Memory and Language, 54, 466–490. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.01.001. CrossRef
Page, M. P., & Norris, D. (1998). The primacy model: A new model of immediate serial recall. Psychological Review, 10, 5761–781. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.105.4.761-781.
Phillips, C., Wagers, M., & Lau, E. F. (2011). Grammatical illusions and selective fallibility in real-time language comprehension. In J. Runner (Ed.), Experiments at the Interfaces (pp. 147–180). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
R Core Team. (2015). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Sanford, A. J., & Sturt, P. (2002). Depth of processing in language comprehension: Not noticing the evidence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 6, 382–386. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(02)01958-7. CrossRef
Smith, N. J., & Levy, R. (2013). The effect of word predictability on reading time is logarithmic. Cognition, 128, 302–319. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.02.013. CrossRef
Townsend, D. J., & Bever, T. G. (2001). Sentence comprehension: The integration of habits and rules. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Tversky, A. & Kahneman, D. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124. CrossRef
- Judgements about double-embedded relative clauses differ between languages
Stefan L. Frank
- Springer Berlin Heidelberg
An International Journal of Perception, Attention, Memory, and Action
Print ISSN: 0340-0727
Elektronisch ISSN: 1430-2772