Online satisfaction of lexical requirements determines the time course of gap creation - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

online satisfaction of lexical requirements determines the time course of gap creation n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Online satisfaction of lexical requirements determines the time course of gap creation PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Online satisfaction of lexical requirements determines the time course of gap creation

play fullscreen
1 / 66
Online satisfaction of lexical requirements determines the time course of gap creation
95 Views
Download Presentation
armen
Download Presentation

Online satisfaction of lexical requirements determines the time course of gap creation

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Online satisfaction of lexical requirements determines the time course of gap creation Sachiko Aoshima, Colin Phillips & Amy Weinberg University of Maryland, College Park WCCFL XXII March 23, 2003

  2. Principle-based Grammar • Structure-building is driven by the need to satisfy grammatical requirementsof lexical heads. • Grammatical theories: Minimalist Program, LFG, HPSG, Categorial Grammar, among others • Parsing theories: Principle-based approach, Constraint-based approach (Gibson 1991, Pritchett 1991, MacDonald et al. 1994, among others)

  3. Implications Structure-building is driven by the need to satisfy grammatical requirementsof lexical heads. • Parsing decisions may be reducible to the need to satisfy lexical requirements. Strategy-based accounts of parsing decisions may not needed. • Structure-building should be delayed in a head-final language. (Pritchett 1992, Mulders 2002)

  4. Processing wh-questions How do readers interpret a fronted wh-phrase online? what did you say that Mary read t

  5. Processing wh-questions what gap

  6. Processing wh-questions what did gap

  7. Processing wh-questions what did you gap

  8. Processing wh-questions what did you gap say

  9. Processing wh-questions what did you say that gap

  10. Processing wh-questions what did you say that Mary gap

  11. Processing wh-questions what did you say that Mary read gap

  12. Processing wh-questions Generalization Gap for a wh-phrase is initially posited in the first/highest available position. what did you gap say

  13. Strategy-based Approach: When a wh-phrase has been identified, rank the option of assigning it to a gap above all other options. (Crain&Fodor 1985, Frazier&Clifton 1989, among others) Two approaches for processing wh-questions

  14. Strategy-based Approach: When a wh-phrase has been identified, rank the option of assigning it to a gap above all other options. (Crain&Fodor 1985, Frazier&Clifton 1989, among others) Grammatical principle-based Approach Online interpretation of wh-phrases is driven by independently motivated grammatical requirements, e.g. thematic role assignment. (Gibson 1991, Pritchett 1992, among others) Two approaches for processing wh-questions

  15. Strategy-based Two approaches for processing wh-questions: head-initial languages Grammatical principle-based CP CP WH WH IP C IP C NP … NP … VP VP V gap V gap the first opportunity to satisfy thematic requirements = complement of the first verb the first possible gap position = complement of the first verb

  16. Strategy-based Grammatical principle-based Two approaches for processing wh-questions: head-final languages CP CP WH The first opportunity to satisfy thematic requirements occurs at the embedded clause. WH IP C IP C NP VP NP VP gap gap CP V CP V … NP VP the first possible gap position V gap

  17. Implications Structure-building is driven by the need to satisfy grammatical requirementsof lexical heads. • Parsing decisions may be reducible to the need to satisfy lexical requirements. Strategy-based accounts of parsing decisions may not needed. • Structure-building should be delayed in a head-final language. (Pritchett 1992, Mulders 2002)

  18. Processing head-final sentences John-ga paatii-de Mary-ni hana-o ageta. John-nom party-at Mary-dat flower-acc gave ‘John gave Mary flowers at the party.’ In a head-final language, lexical heads are delayed.  Structure-building should be correspondingly delayed, too.

  19. Our experiments show Structure-building is driven by the need to satisfy grammatical requirements of lexical heads. • Parsing decisions may be reducible to the need to satisfy lexical requirements. Strategy-based accounts of parsing decisions may not needed. • Structure-building should be delayed in a head-final language. Experiment 1 & 2 Experiment 2 & 3

  20. Our experiments show Structure-building is driven by the need to satisfy grammatical requirements of lexical heads. • Parsing decisions may be reducible to the need to satisfy lexical requirements. Strategy-based accounts of parsing decisions may not needed. • Structure-building should be delayed in a head-final language. Experiment 1& 2 Experiment 2 & 3

  21. Strategy-based Grammatical principle-based Experiment 1: Goal (e.g. Gibson 1991, Pritchett 1991) CP (e.g. Crain&Fodor 1985, Frazier&Clifton 1989) CP WH WH The first opportunity to satisfy thematic requirements occurs at the embedded clause. IP C IP C NP VP NP VP gap gap CP V CP V … NP VP the first possible gap position V gap

  22. Long-distance Wh-scrambling formation • Japanese wh-phrases are canonically in-situ, but they can be fronted by scrambling. Dare-ni Taro-wa [Jiro-ga t atta-ka] itta. Who-dat Taro-top Jiro-nom met-Q said ‘Taro said who Jiro met.’

  23. Question Formation Japanese uses question particles (Q-particles) to mark questions. John-nom the book-acc read. John-nom the book-acc read-Q[yes/no question] Sally-top John-nom what-acc read-declCsaid-Q[root question] ‘What did Sally say that John read?’ Sally-top John-nom what-acc read-Qsaid [embedded question] ‘Sally said what John read.’

  24. Diagnostics of Active Gap Filling:Typing Mismatch Effect yonda-to (Declarative) …John-ga nani-o yonda-ka (Q-Particle) …John-nomwhat-acc read Slowdown: Typing Mismatch Effect (Miyamoto & Takahashi 2001)

  25. Experiment 1:Conditions a. <SCRAM+DECLC> Wh-dat NP-top [NP-nom NP-acc V-DeclC] AdvP NP-dat V-Q b.<INSIT+DECLC> NP-top [NP-nom Wh-dat NP-acc V-DeclC] AdvP NP-dat V-Q c. <SCRAM+Q> Wh-dat NP-top [NP-nom NP-acc V-Q] AdvP NP-dat V d. <INSIT+Q> NP-top [NP-nom Wh-dat NP-acc V-Q] AdvP NP-dat V

  26. Experiment 1: Examples a. <SCRAM+DECLC> どの生徒に担任は 校長が 本を 読んだと図書室で 司書に 言いましたか。 'Which student did the class teacher tell the librarian at the library that the principal read a book for?' b.<INSIT+DECLC> 担任は 校長が どの生徒に本を 読んだと 図書室で 司書に 言いましたか。 c. <SCRAM+Q> どの生徒に担任は 校長が 本を 読んだか図書室で 司書に 言いました。 'The class teacher told the librarian at the library which student the principal read a book for.' d. <INSIT+Q> 担任は 校長が どの生徒に本を 読んだか図書室で 司書に 言いました。

  27. Experiment 1:Design & Procedure • 2 x 2 factorial design • 4 lists were created by distributing 24 items in a Latin Square design • 48 filler sentences • Comprehension questions: matching a subject with a predicate • Self-paced reading task -Moving Window - • 48 native speakers of Japanese

  28. Experiment 1: In-situ Condition b.<INSIT+DECLC> NP-top [NP-nom Wh-dat NP-acc V-DeclC] … Verb-Q d. <INSIT+Q> NP-top [NP-nom Wh-dat NP-acc V-Q] … Verb

  29. F1 (1, 47) = 5.5, p <.01 F2 (1, 18) = 2.8, p = 0.09 V-DeclC/Q Wh-dat Miyamoto & Takahashi’s observation is replicated.

  30. Experiment 1: Scrambled Condition a. <SCRAM+DECLC> Wh-dat NP-top [NP-nom NP-acc V-DeclC] … Verb-Q c. <SCRAM+Q> Wh-dat NP-top [NP-nom NP-acc V-Q] …Verb.

  31. Experiment 1: Scrambled Condition a. <SCRAM+DECLC> Wh-dat NP-top [NP-nom NP-acc V-DeclC] … Verb-Q c. <SCRAM+Q> Wh-dat NP-top [NP-nom NP-acc V-Q] …Verb. <GAP> <GAP> Slowdown

  32. Experiment 1: Scrambled Condition a. <SCRAM+DECLC> Wh-dat NP-top [NP-nom NP-acc V-DeclC] … Verb-Q c. <SCRAM+Q> Wh-dat NP-top [NP-nom NP-acc V-Q] …Verb. <GAP> Slowdown <GAP>

  33. F1 (1, 47) = 6.1, p <.01 F2 (1, 18) = 5.6, p <.01 V-DeclC/Q Wh-dat Readers also exhibit Typing Mismatch effect in the embedded clause in the scrambled conditions.

  34. Readers create a gap position in the embedded clause. Wh-gap is predicted until it can be interpreted. This finding is expected under the grammatical principle-based approach. Experiment 1: Results Scrambled Condition WH-dat NP-top gap CP Verb NP-nom VP gap Verb

  35. Our experiments show Structure-building is driven by the need to satisfy grammatical requirements of lexical heads. • Parsing decisions may be reducible to the need to satisfy lexical requirements. Strategy-based accounts of parsing decisions may not needed. • Structure-building should be delayed in a head-final language. Experiment1 &2 Experiment 2& 3

  36. English Filled Gap Effect My brother wanted to know who Stowe 1986

  37. English Filled Gap Effect My brother wanted to know who Ruth Stowe 1986

  38. English Filled Gap Effect My brother wanted to know who Ruth will Stowe 1986

  39. English Filled Gap Effect My brother wanted to know who Ruth will gap bring Stowe 1986

  40. English Filled Gap Effect My brother wanted to know who Ruth will bring us Readers slow down upon encountering an NP where a gap was expected. home to at Christmas Slowdown Stowe 1986

  41. Japanese Filled-Gap Effect Slowdown upon encountering an NP where a gap was expected. WH-dat NP-top Second NP-dat is unexpected if the first NP-dat has already been interpreted in embedded clause. CP NP-nom VP Position of the unexpected NP is before the verb gap NP-dat Verb Slowdown

  42. Experiment 2:Conditions control target WH-dat WH-nom NP-top NP-dat CP CP NP-nom VP NP-nom VP gap NP-dat Verb NP-dat Verb Slowdown

  43. Experiment 2:Conditions a. Filled WH-datNP-top [NP-nom AdvNP-dat NP-acc Verb-DeclC] Verb-Q b. Non-Filled WH-nom NP-dat [NP-nom Adv NP-dat NP-acc Verb-DeclC] Verb-Q

  44. Experiment 2:Examples a.どの子供に母親は お手伝いさんが 台所で 父親に お弁当を 渡したと 言いましたか。 ‘To which children did the mother tell that the housekeeper handed a lunchbox to the father at the kitchen?’ b.どの子供が母親にお手伝いさんが 台所で 父親に お弁当を 渡したと 言いましたか。 ‘Which children told the mother that the housekeeper handed a lunchbox to the father at the kitchen?’

  45. Experiment 2:Design & Procedure • 2 conditions • 2 lists were created by distributing 20 paired items in a Latin Square design • 60 filler sentences • Comprehension questions: matching a subject with a predicate • Self-paced reading task -Moving Window - • 34 native speakers of Japanese

  46. F1 (1, 33) = 11.9, p <.01 F2 (1, 19) = 6.4, p <.05 NP-dat Japanese readers exhibit Filled Gap effect. Confirms that theyinterpret a sentence-initialwh-phrase in the embedded clause,before reaching the embedded verb (Region 7).

  47. Further support for Principle-based theory. No need to assume parser-specific strategy. Gap creation takes place before the verb is processed. Structure-building is not delayed in a head-final language. Summary: Experiment 1 and 2 WH-dat NP-top gap CP Verb NP-nom VP gap Verb

  48. Our experiments show Structure-building is driven by the need to satisfy grammatical requirements of lexical heads. • Parsing decisions may be reducible to the need to satisfy lexical requirements. Strategy-based accounts of parsing decisions may not needed. • Structure-building should be delayed in a head-final language. Experiment 1 & 2 Experiment 2 & 3

  49. English pronoun and its antecedent To which of his children did the man give a gift?

  50. English pronoun and its antecedent To which of his children did the man give a gift?