Comprehension of double-center embedded relatives in Italian: a case for hierarchical intervention
Abstract
Object relatives are more difficult to process than subject relatives. Several sentence processing models have been proposed to explain this difference. As double-center embedding relatives contain several long-distance dependencies, they are an ideal configuration to compare sentence processing models. The main aim of the present study was to compare the predictions of the featural Relativized Minimality approach with the ones of other relevant sentence processing models.
57 Italian-speaking healthy adults answered comprehension questions concerning the first, second, or third verb to appear in both double-center embedding and control sentences. Results show that questions concerning the matrix verb of double-center embedding structures were significantly easier and were associated with faster response times than questions concerning the embedded verbs. Furthermore, in object double-center embedding relatives the questions concerning the verb of the most embedded clause were easier than the ones concerning the verb of the intermediate embedded clause.
This pattern of results is consistent with featural Relativized Minimality but cannot be fully explained by other sentence processing models.
Keywords
sentence processing, object relatives, double-center embedding, Italian, hierarchical interventionReferences
Baayen, Rolf H. 2008. Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics using R. Cambridge: Cambridge University press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511801686
Baayen, Rolf H., Davidson, Dough J., & Bates, Douglas M. 2008. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of memory and language, 59(4), 390-412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
Bates, Douglas, Mächler, Martin, Bolker, Ben, & Walker, Steve. 2015. Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67(1), 1–48. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1406.5823
Benjamini, Yoav, & Hochberg, Yosef. 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal statistical society: series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289-300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2517-6161.1995.tb02031.x
Bever, Thomas G. 1970. The cognitive basis for linguistic structures. In John R. Hayes (ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language, 279-362. New York: Wiley & Sons.
Cecchetto, Carlo, & Donati, Caterina (2015). (Re)labeling, Linguistic Inquiry Monograph. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/9780262028721.001.0001
Chomsky, Noam, & Miller, George A. 1963. Introduction to the Formal Analysis of Natural Languages. In R. Duncan Luce, Robert R. Bush & Eugene Galanter (ed.), Handbook of Mathematical Psychology, 269- 321. New York: John Wiley & Sons. https://doi.org/10.2307/2269904
De Rosario-Martinez, Helios. 2015. PHIA. Post-hoc interaction analysis (R package v0.2-1). CRAN: The R Foundation for Statistical Computing. https://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/phia/index.html
Frazier, Lyn. 1987. Syntactic processing: evidence from Dutch. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory, 5(4), 519-559. http://doi.org/10.1007/Bf00138988
Frazier, Lyn, & Clifton, Charles J. 1989. Successive cyclicity in the grammar and the parser. Language and Cognitive Processes, 4, 93–126. http://doi.org/10.1080/01690968908406359
Frazier, Lyn, & Flores d’Arcais, Giovanni B. 1989. Filler-driven parsing: A study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 331–344. http://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90037-5
Friedmann, Naama, Belletti, Adriana, & Rizzi, Luigi. 2009. Relativized relatives: Types of intervention in the acquisition of A-bar dependencies. Lingua, 119, 67-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2008.09.002
Gibson, Edward. 1998. Linguistic complexity: Locality of syntactic dependencies. Cognition, 68, 1–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(98)00034-1
Gibson, Edward. 2000. The Dependency Locality Theory: A Distance-Based Theory of Linguistic Complexity. In Alec P. Marantz, Yasushi Miyashita, & Wayne O'Neil (ed.), Image, language, brain: Papers from the first mind articulation project symposium, 94–126. MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/3654.001.0001
Gibson, Edward, & Iris Wu, Hsiao-Hung. 2013. Processing Chinese relative clauses in context. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28:1-2, 125-155. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.536656
Gordon, Peter C., Hendrick, Randall, & Johnson, Marcus 2001. Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 27(6), 1411–1423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.6.1411
Gordon, Peter C., Hendrick, Randall, & Johnson, Marcus. 2004. Effects of noun phrase type on sentence complexity. Journal of Memory and Language, 51(1), 97–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2004.02.003
Grodner, Daniel, & Gibson, Edward. 2005. Consequences of the serial nature of linguistic input. Cognitive Science, 29(2), 261–290. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog0000_7
Hale, John. 2001. A probabilistic Earley parser as a psycholinguistic model. In Second Meeting of the North American Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics.
Hale, John. 2003. The information conveyed by words in sentences. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 32, 101–123. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1022492123056
Hsiao, Franny, & Gibson, Edward. 2003. Processing relative clauses in Chinese. Cognition, 90, 3–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0010-0277(03)00124-0
Huang, C.-T. James, Li, Y.-H. Audrey, & Li, Yafei. 2009. The syntax of Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Jäger, Lena, Chen, Zhong, Li, Qiang, Lin, C.-J. Charles, & Vasishth, Shravan. 2015. The subject-relative advantage in Chinese: Evidence for expectation-based processing. Journal of Memory and Language, 79, 97–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.10. 005
Karlsson, Fred. 2007. Constraints on multiple center-embedding of clauses. Journal of Linguistics, 43(2), 365-392. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022226707004616
King, Jonathan, & Just, Marcel A. 1991. Individual differences in syntactic processing: The role of working memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 30(5), 580–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(91)90027-H
Levy, Roger. 2008. Expectation-based syntactic comprehension. Cognition, 106, 1126–1177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.05.006
Miyamoto, Edson T., & Nakamura, Michiko. 2013. Unmet expectations in the comprehension of relative clauses in Japanese. In Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 35, 3074-3079. https://escholarship.org/uc/item/1pp1w93k
R Core Team. 2021. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org
Reinhart, Tanya M. 1976. The syntactic domain of anaphora. Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Rizzi, Luigi. 1990. Relativized minimality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.9793/elsj1984.8.154
Rizzi, Luigi. 1997. The Fine Structure of the Left Periphery. In: Haegeman, Liliane (ed.) Elements of Grammar. Kluwer International Handbooks of Linguistics. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-5420-8_7
Ross, John R. 1967. Constraints on variables in syntax. Ph.D. Thesis, Cambridge: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Staub, Adrian, Foppolo, Francesca, Donati, Caterina, & Cecchetto, Carlo. 2018. Relative clause avoidance: Evidence for a structural parsing principle. Journal of Memory and Language, 98, 26 - 44, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2017.09.003
Traxler, Matthew J., Morris, Robin K., & Seely, Rachel E. 2002. Processing subject and object relative clauses: Evidence from eye movements. Journal of Memory and Language, 47(1), 69–90. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2836
Vasishth, Shravan, Chen, Zhong, Li, Qiang, & Guo, Gueilan. 2013. Processing Chinese Relative Clauses: Evidence for the Subject-Relative Advantage. PLoS ONE 8(10): e77006. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0077006
Voeten, Cesko C. 2022. buildmer: Stepwise Elimination and Term Reordering for Mixed-Effects Regression. R package version 2.4. https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=buildmer
Yun, Jiwon, Whitman, John, & Hale, John. 2010. Subject-object asymmetries in Korean sentence comprehension. In Stellan Ohlsson and Richard Catrambone (ed.), Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 32(32). https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4j65p53z
Published
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2023 Marco Sala, Giulia Bettelli, Beatrice Giustolisi, Alessandra Vergallito, Leonor Josefina Romero Lauro, Carlo Cecchetto
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
