1887
Volume 48, Issue 2
  • ISSN 0378-4177
  • E-ISSN: 1569-9978
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

An OSV word order that deviates from the canonical SVO word order is typically viewed as derived through movement. This theory has been widely supported by psycholinguistic studies showing that the displaced constituents are mentally reactivated at the gap positions. However, some cognitive-functionalists have proposed an alternative account: in a topic-prominent language like Chinese, topic is the basic unit of a sentence that delimits the frame within which the main predication holds. The present study adopts the cross-modal antecedent priming technique to test whether the sentence-initial object is structurally associated with the verb in native speakers’ online processing. Results of two experiments show that the sentence-initial object is not associated with the verb whatsoever, neither lexically nor structurally, shedding light on the typological characteristics of Chinese as a topic-prominent language. However, the processing of the antecedent object was shown facilitated at the post-quantifier position.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/sl.22041.zha
2023-06-23
2024-06-21
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Baayen, Harald R., Douglas J. Davidson & Douglas M. Bates
    2008 Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language591. 390–412. 10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005 [Google Scholar]
  2. Barr, Dale J., Roger Levy, Christoph Scheepers & Harry J. Tily
    2013 Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language68(3). 255–278. 10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001 [Google Scholar]
  3. Bever, Thomas G. & Brian McElree
    1988 Empty categories access their antecedents during comprehension. Linguistic Inquiry191. 35–43.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Bürkner, Paul-Christian
    2017 brms: An R Package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of Statistical Software80(1). 15–28. 10.18637/jss.v080.i01
    https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v080.i01 [Google Scholar]
  5. Cai, Rendong & Yanping Dong
    2010 汉语话题化结构空位的心理现实性研究 – 来自填充语启动实验的证据Hanyu huatihua jiegou kongwei de xinli xianshixing yanjiu: laizi tianchongyu qidong shiyan de zhengju [An empirical study of the psychological reality of the gap in Chinese topicalization: Evidence from filler priming]. 现代外语Xiandai Waiyu [Modern Foreign Languages (Quarterly)] 33(1). 64–71.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Chacon, Dustin Alfonso, Mashrur Imtiaz, Shirsho Dasgupta, Sikder Monoare Murshed, Mina Dan & Colin Phillips
    2016 Locality and word order in active dependency formation in Bangla. Front Psychol71. 1235. 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01235
    https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01235 [Google Scholar]
  7. Chafe, Wallace
    1976 Giveness, contrastiveness, definiteness, subjects, topics, and point of view. InCharles N. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 27–55. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Chomsky, Noam
    1995The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Clahsen, Harald & Sam Featherston
    1999 Antecedent-priming at trace positions: evidence from German scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research281. 415–437. 10.1023/A:1023293132656
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1023293132656 [Google Scholar]
  10. Clahsen, Harald & Claudia Felser
    2006 Grammatical processing in first and second language learners. Applied Psycholinguistics271. 3–42. 10.1017/S0142716406060024
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716406060024 [Google Scholar]
  11. Coulson, Seana
    2007 Electrifying results: ERP data and cognitive linguistics. InMonica Gonzalez-Marquez, Irene Mittelberg, Seana Coulson, Michael J. Spivey (eds.), Methods in cognitive linguistics, 400–423. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company. 10.1075/hcp.18.25cou
    https://doi.org/10.1075/hcp.18.25cou [Google Scholar]
  12. Crain, Stephen & Janet D. Fodor
    1985 “How can grammars help parsers?” InDavid Dowty, Lauri Karttunen & Arnold Zwicky (eds.), Natural language processing: Psychological, computational and theoretical perspectives, 94–128. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9780511597855.004
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511597855.004 [Google Scholar]
  13. Felser, Claudia & Leah Roberts
    2007 Processing wh-dependencies in a second language: A cross-modal priming study. Second Language Research231. 9–39. 10.1177/0267658307071600
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658307071600 [Google Scholar]
  14. Fodor, Janet D.
    1978 Parsing strategies and constraints on transformations. Linguistic Inquiry9(3). 427–473.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Frazier, Lyn & Giovanni B. Flores d’Arcais
    1989 Filler driven parsing: a study of gap filling in Dutch. Journal of Memory and Language281. 331–344. 10.1016/0749‑596X(89)90037‑5
    https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90037-5 [Google Scholar]
  16. Frazier, Lyn
    1987 Syntactic processing: evidence from Dutch. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory51. 519–559. 10.1007/BF00138988
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00138988 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gibson, Edward & Gregory Hickok
    1993 Sentence processing with empty categories. Language and Cognitive Processes8(2). 147–161. 10.1080/01690969308406952
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969308406952 [Google Scholar]
  18. Goldberg, Adele E.
    1995Constructions: A construction grammar approach to argument structure. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. 2003 Constructions: A new theoretical approach to language. Trends in Cognitive Science71. 219–224. 10.1016/S1364‑6613(03)00080‑9
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(03)00080-9 [Google Scholar]
  20. Hahne, Anja & Angela D. Friederici
    1999 Electrophysiological evidence for two steps in syntactic analysis: Early automatic and late controlled processes. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience11(2). 194–205. 10.1162/089892999563328
    https://doi.org/10.1162/089892999563328 [Google Scholar]
  21. Haiman, John
    2011 Competing motivations. InJae Jung Song (ed.), The Oxford handbook of linguistic typology, 148–165. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Huang, C.-T. James, Y.-H. Audrey Li & Yafei Li
    2009The syntax of Chinese. New York: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139166935
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166935 [Google Scholar]
  23. Huang, Shuanfan
    2013Chinese grammar at work. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/scld.1
    https://doi.org/10.1075/scld.1 [Google Scholar]
  24. Huang, Yu-Chi & Elsi Kaiser
    2008 Investigating filler-gap dependencies in Chinese topicalization. InMarjorie K. M. Chan & Hana Kang (eds.), Proceedings of the 20th North American Conference on Chinese Linguistics (NACCL-20), 129–135. Columbus: The Ohio State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Huettig, Falk, Jidong Chen, Melissa Bowerman & Asifa Majid
    2010 Do language-specific categories shape conceptual processing? Mandarin classifier distinctions influence eye gaze behavior, but only during linguistic processing. Journal of Cognition and Culture101. 39–58. 10.1163/156853710X497167
    https://doi.org/10.1163/156853710X497167 [Google Scholar]
  26. Jacobs, Joachim
    2001 The dimensions of topic-comment. Linguistics39(4). 641–681. 10.1515/ling.2001.027
    https://doi.org/10.1515/ling.2001.027 [Google Scholar]
  27. Jegerski, Jill
    2014 Self-paced reading. InJill Jegerski & Bill VanPatten (eds.), Research methods in second language psycholinguistics, 20–49. New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Jiang, Song
    2017The semantics of Chinese classifiers and linguistic relativity. London: Routledge. 10.4324/9781315265483
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315265483 [Google Scholar]
  29. Klein, Natalie M., Greg N. Carlson, Renjie Li, Florian Jaeger & Michael K. Tanenhaus
    2012 Classifying and massifying incrementally in Chinese language comprehension. InDiane Massam (ed.), Count and mass across languages, 261–282. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199654277.003.0014
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199654277.003.0014 [Google Scholar]
  30. Koehrsen, Will
    2018 Introduction to Bayesian linear regression. Towards Data Science 2018 Available athttps://towardsdatascience.com/introduction-to-bayesian-linear-regression-e66e60791ea7, last access16 May 2023.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Langacker, Ronald W.
    2008Cognitive grammar: A basic introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001
    https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195331967.001.0001 [Google Scholar]
  32. LaPolla, Randy J.
    1995 Pragmatic relations and word order in Chinese. InPamela Downing & Michael Noonan (eds.), Word order in discourse, 297–330. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. 10.1075/tsl.30.11lap
    https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.30.11lap [Google Scholar]
  33. Lau, Elaine & Theres Grüter
    2015 Real-time processing of classifier information by L2 speakers of Chinese. InDiane Massam (ed.), Proceedings of the 39th Annual Boston University Conference on Language Development, 311–323. Somerville, MA: Cascadilla Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Li, Charles & Sandra A. Thompson
    1976 Subject and topic: a new typology of language. InCharles N. Li (ed.), Subject and topic, 457–489. New York: Academic Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. 1981Mandarin Chinese: A functional reference grammar. Berkeley: University of California Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Liu, Jie
    2014 Grammatically-guided resolution of filler-gap dependencies: An investigation of Chinese multiple dependencies. Kansas City: University of Kansas MA thesis.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Love, Tracy & David Swinney
    1996 Conference processing and levels of analysis in object-relative constructions: demonstration of antecedent reactivation with cross-modal priming paradigm. Journal of Psycholinguistics Research201. 5–24. 10.1007/BF01708418
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01708418 [Google Scholar]
  38. Marinis, Theodore, Leah Roberts, Claudia Felser & Harald Clahsen
    2005 Gaps in second language sentence processing. Studies in Second Language Acquisition271. 53–78. 10.1017/S0272263105050035
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263105050035 [Google Scholar]
  39. Miyamoto, Edson & Shoichi Takahashi
    2002 Antecedent reactivation in the processing of scrambling in Japanese. MIT Working Papers in Linguistics431. 127–142.
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Morbiato, Anna
    2017 Word order and sentence structure in Mandarin Chinese: New perspectives. Venice, Italy: Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, and Sydney, Australia: The University of Sydney PhD dissertation.
  41. Nakano, Yoko, Claudia Felser & Herald Clahsen
    2002 Antecedent priming at trace positions in Japanese long-distance scrambling. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research311. 531–571. 10.1023/A:1021260920232
    https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021260920232 [Google Scholar]
  42. Neely, James
    1991 Semantic priming effects in visual word recognition: A selective review of current findings and theories. InDerek Besner & Glyn Humphreys (eds.), Basic processes in reading: Visual word recognition, 264–336. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Nicol, Janet & David Swinney
    1989 The role of structure and co-reference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research181. 5–19. 10.1007/BF01069043
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01069043 [Google Scholar]
  44. Nicol, Janet
    1993 Reconsidering reactivation. InDerek Besner & Glyn Humphreys (eds.), Cognitive models of speech processing: The second Sperlonga meeting, 321–347. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Norman, Jerry
    1988Chinese. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Osterhout, Lee & David A. Swinney
    1993 On the temporal course of gap-filling during comprehension of verbal passives. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research22(2). 273–286. 10.1007/BF01067834
    https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067834 [Google Scholar]
  47. Pickering, Martin & Guy Barry
    1991 Sentence processing without empty categories. Language and Cognitive Processes61. 229–259. 10.1080/01690969108406944
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969108406944 [Google Scholar]
  48. Pickering, Martin
    1993 Direct Association and sentence processing: A reply to Gibson, and Hickok. Language and Cognitive Processes81. 163–196. 10.1080/01690969308406953
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690969308406953 [Google Scholar]
  49. Qu, Yan-Feng
    1994 Object noun phrase dislocation in Mandarin Chinese. Vancouver: University of British Columbia PhD dissertation.
  50. Roberts, Leah, Theodore Marinis, Claudia Felser & Harald Clahsen
    2007 Antecedent priming at gap positions in children’s sentence processing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research36(3). 175–188. 10.1007/s10936‑006‑9038‑3
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-006-9038-3 [Google Scholar]
  51. Sag, Ivan & Janet Fodor
    1994 Extraction without traces. InRaul Aranovich, William Byme, Susanne Preuss & Martha Senturia (eds.), Proceedings of the 13th West Coast conference on formal linguistics, 365–384. Stanford, CA: Stanford Linguistic Association.
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Shi, Dingxu
    1992 The nature of topic comment constructions and topic constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Los Angeles: University of Southern California PhD dissertation.
  53. 1998汉语主题句的特征Hanyu zhutiju de tezheng [The nature of Chinese topics]. Beijing: Modern Foreign Language Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  54. 2000 Topic and topic-comment constructions in Mandarin Chinese. Language76(2). 383–408. 10.1353/lan.2000.0070
    https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2000.0070 [Google Scholar]
  55. Shillcock, Richard
    1982 The on-line resolution of pronominal anaphora. Language and Speech25(4). 385–401. 10.1177/002383098202500404
    https://doi.org/10.1177/002383098202500404 [Google Scholar]
  56. Shyu, Shu-ing
    1995 The syntax of focus and topic. Los Angeles: University of Southern California PhD dissertation.
  57. Stan Development Team
    Stan Development Team 2017 Stan: A C++ Library for Probability and Sampling, Version 2.14.0. Available atmc-stan.org/, last access16 May 2023.
  58. Stowe, Laurie A.
    1986 Evidence for on-line gap location. Language and Cognitive Processes11. 227–342. 10.1080/01690968608407062
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01690968608407062 [Google Scholar]
  59. Swinney, David & William Onifer, Penny Prathe & Max Hirshkowitz
    1979 Semantic facilitation across sensory modalities in the processing of individual words and sentences. Memory and Cognition71. 159–165. 10.3758/BF03197534
    https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03197534 [Google Scholar]
  60. Tai, James. H.-Y. & Lianqing Wang
    1990 A semantic study of the classifier Tiao. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers AssociationXXVI (1). 35–56.
    [Google Scholar]
  61. Thiersch, Craig L.
    1978 Topics in German syntax. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Boston PhD dissertation.
  62. Traxler, Matthew & Martin Pickering
    1996 Plausibility and the processing of unbounded dependencies: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language351. 454–475. 10.1006/jmla.1996.0025
    https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.1996.0025 [Google Scholar]
  63. Tsang, Cara & Craig G. Chambers
    2011 Appearances aren’t everything: Shape classifiers and referential processing in Cantonese. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition37(5). 1065–1080.
    [Google Scholar]
  64. Van de Schoot, Rens & Joris J. Broere, Koen H. Perryck, Mariëlle Zondervan-Zwijnenburg & Nancy E. Van Loey
    2015 Analyzing small data sets using Bayesian estimation: The case of posttraumatic stress symptoms following mechanical ventilation in burn survivors. European Journal of Psychotraumatology61. 1–13. 10.3402/ejpt.v6.25216
    https://doi.org/10.3402/ejpt.v6.25216 [Google Scholar]
  65. Van de Schoot, Rens & Sarah Depaoli
    2014 Bayesian analyses: Where to start and what to report. European Health Psychologist21. 75–84.
    [Google Scholar]
  66. Van Valin, Robert & Randy LaPolla
    1997Syntax: Structure, meaning and function. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/CBO9781139166799
    https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139166799 [Google Scholar]
  67. Wang, Zhenlai
    2004 被动表述对自主动词和非自主动词的选择Beidong biaoshu dui zizhu dongci he feizizhu dongci de xuanze [Selection of volitional and nonvolitional verb in passive statement]. 汉语学习Hanyu Xuexi [Chinese Learning] (6). 17–22.
    [Google Scholar]
  68. Wanner, Erik & Michael Maratsos
    1978 An ATN approach to comprehension. InMorris Halle, Joan Bresnan & George A. Miller (eds.), Linguistic theory and psychological reality, 119–161. Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  69. Yang, Yiming & Tao Liu
    2013 汉语话题句中语迹的神经机制研究Hanyu huatiju Zhong yuji de shenjing jizhi yanjiu [On the neutral mechanism of the traces of Chinese topicalization]. 中国社会科学Zhongguo Shehui Kexue [Social Sciences in China] (6). 146–166.
    [Google Scholar]
  70. Yuan, Yulin
    1996 话题化及相关的语法过程Yufahua ji xiangguan de yufa guocheng [Topicalization and Related Grammatical Process]. 中国语文Zhongguo Yuwen [Studies of the Chinese Language] 254 (4). 241–254.
    [Google Scholar]
  71. Zhang, Jinjun, Nini Xie, Shihua Wang, Yanan Li & Tieying Zhang
    2010 汉语水平考试研制报告Hanyu Shuiping Kaoshi yanzhi baogao [Report of Chinese Proficiency Test designing]. 中国考试Zhongguo Kaoshi [China Examinations] 91. 38–44.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/sl.22041.zha
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/sl.22041.zha
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error