Startseite Processing reflexives in adjunct control: an exploration of attraction effects
Artikel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Processing reflexives in adjunct control: an exploration of attraction effects

  • Myung Hye Yoo ORCID logo EMAIL logo
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 2. April 2024

Abstract

Previous research has demonstrated that dependencies between reflexives and their licensors resist attraction effects from structurally illicit but feature-matching attractors. However, mechanisms guiding reflexive licensing in control clauses remain insufficiently explored. To address this gap, this paper examines whether reflexives in adjunct control clauses primarily seek their licensors within the same clause (i.e., from the null subject) or access noun phrases in higher clauses by probing attraction effects from attractors in the higher clauses. The licensing of the null subject is dependent on the animacy requirement of the main clause subject. Therefore, if the reflexive searches for its licensor from the higher clause, the gender manipulation of noun phrases in the higher clause should exclusively impact the reflexive processing, not the null subject licensing. A self-paced reading task reveals that the licensing of reflexives is sensitive to attraction effects, but only when the overall gender feature of the main clause subject is complex. This finding suggests that reflexives in adjunct control clauses do not exclusively rely on the null subject as a licensor; instead, they extend their search beyond the local domain of the adjunct clause, using gender cues. The observed selective attraction effects support the notion that the distinctiveness of the main clause subject matters.


Corresponding author: Myung Hye Yoo, National University of Singapore, Block AS5, 7 Arts Link, Singapore, 117570, Singapore, E-mail:

References

Arnett, Nathan & Matthew Wagers. 2017. Subject encodings and retrieval interference. Journal of Memory and Language 93. 22–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2016.07.005.Suche in Google Scholar

Baayen, R. Harald, Douglas J. Davidson & Douglas M. Bates. 2008. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language 59. 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005.Suche in Google Scholar

Bacskai-Atkari, Julia. 2014. The syntax of comparative constructions: Operators, ellipsis phenomena and functional left peripheries. Potsdam: Universitätsverlag Potsdam.10.1515/east-2014-0004Suche in Google Scholar

Badecker, William & Kathleen Straub. 2002. The processing role of structural constraints on the interpretation of pronouns and anaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology 28(4). 748–769. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.28.4.748.Suche in Google Scholar

Bates, Douglas M. 2010. Lme4: Mixed-effects modeling with R. Available at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/235709638_Lme4_Mixed-Effects_Modeling_With_R.Suche in Google Scholar

Bates, Douglas, Martin Maechler, Ben Bolker & Steve Walker. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software 67(1). 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01.Suche in Google Scholar

Bresnan, Joan W. 1973. Syntax of the comparative clause construction in English. Linguistic Inquiry 4(3). 275–343.Suche in Google Scholar

Chaves, Rui P. & Michael T. Putnam. 2020. Unbound dependency constructions: Theoretical and experimental perspectives (Oxford Surveys in Syntax & Morphology). Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/oso/9780198784999.001.0001Suche in Google Scholar

Clifton, CharlesJr., Lyn Frazier & Patricia Deevy. 1999. Feature manipulation in sentence comprehension. Rivista di Linguistica 11. 11–39.Suche in Google Scholar

Cunnings, Ian & Patrick Sturt. 2018. Retrieval interference and semantic interpretation. Journal of Memory and Language 102. 16–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.001.Suche in Google Scholar

Cunnings, Ian & Patrick Sturt. 2023. Illusions of plausibility in adjuncts and co-ordination. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 38(9). 1318–1337. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2023.2235033.Suche in Google Scholar

Dillon, Brian, Alan Mishler, Shayne Sloggett & Colin Phillips. 2013. Contrasting intrusion profiles for agreement and anaphora: Experimental and modeling evidence. Journal of Memory and Language 69(2). 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2013.04.003.Suche in Google Scholar

Engelmann, Felix, Lena Jäger & Shravan Vasishth. 2015. Cue confusion and distractor prominence can explain inconsistent interference effects. Paper presented at the 28th CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, University of Southern California, March 19–21.Suche in Google Scholar

Engelmann, Felix, Lena Jäger & Shravan Vasishth. 2019. The effect of prominence and cue association on retrieval processes: A computational account. Cognitive Science 43. e12800. https://doi.org/10.1111/cogs.12800.Suche in Google Scholar

Gordon, Peter C., Randall Hendrick & Marcus Johnson. 2001. Memory interference during language processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology 27(6). 1411–1423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.27.6.1411.Suche in Google Scholar

Hofmeister, Philip. 2011. Representational complexity and memory retrieval in language comprehension. Language and Cognitive Processes 26(3). 109–123. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2010.492642.Suche in Google Scholar

Kamide, Yuki & Don C. Mitchell. 1999. Incremental pre-head attachment in Japanese parsing. Language and Cognitive Processes 14(5–6). 631–662. https://doi.org/10.1080/016909699386211.Suche in Google Scholar

Kwon, Nayoung & Patrick Sturt. 2013. Null pronominal (pro) resolution in Korean, a discourse-oriented language. Language and Cognitive Processes 28(3). 377–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2011.645314.Suche in Google Scholar

Kwon, Nayoung & Patrick Sturt. 2014. The use of control information in dependency formation: An eye-tracking study. Journal of Memory and Language 73. 59–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2014.02.005.Suche in Google Scholar

Lago, Sol, Carlos Acuña Fariña & Enrique Meseguer. 2022. The reading signatures of agreement attraction. Open Mind 5. 132–153. https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00047.Suche in Google Scholar

Landau, Idan. 2001. Elements of control: Structure and meaning in infinitival constructions. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media.Suche in Google Scholar

Mazuka, Reiko. 1991. Processing of empty categories in Japanese. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 20. 215–232. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01067216.Suche in Google Scholar

McDaniel, Dana. 2018. Long-distance extraction attraction: A production-based account of an unexpected cross-linguistic structure. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1). 1–17. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.712.Suche in Google Scholar

Nairne, James S. 1990. A feature model of immediate memory. Memory and Cognition 18. 251–269. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03213879.Suche in Google Scholar

Ness, Tal & Aya Meltzer-Asscher. 2019. When is the verb a potential gap site? The influence of filler maintenance on the active search for a gap. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience 34(7). 936–948. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2019.1591471.Suche in Google Scholar

Nicol, Janet & David Swinney. 1989. The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research 18(1). 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01069043.Suche in Google Scholar

Parker, Dan & Adam An. 2018. Not all phrases are equally attractive: Experimental evidence for selective agreement attraction effects. Frontiers in Psychology 9. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01566.Suche in Google Scholar

Parker, Dan, Sol Lago & Colin Phillips. 2015. Interference in the processing of adjunct control. Frontiers in Psychology 6. 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01346.Suche in Google Scholar

Patil, Umesh, Shravan Vasishth & Richard L. Lewis. 2016. Retrieval interference in syntactic processing: The case of reflexive binding in English. Frontiers in Psychology 7. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00329.Suche in Google Scholar

Phillips, Colin, Matthew W. Wagers & Ellen F. Lau. 2011. Grammatical illusions and selective fallibility in real-time language comprehension. In Jeffrey Runner (ed.), Experiments at the interfaces, 147–180. Leiden: Brill.10.1163/9781780523750_006Suche in Google Scholar

R Development Core Team. 2021. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available at: https://www.r-project.org.Suche in Google Scholar

Ramchand, Gillian. 2008. Verb meaning and the lexicon: A first-phase syntax. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511486319Suche in Google Scholar

Rizzi, Luigi. 2013. Issues in Italian syntax. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Suche in Google Scholar

Sturt, Patrick. 2003. The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language 48(3). 542–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00536-3.Suche in Google Scholar

Sturt, Patrick & Nayoung Kwon. 2015. The processing of raising and nominal control: An eye-tracking study. Frontiers in Psychology 6. 1–15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00331.Suche in Google Scholar

Sturt, Patrick, Martin J. Pickering, Christoph Scheepers & Matthew W. Crocker. 2001. The preservation of structure in language comprehension: Is reanalysis the last resort? Journal of Memory and Language 45(2). 283–307. https://doi.org/10.1006/jmla.2001.2776.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Dyke, Julie A. 2007. Interference effects from grammatically unavailable constituents during sentence processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology 33. 407–430. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.33.2.407.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Dyke, Julie A. & Richard L. Lewis. 2003. Distinguishing effects of structure and decay on attachment and repair: A cue-based parsing account of recovery from misanalyzed ambiguities. Journal of Memory and Language 49(3). 285–316. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0749-596x(03)00081-0.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Dyke, Julie A. & Brian McElree. 2006. Retrieval interference in sentence comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 55(2). 157–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.03.007.Suche in Google Scholar

Van Dyke, Julie A. & Brian McElree. 2011. Cue-dependent interference in comprehension. Journal of Memory and Language 65(3). 247–263. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2011.05.002.Suche in Google Scholar

Villata, Sandra & Julie Franck. 2020. Similarity-based interference in agreement comprehension and production: Evidence from object agreement. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 46(1). 170–188. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000718.Suche in Google Scholar

Villata, Sandra, Whitney Tabor & Julie Franck. 2018. Encoding and retrieval interference in sentence comprehension: Evidence from agreement. Frontiers in Psychology 9. 1–16. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00002.Suche in Google Scholar

Xiang, Ming, Brian Dillon & Colin Phillips. 2009. Illusory licensing effects across dependency types: ERP evidence. Brain and Language 108(1). 40–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2008.10.002.Suche in Google Scholar

Xiang, Ming, Julian Grove & Anastasia Giannakidou. 2013. Dependency dependent interference: NPI interference, agreement attraction, and global pragmatic inferences. Frontiers in Psychology 4. 1–19. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00708.Suche in Google Scholar

Zehr, Jeremy & Florian Schwarz. 2018. PennController for internet-based experiments (IBEX). https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/MD832.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-08-03
Accepted: 2024-02-26
Published Online: 2024-04-02

© 2024 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Artikel in diesem Heft

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Editorial
  3. Editorial 2024
  4. Phonetics & Phonology
  5. The role of recoverability in the implementation of non-phonemic glottalization in Hawaiian
  6. Epenthetic vowel quality crosslinguistically, with focus on Modern Hebrew
  7. Japanese speakers can infer specific sub-lexicons using phonotactic cues
  8. Articulatory phonetics in the market: combining public engagement with ultrasound data collection
  9. Investigating the acoustic fidelity of vowels across remote recording methods
  10. The role of coarticulatory tonal information in Cantonese spoken word recognition: an eye-tracking study
  11. Tracking phonological regularities: exploring the influence of learning mode and regularity locus in adult phonological learning
  12. Morphology & Syntax
  13. #AreHashtagsWords? Structure, position, and syntactic integration of hashtags in (English) tweets
  14. The meaning of morphomes: distributional semantics of Spanish stem alternations
  15. A refinement of the analysis of the resultative V-de construction in Mandarin Chinese
  16. L2 cognitive construal and morphosyntactic acquisition of pseudo-passive constructions
  17. Semantics & Pragmatics
  18. “All women are like that”: an overview of linguistic deindividualization and dehumanization of women in the incelosphere
  19. Counterfactual language, emotion, and perspective: a sentence completion study during the COVID-19 pandemic
  20. Constructing elderly patients’ agency through conversational storytelling
  21. Language Documentation & Typology
  22. Conative animal calls in Macha Oromo: function and form
  23. The syntax of African American English borrowings in the Louisiana Creole tense-mood-aspect system
  24. Syntactic pausing? Re-examining the associations
  25. Bibliographic bias and information-density sampling
  26. Historical & Comparative Linguistics
  27. Revisiting the hypothesis of ideophones as windows to language evolution
  28. Verifying the morpho-semantics of aspect via typological homogeneity
  29. Psycholinguistics & Neurolinguistics
  30. Sign recognition: the effect of parameters and features in sign mispronunciations
  31. Influence of translation on perceived metaphor features: quality, aptness, metaphoricity, and familiarity
  32. Effects of grammatical gender on gender inferences: Evidence from French hybrid nouns
  33. Processing reflexives in adjunct control: an exploration of attraction effects
  34. Language Acquisition & Language Learning
  35. How do L1 glosses affect EFL learners’ reading comprehension performance? An eye-tracking study
  36. Modeling L2 motivation change and its predictive effects on learning behaviors in the extramural digital context: a quantitative investigation in China
  37. Ongoing exposure to an ambient language continues to build implicit knowledge across the lifespan
  38. On the relationship between complexity of primary occupation and L2 varietal behavior in adult migrants in Austria
  39. The acquisition of speaking fundamental frequency (F0) features in Cantonese and English by simultaneous bilingual children
  40. Sociolinguistics & Anthropological Linguistics
  41. A computational approach to detecting the envelope of variation
  42. Attitudes toward code-switching among bilingual Jordanians: a comparative study
  43. “Let’s ride this out together”: unpacking multilingual top-down and bottom-up pandemic communication evidenced in Singapore’s coronavirus-related linguistic and semiotic landscape
  44. Across time, space, and genres: measuring probabilistic grammar distances between varieties of Mandarin
  45. Navigating linguistic ideologies and market dynamics within China’s English language teaching landscape
  46. Streetscapes and memories of real socialist anti-fascism in south-eastern Europe: between dystopianism and utopianism
  47. What can NLP do for linguistics? Towards using grammatical error analysis to document non-standard English features
  48. From sociolinguistic perception to strategic action in the study of social meaning
  49. Minority genders in quantitative survey research: a data-driven approach to clear, inclusive, and accurate gender questions
  50. Variation is the way to perfection: imperfect rhyming in Chinese hip hop
  51. Shifts in digital media usage before and after the pandemic by Rusyns in Ukraine
  52. Computational & Corpus Linguistics
  53. Revisiting the automatic prediction of lexical errors in Mandarin
  54. Finding continuers in Swedish Sign Language
  55. Conversational priming in repetitional responses as a mechanism in language change: evidence from agent-based modelling
  56. Construction grammar and procedural semantics for human-interpretable grounded language processing
  57. Through the compression glass: language complexity and the linguistic structure of compressed strings
  58. Could this be next for corpus linguistics? Methods of semi-automatic data annotation with contextualized word embeddings
  59. The Red Hen Audio Tagger
  60. Code-switching in computer-mediated communication by Gen Z Japanese Americans
  61. Supervised prediction of production patterns using machine learning algorithms
  62. Introducing Bed Word: a new automated speech recognition tool for sociolinguistic interview transcription
  63. Decoding French equivalents of the English present perfect: evidence from parallel corpora of parliamentary documents
  64. Enhancing automated essay scoring with GCNs and multi-level features for robust multidimensional assessments
  65. Sociolinguistic auto-coding has fairness problems too: measuring and mitigating bias
  66. The role of syntax in hashtag popularity
  67. Language practices of Chinese doctoral students studying abroad on social media: a translanguaging perspective
  68. Cognitive Linguistics
  69. Metaphor and gender: are words associated with source domains perceived in a gendered way?
  70. Crossmodal correspondence between lexical tones and visual motions: a forced-choice mapping task on Mandarin Chinese
Heruntergeladen am 13.9.2025 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/lingvan-2023-0110/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen