Tümce İşlemlemede Ne-Üyesi/Eklentisi Asimetrisi

Taylan Akal

doi:10.18492/dad.287720

EN TR

Wh-Argument/Adjunct Asymmetry in Sentence Processing

Abstract

This study investigates the processing of complex sentences with wh-phrases trying to point out whether the proposals stating that arguments are processed easier than adjuncts work for wh-phrases in case of Turkish. A wh-argument and a wh-adjunct were used in two eye-tracking experiments with two word orders, and two embedded verb types as the variables. The orders and the type of the embedded verbs were the same in each experiment to provide the wh-phrase type to be the main variable to compare. The general outcome of the study showed that wh-argument was processed more quickly than wh-adjunct supporting the diversification proposed by both formal and experimental approaches in terms of argument adjunct distinction. In a particular condition, in which the subcategorization features of the embedded verb mismatched with the number of arguments, the processing of wh-adjunct was faster than wh-argument. This seems to support a verb-oriented approach in licensing the scrambled wh-phrases.

Keywords

wh-argument,wh-adjunct,sentence processing,eye-tracking

References

Adger, D. (2004). Core Syntax. A Minimalist Aproach, Oxford University Press, NY.
Akar, D. (1990). Wh-questions in Turkish. M.A. Thesis. Boğaziçi University, İstanbul, Turkey.
Boland, J. E., and Boehm – Jernigan, H. (1998). Lexical constraints and prepositional phrase attachment. Journal of Memory and Language, 39, 684 – 719.
Carnie, A. (2007). Syntax: A generative introduction, 2nd Edition, Blackwell Publishing.
Chomsky, N. (1995). The minimalist program. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Clifton, C., Speer, S., and S. P. Abney. (1991). Parsing arguments: Phrase structure and argument structure as determinants of initial parsing decisions. Journal of Memory and Language, 30-2, 251 – 271.
Erguvanlı, E. (1984). The Function of Word Order in Turkish Grammar. University of California Publications.
Ferretti, T. R., McCrae, K., and Hatherall, A. (2001). Integrating verbs, situation schemas and thematic role concepts, Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 516 – 547.

Frazier, L., and Rayner, K. (1982). Making and correcting errors during sentence comprehension: eye movements in the analysis of structurally ambiguous sentences. Cognitive Psychology, v.14, 178 – 210.
Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005). Eye-movement recording as a tool for studying syntactic processing in a second language: a review of methodologies and experimental findings. Second Language Research, 21 (2), 175 – 198.
Haegeman, L. (1992). Introduction to Government and Binding Theory, Blackwell.
Kennison, S. M. (2002). Comprehending noun phrase arguments and adjuncts, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 31 (1), 65 – 81.
Kornfilt, J. (2003). Scrambling, subscrambling, and case in Turkish. S. Karimi (Ed.). in Word Order and Scrambling (pp.125 – 155). Blackwell Publishing.
Liversedge, S. P., Pickering, M. J., Branigan, H. P., and van Gompel, R. P. G. (1998). Processing arguments and adjuncts in isolation and context: The case of by-phrase ambiguities in passives, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24, 461 – 475.
Liversedge, S. P., and Findlay, J. M. (2000). Saccadic eye movements and cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4 (1), 6 – 14.
Liversedge, S. P., Pickering, M. J., Clayes, E. L., and Branigan, H. P. (2003). Thematic processing of adjuncts: Evidence from eye-tracking experiment. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 10 (3), 667 – 675.
Garrod, S. (2006). Psycholinguistic Research Methods. Keith Brown (Ed.) Encyclopedia of Language and Linguistics, 2nd Edition (251 – 257). Elsevier.
Miyagawa, S. (2003). Wh-in-situ and scrambling in the context of comparative Altaic syntax. Paper Presented at WAFL 1 (Workshop in Altaic Formal Linguistics, MIT).
Radford, A. (1988). Transformational Grammar: A first course. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
Rayner, K. (1998). Eye movements in reading and information processing: 20 years of research. Psychological Bulletin, 124 (3), 372 – 422.
Rayner, K., and Juhasz, B. (2006). Reading processes in adults. K. Brown. (Ed.). In Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp.373 – 378). Elsevier.
Rayner, K., and Pollatsek, A. (2006). Eye movement control in reading. M. J. Traxler and M. A. Gernsbacher (Eds.). Handbook of Psycholinguistics, 2nd Edition (pp.613 – 657). Elsevier.
Smiecinska, J. (2001). Towards a minimalist analysis of the argument-adjunct asymmetries in English. Poznan Studies in Contemporary Linguistics, 37, 195 – 209.

Details

Primary Language

Turkish

Subjects

-

Journal Section

Research Article

Authors

Taylan Akal
HACETTEPE UNIV
Türkiye

Publication Date

December 29, 2017

Submission Date

January 24, 2017

Acceptance Date

October 9, 2017

Published in Issue

Year 1970 Volume: 28 Number: 2

DOI

https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.287720

IZ

https://izlik.org/JA85ZF27TF

Cite

RIS / Bibtex

APA

Akal, T. (2017). Tümce İşlemlemede Ne-Üyesi/Eklentisi Asimetrisi. Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi, 28(2), 43-71. https://doi.org/10.18492/dad.287720

Wh-Argument/Adjunct Asymmetry in Sentence Processing

Wh-Argument/Adjunct Asymmetry in Sentence Processing

Abstract

Keywords