(Non-)Arguments in Long-Distance Extractions
Previous research has shown that in fully grammatical sentences, response time increases and acceptability decreases when the filler in a long-distance extraction is incompatible with the matrix verb. This effect could potentially be due to a difference between argument and adjunct extraction. In th...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of psycholinguistic research 2015-10, Vol.44 (5), p.519-531 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 531 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 5 |
| container_start_page | 519 |
| container_title | Journal of psycholinguistic research |
| container_volume | 44 |
| creator | Nyvad, Anne Mette Kizach, Johannes Christensen, Ken Ramshøj |
| description | Previous research has shown that in fully grammatical sentences, response time increases and acceptability decreases when the filler in a long-distance extraction is incompatible with the matrix verb. This effect could potentially be due to a difference between argument and adjunct extraction. In this paper we investigate the effect of long extraction of arguments and adjuncts where incompatibility is kept constant. Based on the results from two offline surveys and an online experiment, we argue that the argument/adjunct asymmetry in terms of acceptability is due to differences in processing difficulty, but that both types of extraction involve the same intermediate attachment sites in the online processing. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10936-014-9300-z |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1710656731</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>3799866971</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-25b178b378b65fba50ed36505a050722fce27ed3044f679c8b451e9bb43b1c13</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMotlZ_gBcpeKlgdLL52hxLrR9Q9NJ72KTZsqXN1mQXtL_elK0igocwJPPMO-FB6JLAHQGQ95GAogIDYVhRALw7Qn3CJcWCc36M-gAKsFDAe-gsxhWke56TU9TLWE6kkKSPbkevtcc347BsN843cVj54az2S_xQxabw1g2nH00obFPVPp6jk7JYR3dxqAM0f5zOJ8949vb0MhnPsGXAG5xxQ2RuaDqCl6bg4BZUcOAFcJBZVlqXyfQEjJVCKpsbxolTxjBqiCV0gEZd7DbU762Ljd5U0br1uvCubqMmkoDgQtI9ev0HXdVt8OlziQKlJMtylijSUTbUMQZX6m2oNkX41AT03qTuTOpkUu9N6l2auTokt2bjFj8T3-oSkHVATC2_dOHX6n9TvwBAhnu5</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1709974284</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>(Non-)Arguments in Long-Distance Extractions</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><creator>Nyvad, Anne Mette ; Kizach, Johannes ; Christensen, Ken Ramshøj</creator><creatorcontrib>Nyvad, Anne Mette ; Kizach, Johannes ; Christensen, Ken Ramshøj</creatorcontrib><description>Previous research has shown that in fully grammatical sentences, response time increases and acceptability decreases when the filler in a long-distance extraction is incompatible with the matrix verb. This effect could potentially be due to a difference between argument and adjunct extraction. In this paper we investigate the effect of long extraction of arguments and adjuncts where incompatibility is kept constant. Based on the results from two offline surveys and an online experiment, we argue that the argument/adjunct asymmetry in terms of acceptability is due to differences in processing difficulty, but that both types of extraction involve the same intermediate attachment sites in the online processing.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0090-6905</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-6555</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10936-014-9300-z</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24817671</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adult ; Behavioral Science and Psychology ; Cognitive Psychology ; Dialogs (Language) ; Female ; Generative Grammar ; Humans ; Judgment - physiology ; Language ; Malayo Polynesian Languages ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Phrase Structure ; Psycholinguistics ; Psychology ; Reaction Time ; Reaction Time - physiology ; Short Term Memory ; Verbs ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2015-10, Vol.44 (5), p.519-531</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-25b178b378b65fba50ed36505a050722fce27ed3044f679c8b451e9bb43b1c13</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-25b178b378b65fba50ed36505a050722fce27ed3044f679c8b451e9bb43b1c13</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s10936-014-9300-z$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10936-014-9300-z$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24817671$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nyvad, Anne Mette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kizach, Johannes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Christensen, Ken Ramshøj</creatorcontrib><title>(Non-)Arguments in Long-Distance Extractions</title><title>Journal of psycholinguistic research</title><addtitle>J Psycholinguist Res</addtitle><addtitle>J Psycholinguist Res</addtitle><description>Previous research has shown that in fully grammatical sentences, response time increases and acceptability decreases when the filler in a long-distance extraction is incompatible with the matrix verb. This effect could potentially be due to a difference between argument and adjunct extraction. In this paper we investigate the effect of long extraction of arguments and adjuncts where incompatibility is kept constant. Based on the results from two offline surveys and an online experiment, we argue that the argument/adjunct asymmetry in terms of acceptability is due to differences in processing difficulty, but that both types of extraction involve the same intermediate attachment sites in the online processing.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Behavioral Science and Psychology</subject><subject>Cognitive Psychology</subject><subject>Dialogs (Language)</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Generative Grammar</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Judgment - physiology</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Malayo Polynesian Languages</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Phrase Structure</subject><subject>Psycholinguistics</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Reaction Time</subject><subject>Reaction Time - physiology</subject><subject>Short Term Memory</subject><subject>Verbs</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>0090-6905</issn><issn>1573-6555</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2015</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMotlZ_gBcpeKlgdLL52hxLrR9Q9NJ72KTZsqXN1mQXtL_elK0igocwJPPMO-FB6JLAHQGQ95GAogIDYVhRALw7Qn3CJcWCc36M-gAKsFDAe-gsxhWke56TU9TLWE6kkKSPbkevtcc347BsN843cVj54az2S_xQxabw1g2nH00obFPVPp6jk7JYR3dxqAM0f5zOJ8949vb0MhnPsGXAG5xxQ2RuaDqCl6bg4BZUcOAFcJBZVlqXyfQEjJVCKpsbxolTxjBqiCV0gEZd7DbU762Ljd5U0br1uvCubqMmkoDgQtI9ev0HXdVt8OlziQKlJMtylijSUTbUMQZX6m2oNkX41AT03qTuTOpkUu9N6l2auTokt2bjFj8T3-oSkHVATC2_dOHX6n9TvwBAhnu5</recordid><startdate>20151001</startdate><enddate>20151001</enddate><creator>Nyvad, Anne Mette</creator><creator>Kizach, Johannes</creator><creator>Christensen, Ken Ramshøj</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BM</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20151001</creationdate><title>(Non-)Arguments in Long-Distance Extractions</title><author>Nyvad, Anne Mette ; Kizach, Johannes ; Christensen, Ken Ramshøj</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c405t-25b178b378b65fba50ed36505a050722fce27ed3044f679c8b451e9bb43b1c13</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2015</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Behavioral Science and Psychology</topic><topic>Cognitive Psychology</topic><topic>Dialogs (Language)</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Generative Grammar</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Judgment - physiology</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Malayo Polynesian Languages</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Phrase Structure</topic><topic>Psycholinguistics</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Reaction Time</topic><topic>Reaction Time - physiology</topic><topic>Short Term Memory</topic><topic>Verbs</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nyvad, Anne Mette</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Kizach, Johannes</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Christensen, Ken Ramshøj</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>ComDisDome</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of psycholinguistic research</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nyvad, Anne Mette</au><au>Kizach, Johannes</au><au>Christensen, Ken Ramshøj</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>(Non-)Arguments in Long-Distance Extractions</atitle><jtitle>Journal of psycholinguistic research</jtitle><stitle>J Psycholinguist Res</stitle><addtitle>J Psycholinguist Res</addtitle><date>2015-10-01</date><risdate>2015</risdate><volume>44</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>519</spage><epage>531</epage><pages>519-531</pages><issn>0090-6905</issn><eissn>1573-6555</eissn><abstract>Previous research has shown that in fully grammatical sentences, response time increases and acceptability decreases when the filler in a long-distance extraction is incompatible with the matrix verb. This effect could potentially be due to a difference between argument and adjunct extraction. In this paper we investigate the effect of long extraction of arguments and adjuncts where incompatibility is kept constant. Based on the results from two offline surveys and an online experiment, we argue that the argument/adjunct asymmetry in terms of acceptability is due to differences in processing difficulty, but that both types of extraction involve the same intermediate attachment sites in the online processing.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>24817671</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10936-014-9300-z</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0090-6905 |
| ispartof | Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2015-10, Vol.44 (5), p.519-531 |
| issn | 0090-6905 1573-6555 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1710656731 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals |
| subjects | Adult Behavioral Science and Psychology Cognitive Psychology Dialogs (Language) Female Generative Grammar Humans Judgment - physiology Language Malayo Polynesian Languages Male Middle Aged Phrase Structure Psycholinguistics Psychology Reaction Time Reaction Time - physiology Short Term Memory Verbs Young Adult |
| title | (Non-)Arguments in Long-Distance Extractions |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T01%3A46%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=(Non-)Arguments%20in%20Long-Distance%20Extractions&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20psycholinguistic%20research&rft.au=Nyvad,%20Anne%20Mette&rft.date=2015-10-01&rft.volume=44&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=519&rft.epage=531&rft.pages=519-531&rft.issn=0090-6905&rft.eissn=1573-6555&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10936-014-9300-z&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E3799866971%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1709974284&rft_id=info:pmid/24817671&rfr_iscdi=true |