jlr

Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi

1300-8552 2587-0939

Dilbilim Derneği

10.18492/dad.287720

Wh-Argument/Adjunct Asymmetry in Sentence Processing

Tümce İşlemlemede Ne-Üyesi/Eklentisi Asimetrisi

Akal

Taylan

HACETTEPE UNIV

12 29 2017

28 2 43 71 01 24 2017 10 09 2017

1990

Dilbilim Araştırmaları Dergisi

This study investigates the processing ofcomplex sentences with wh-phrases trying to point out whether the proposalsstating that arguments are processed easier than adjuncts work for wh-phrasesin case of Turkish. A wh-argument and a wh-adjunct were used in twoeye-tracking experiments with two word orders, and two embedded verb types asthe variables. The orders and the type of the embedded verbs were the same ineach experiment to provide the wh-phrase type to be the main variable tocompare. The general outcome of the study showed that wh-argument was processedmore quickly than wh-adjunct supporting the diversification proposed by bothformal and experimental approaches in terms of argument adjunct distinction. Ina particular condition, in which the subcategorization features of the embeddedverb mismatched with the number of arguments, the processing of wh-adjunct wasfaster than wh-argument. This seems to support a verb-oriented approach inlicensing the scrambled wh-phrases.

Bu çalışma, üyelerin eklentilerden daha hızlıişlemlendiğini belirten önermelerin ne-öbekleri için de Türkçe bağlamındageçerli olup olmadığını ortaya çıkartmayı amaçlayarak ne-öbeği içeren karmaşıktümcelerin işlemlenmesini inceler. Çalışmada iki göz-izleme deneyinde, birne-üyesi ve bir ne-eklentisi, diğer değişkenler olan iki farklı sözcük dizilişive iki tür yantümce eylemiyle (geçişli ve çift geçişli) birliktekullanılmıştır. Ne-öbeğinin türünün karşılaştırılacak başlıca değişken olmasıiçin, her iki deneyde de aynı tür yantümce eylemleri ve aynı sözcük dizilişi tekrarkullanılmıştır. Çalışmanın genel sonucu ne-üyesinin ne-eklentisinden daha hızlıişlemlendiğini göstererek formal ve deneysel yaklaşımlar tarafından üye veeklenti üzerine öne sürülen farklılığı destekler niteliktedir. Yantümceeyleminin altulamlama özelliklerinin üye sayısıyla eşleşmediği özel bir koşuldaise ne-eklentisi ne-üyesinden daha hızlı işlemlenmiştir. Bu da yer değiştirenne-öbeklerinin lisanslanmasında eylem-odaklı bir yaklaşımı desteklerniteliktedir.

ne-üyesi ne-eklentisi tümce işlemleme göz-izleme

wh-argument wh-adjunct sentence processing eye-tracking

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.