Johannes Kizach

Escape from the island: grammaticality and (reduced) acceptability of wh-island violations in Danish.

In the syntax literature, it is commonly assumed that a constraint on linguistic competence blocks extraction of wh-expressions (e.g. what or which book) from embedded questions, referred to as wh-islands. Furthermore, it is assumed that there is an argument/adjunct asymmetry in extraction from wh-islands. We report results from two acceptability judgment experiments on long and short wh-movement and wh-extraction from wh-islands in Danish. The results revealed four main findings: (1) No adjunct/argument asymmetry in extraction from wh-islands. (2) Long adjunct wh-movement is less acceptable than long argument wh-movement, and this difference is attributable to matrix verb compatibility and factivity, not D-linking. (3) Long movement reduces acceptability, but is more acceptable than island violations. (4) Training effects reveal that island violations, though degraded, are grammatical in Danish. Since the standard assumptions cannot account for the range of results, we argue in favor of a processing account referring to locality (processing domains) and working memory.

Givenness, complexity, and the Danish dative alternation

In this study, we investigated the interaction between givenness and complexity on the choice of syntactic structure, via two experiments using speeded acceptability judgments. Experiment 1 showed that for the Danish dative alternation, given–new orders are only easier to process for double-object or NP constructions, whereas PP constructions are unaffected. This replicates previous findings for the English dative alternation. Experiment 2 revealed that when a long NP precedes a short NP—a suboptimal complexity relation—the effect of givenness is neutralized, whereas givenness remains influential when the complexity relation between the NPs in the sentence is optimal. This is consistent with the view that in online parsing, the actual syntactic structure-building process is primary, whereas any higher-order computations such as discourse linking are secondary. The relative complexity of the NPs in the double-object construction directly affects the structure-building process, whereas the decoding of the discourse structure is a later and less crucial phenomenon, resulting in neutralization of the givenness effect in cases in which the complexity relation is suboptimal.

Structure before Meaning: Sentence Processing, Plausibility, and Subcategorization

Natural language processing is a fast and automatized process. A crucial part of this process is parsing, the online incremental construction of a syntactic structure. The aim of this study was to test whether a wh-filler extracted from an embedded clause is initially attached as the object of the matrix verb with subsequent reanalysis, and if so, whether the plausibility of such an attachment has an effect on reaction time. Finally, we wanted to examine whether subcategorization plays a role. We used a method called G-Maze to measure response time in a self-paced reading design. The experiments confirmed that there is early attachment of fillers to the matrix verb. When this attachment is implausible, the off-line acceptability of the whole sentence is significantly reduced. The on-line results showed that G-Maze was highly suited for this type of experiment. In accordance with our predictions, the results suggest that the parser ignores (or has no access to information about) implausibility and attaches fillers as soon as possible to the matrix verb. However, the results also show that the parser uses the subcategorization frame of the matrix verb. In short, the parser ignores semantic information and allows implausible attachments but adheres to information about which type of object a verb can take, ensuring that the parser does not make impossible attachments. We argue that the evidence supports a syntactic parser informed by syntactic cues, rather than one guided by semantic cues or one that is blind, or completely autonomous.

(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 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.

A Verbal Illusion: Now in Three Languages

The so-called depth charge sentences (e.g., no head injury is too trivial to be ignored) were investigated in a comprehension experiment measuring both whether participants understood the stimuli and how certain they were of their interpretation. The experiment revealed that three factors influence the difficulty of depth charge type sentences: the number of negations, the plausibility of the relation between the subject and the verb, and finally the logic of the relation between the adjective and the verb. When a sentence is maximally complex (i.e., when there are multiple negations, the relation between subject and verb is implausible, and the relation between adjective and verb is illogical) participants misunderstood the sentence, but were at the same time certain of their answers. The experiment supports the idea that depth charge sentences create a verbal illusion—the sentences mean one thing, but people systematically understand them to mean the opposite.

Animacy and the ordering of postverbal prepositional phrases in Danish

Animacy is well known to affect the order of arguments, and in this article, a corpus study demonstrates that animacy affects the order of non-arguments too. Animacy effects have been explained by appeal to the faster retrieval of animate words, and this account is supported by the finding that postverbal adverbial prepositional phrases in Danish are mostly ordered with the animate phrase first in a corpus sample. Two behavioral experiments reveal no effect of animacy, which strongly suggests that animacy does not affect comprehension. In the corpus study, a strong preference for placing short phrases before long ones is found, and it is argued that this preference is not due to a link between length and accessibility, but rather due to a linearization principle, favoring placement of syntactic heads as close together as possible (in this case, this means placing the verb and the two prepositions as close as possible).

Effects of Surprisal and Locality on Danish Sentence Processing: An Eye-Tracking Investigation

An eye-tracking experiment in Danish investigates two dominant accounts of sentence processing: locality-based theories that predict a processing advantage for sentences where the distance between the major syntactic heads is minimized, and the surprisal theory which predicts that processing time increases with big changes in the relative entropy of possible parses, sometimes leading to anti-locality effects. We consider both lexicalised surprisal, expressed in conditional trigram probabilities, and syntactic surprisal expressed in the manipulation of the expectedness of the second NP in Danish constructions with two postverbal NP-objects. An eye-tracking experiment showed a clear advantage for local syntactic relations, with only a marginal effect of lexicalised surprisal and no effect of syntactic surprisal. We conclude that surprisal has a relatively marginal effect, which may be clearest for verbs in verb-final languages, while locality is a robust predictor of sentence processing.